If Anyone Is "Aiding and Abetting" the Terrorists, It Is Liberals

[Dr Grump]

Yes you are, as you just proven once again with your post! Just come out of the closet. I here it is very liberating!

So show where you have protested the illegal wars of Obama!

Show where I have supported any of the US's wars...

 

[Kosh]

Yes you are, as you just proven once again with your post! Just come out of the closet. I here it is very liberating!

So show where you have protested the illegal wars of Obama!

Show where I have supported any of the US's wars...

You support the far left and Obama, therefore you support the illegal wars of Obama..

But then again you claim that you have not supported any wars for 12 years, which mean you supported the war in Afghanistan..

Thus proving you have supported wars of the US...

Now show where you have condemned Obama and his illegal wars..

 

[Dr Grump]

In truth, where one removes the Leftist population centers from the equation, the United States is the safest nation on earth.

In a Hitlarian kinda way...yeah, you would be...

 

[Kosh]

In truth, where one removes the Leftist population centers from the equation, the United States is the safest nation on earth.

In a Hitlarian kinda way...yeah, you would be...

And the far left drone plays the Hitler card as they support the removal of anyone not far left out of the equation..

 

[Dr Grump]

[


According to the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) 92% of mass public shootings between January 2009 and July 2014 occurred in gun-free zones. Presidential candidate Donald Trump saw this point clearly. He stated, referring to this recent catastrophe: “And by the way, it was a gun-free zone. I will tell you — if you had a couple of the teachers or somebody with guns in that room, you would have been a hell of a lot better off.” Precisely. If several students and the professor of that class were carrying pistols, and were shooting back at the vicious perpetrator, he would not have been able to hit as many people as he did. But I go further than The Donald. If Umpqua Community College were not a gun-free zone, and this mass murderer knew that, oh, half of the students were armed, he most likely would not have shown up there to perpetrate his evil deeds."


.

A link to an op-ed piece is not evidence. A link to the CPRC's work would be more credible so I could study the method of the survey (even if they are a pro-gun, anti-Obama outfit).

 

[Dr Grump]

And the far left drone plays the Hitler card as they support the removal of anyone not far left out of the equation..

Listen to the stuff you say. No abortions, no gays, no Hispanics, no blacks, no tolerance of anything other than you own warped ideals - your Utopia is a normal person's nightmare.

 

[Kosh]

[


According to the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) 92% of mass public shootings between January 2009 and July 2014 occurred in gun-free zones. Presidential candidate Donald Trump saw this point clearly. He stated, referring to this recent catastrophe: “And by the way, it was a gun-free zone. I will tell you — if you had a couple of the teachers or somebody with guns in that room, you would have been a hell of a lot better off.” Precisely. If several students and the professor of that class were carrying pistols, and were shooting back at the vicious perpetrator, he would not have been able to hit as many people as he did. But I go further than The Donald. If Umpqua Community College were not a gun-free zone, and this mass murderer knew that, oh, half of the students were armed, he most likely would not have shown up there to perpetrate his evil deeds."


.

A link to an op-ed piece is not evidence. A link to the CPRC's work would be more credible so I could study the method of the survey (even if they are a pro-gun, anti-Obama outfit).

And the far left will deny anything that does not fit their narrative..

Analysis of Mass Shootings

 

[Kosh]

And the far left drone plays the Hitler card as they support the removal of anyone not far left out of the equation..

Listen to the stuff you say. No abortions, no gays, no Hispanics, no blacks, no tolerance of anything other than you own warped ideals - your Utopia is a normal person's nightmare.

I called you are far left drone and have been correct on the subject and you keep proving my comments with each and every post..

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

 

[Contumacious]

[


According to the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) 92% of mass public shootings between January 2009 and July 2014 occurred in gun-free zones. Presidential candidate Donald Trump saw this point clearly. He stated, referring to this recent catastrophe: “And by the way, it was a gun-free zone. I will tell you — if you had a couple of the teachers or somebody with guns in that room, you would have been a hell of a lot better off.” Precisely. If several students and the professor of that class were carrying pistols, and were shooting back at the vicious perpetrator, he would not have been able to hit as many people as he did. But I go further than The Donald. If Umpqua Community College were not a gun-free zone, and this mass murderer knew that, oh, half of the students were armed, he most likely would not have shown up there to perpetrate his evil deeds."


.

A link to an op-ed piece is not evidence. A link to the CPRC's work would be more credible so I could study the method of the survey (even if they are a pro-gun, anti-Obama outfit).

Vern, here in our neck of the woods we use google, how about you guys?


LINK

 

[NightFox]

* Insisted that we leave no residual force in Iraq, which led to the creation of the Islamic State in the first place.

Point of order Mike: The fact that we were in Iraq in the first place caused all this ******* mess with ISIS so "no residual force" is an after the fact consideration to the root cause of the problem.

Gee thanks President George W. "Gunslinger" Bush... hate to say I told ya so, but I ******* told ya so ..... DICK.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Humm, it turns out that Tashfeen Malik (Farook's wife) passed her "extensive" State Department vetting and her Homeland Security vetting, which included two face-to-face interviews! Yes, and a short time later she helped murder 14 Americans just after proclaiming her allegiance to the Islamic State on Facebook.

So, liberals, are you still gonna tell us that we can properly vet the 170,000 Syrian Muslims whom Obama wants to let into the country?

 

[Clementine]

There weren't that many. You're swallowing propaganda.

Yes, that lie about 355 mass shootings this year has been proven false, but the left has an agenda and they have a lot of supporters who believe anything they are told. There has been more violence under the Obama administration, which is interesting.

The liberals still want to blame the guns rather than the mindsets of killers. In Islamist terrorist attacks, the mindset is about archaic beliefs and a learned hatred of all non-Muslims. Can't blame that on anything other than what the radical teachings.

As far as some random shooters, they tend to have mental illness and also a history of taking medications at a young age. I believe that the practice of declaring every other child as having ADHD and feeding them drugs may have something to do with it. There were so many anti-depressant drugs introduced in the last twenty years and so many lawsuits following because of the negative side effects. But, let's blame guns that have been around forever and not the people whose fingers are on the trigger.

The left is bound and determined to minimize the latest terrorist attack because it does nothing for their agenda. The reporting right after the attacks was appalling. A lot of the libs immediately declared that it was likely anti-government, racist white NRA members. When the facts came in and there was no more pretending that the suspects fit their narrative, they quickly turned to guns as the problem. Barbara Boxer stated that California proved that gun control works. I think someone should show her a map and point out where San Bernardino is located.

As the FBI disclosed more details about the suspects, it became clear we have yet another attack by radical Muslim terrorists. You'd think the left would just admit that is what it is and speak out against it. No, they are still trying to find someone or something else to blame.

This CNN anchor demonstrated what many of us already knew. Liberalism is a mental illness. After finding out that Malik was an agent for a terrorist group and likely trained, this is the explanation offered up by an insane liberal anchor to take attention off radical Muslims:

"BURNETT: Jim, I mean, obviously, her involvement is a game changer in how enforcement, law enforcement will look at this. But I just have to ask you, could there be something else, anything else, that could have explained her involvement? Something like a postpartum psychosis?"


Yes, you idiot woman. It was female problems that caused her to train as a terrorist agent and plan to kill all those infidels. Oh, and the reason the maniac shot people in Colorado Springs is because he was having a midlife crisis. Glad we got all that cleared up.


http://toprightnews.com/cnn-insanity-anchor-proposes-unbelievable-defense-for-female-san-bernardino-terrorist/

 

[mikegriffith1]

There weren't that many. You're swallowing propaganda.

Yes, that lie about 355 mass shootings this year has been proven false, but the left has an agenda and they have a lot of supporters who believe anything they are told. There has been more violence under the Obama administration, which is interesting.

The liberals still want to blame the guns rather than the mindsets of killers. In Islamist terrorist attacks, the mindset is about archaic beliefs and a learned hatred of all non-Muslims. Can't blame that on anything other than what the radical teachings.

As far as some random shooters, they tend to have mental illness and also a history of taking medications at a young age. I believe that the practice of declaring every other child as having ADHD and feeding them drugs may have something to do with it. There were so many anti-depressant drugs introduced in the last twenty years and so many lawsuits following because of the negative side effects. But, let's blame guns that have been around forever and not the people whose fingers are on the trigger.

The left is bound and determined to minimize the latest terrorist attack because it does nothing for their agenda. The reporting right after the attacks was appalling. A lot of the libs immediately declared that it was likely anti-government, racist white NRA members. When the facts came in and there was no more pretending that the suspects fit their narrative, they quickly turned to guns as the problem. Barbara Boxer stated that California proved that gun control works. I think someone should show her a map and point out where San Bernardino is located.

As the FBI disclosed more details about the suspects, it became clear we have yet another attack by radical Muslim terrorists. You'd think the left would just admit that is what it is and speak out against it. No, they are still trying to find someone or something else to blame.

This CNN anchor demonstrated what many of us already knew. Liberalism is a mental illness. After finding out that Malik was an agent for a terrorist group and likely trained, this is the explanation offered up by an insane liberal anchor to take attention off radical Muslims:

"BURNETT: Jim, I mean, obviously, her involvement is a game changer in how enforcement, law enforcement will look at this. But I just have to ask you, could there be something else, anything else, that could have explained her involvement? Something like a postpartum psychosis?"


Yes, you idiot woman. It was female problems that caused her to train as a terrorist agent and plan to kill all those infidels. Oh, and the reason the maniac shot people in Colorado Springs is because he was having a midlife crisis. Glad we got all that cleared up.


http://toprightnews.com/cnn-insanity-anchor-proposes-unbelievable-defense-for-female-san-bernardino-terrorist/

Very good points. And it's just almost comical, and certainly pathetic, that we still have a bunch of liberal talking heads on TV saying "we still don't know why they did it" and "their motives remain unclear." Really? Their motives are perfectly clear to anyone not drinking liberal kool-aid.

 

[mikegriffith1]

CORRECTION: I conflated a couple numbers as I was writing the OP. Obama has not proposed allowing over 100,000 Muslims into the country, but 10,000. Obama is pushing other nations to resettle well over 100,000 Muslims within their borders, and he wants to bring 10,000 of them into the U.S. And, again, given the recently exposed severe holes in our vetting process, it would be insanity to risk allowing 10,000 more Muslims into the country.

 

[imawhosure]

CORRECTION: I conflated a couple numbers as I was writing the OP. Obama has not proposed allowing over 100,000 Muslims into the country, but 10,000. Obama is pushing other nations to resettle well over 100,000 Muslims within their borders, and he wants to bring 10,000 of them into the U.S. And, again, given the recently exposed severe holes in our vetting process, it would be insanity to risk allowing 10,000 more Muslims into the country.

And ALL of the Democratic Presidential candidates have supported this idea. So the question is.......are they going to backtrack, or double down?!?!?!

 

[Moonglow]

Much to my genuine disbelief, we have liberals on this board arguing, in the immediate aftermath of the Muslim terrorist attack in San Bernardino no less, that Republicans are guilty of "aiding and abetting" and even "arming" the terrorists. If anyone is guilty of "aiding and abetting" the terrorists, it is American liberals. The same American liberals who:

* Refuse to seal our borders.

* Refuse to toughen our visa tracking program to stop potential bad guys from coming here on a visa and then over-staying.

* Refuse to support sane tough internal security policies (such as NSA's metadata program and the larger TSP).

* Insisted that we leave no residual force in Iraq, which led to the creation of the Islamic State in the first place.

* Refuse to acknowledge the self-evident fact that the more Muslims a Western/pro-Western nation has, the greater its chances of being attacked at some point.

* Not only refuse to acknowledge the above reality but now want to allow over 100,000 more Muslims into the country, even though several of our intel officials, including the FBI Director and the assistant director in charge of such screening, have said we cannot properly screen them. (By the way, Farook's wife passed her "vetting." In fact, she passed her Homeland Security "vetting." Yeah, liberals, tell me how we should feel safe that we can screen tens of thousands of Syrian refugees.)

* Refuse to admit that France's very strict gun laws, which include absolute bans on automatic weapons, did NOTHING to prevent the two recent horrendous terrorist attacks in Paris. Instead, they have gone to the sick extreme of mocking Republicans for praying for the victims' families and claim that Republicans have no business praying for the families until they support tougher gun laws. That's just sick.

* Have defended the disastrous, misguided decision of two potential life-saving witnesses who opted not to contact authorities about their suspicions regarding Farook and his wife because they did not want to engage in "profiling" (racial or otherwise). As Rudy Giuliani pointed out in a recent interview, he was personally involved with two cases where attacks were prevented because witnesses chose to say something rather than stay silent.

* Refuse to even call Muslim/Islamic terrorism by name, and their choice for president has gone to the idiotic extreme of saying that Muslims have "nothing whatsoever" to do with jihad.

So if anyone is aiding and abetting the terrorists, it is American liberals.

Seems the GOP led Congress forgot about that wall thang....

 

[Moonglow]

When it becomes this obvious liberals are at fault they freak out and start blaming everyone else, this is not the first time.

Yes because that's what the Leftist Politburo Brainwashing HQ instructs them to do.

Leftists are devoid of any semblance of personal responsibility, as such nothing is ever their fault, thus we have the blame somebody else syndrome that they frequently exhibit.

The Leftist mind is actually incredibly infantile, it's growth has been stunted as soon as the Cultural Marxism garbage begins to take control of it.

Siege heil, care to go goosestepping in the nude?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Much to my genuine disbelief, we have liberals on this board arguing, in the immediate aftermath of the Muslim terrorist attack in San Bernardino no less, that Republicans are guilty of "aiding and abetting" and even "arming" the terrorists. If anyone is guilty of "aiding and abetting" the terrorists, it is American liberals. The same American liberals who:

* Refuse to seal our borders.

* Refuse to toughen our visa tracking program to stop potential bad guys from coming here on a visa and then over-staying.

* Refuse to support sane tough internal security policies (such as NSA's metadata program and the larger TSP).

* Insisted that we leave no residual force in Iraq, which led to the creation of the Islamic State in the first place.

* Refuse to acknowledge the self-evident fact that the more Muslims a Western/pro-Western nation has, the greater its chances of being attacked at some point.

* Not only refuse to acknowledge the above reality but now want to allow over 100,000 more Muslims into the country, even though several of our intel officials, including the FBI Director and the assistant director in charge of such screening, have said we cannot properly screen them. (By the way, Farook's wife passed her "vetting." In fact, she passed her Homeland Security "vetting." Yeah, liberals, tell me how we should feel safe that we can screen tens of thousands of Syrian refugees.)

* Refuse to admit that France's very strict gun laws, which include absolute bans on automatic weapons, did NOTHING to prevent the two recent horrendous terrorist attacks in Paris. Instead, they have gone to the sick extreme of mocking Republicans for praying for the victims' families and claim that Republicans have no business praying for the families until they support tougher gun laws. That's just sick.

* Have defended the disastrous, misguided decision of two potential life-saving witnesses who opted not to contact authorities about their suspicions regarding Farook and his wife because they did not want to engage in "profiling" (racial or otherwise). As Rudy Giuliani pointed out in a recent interview, he was personally involved with two cases where attacks were prevented because witnesses chose to say something rather than stay silent.

* Refuse to even call Muslim/Islamic terrorism by name, and their choice for president has gone to the idiotic extreme of saying that Muslims have "nothing whatsoever" to do with jihad.

So if anyone is aiding and abetting the terrorists, it is American liberals.

Farook was an American citizen.

 

[imawhosure]

95 to 99% of all of the gun talk is aimed squarely at red states, which the left wants to be able to control.

How do we know this?

Because lefty bastions are big cities run by lefties with gun control, and blue states that also have massive gun control. (Just think Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and for states California) Virtually all of these cities and blue states have tremendous amounts of gun control, and yet they are the most violent places with gun abuse, usually by people wielding illegal fire arms.

And so, every thinking individual knows that the government can NOT legislate gun violence away, unless they make guns illegal and start forced confiscation. Even at that, the criminals will have them, looooooong after law abiding citizens turn them in, leaving the law abiders defenseless, and basically making it open season on them.

I do not think it is to much to ask the left to show us one or two laws that would have stopped most of the mass shootings, and we can all then discuss them like intelligent human beings! If they can't produce them, then they are doing no more than trying through the backdoor to repeal the 2nd amendment.

Now for you reasonable Democrats, (and I honestly hope there are some left) with Obama basically over riding the law of the land on illegal immigration and everything else, why would you believe that we should trust his promise on ANYTHING? I am sorry, but he has consistently lied to all of us; the American citizenry, so to believe anything the man says now is akin to going back to a car dealer that charged you double for the last car you purchased. It ain't going to happen!!!!!!