Random Politics & Religion #07

Facts are a twisted world view to you? That explains a lot.

But isn't that the argument? That until the president himself declares its Islamic extremism we can't win the war? I mean... People have already declared it Islamic extremism and millions of people call it that but why are we so hung up on making the president refer to it as that? Don't you think maybe he's weighed the pros and cons and made a logical decision not to? I think most people who refer to it as such don't even know what Islam is...

You're arguing that because we don't call it Islamic extremism then we make republicans the enemies over gun control because you know we haven't been arguing over gun control for a long time anyways... Was it the same with sandy hook? Or all the other mass shootings that spark the same debate that has nothing to do with Isis or Islamic extremism?

so if Dems are making pubs out to be the enemy for this then why do I hear pubs making sure they call this guy gay and democrat every time it comes up? Are you trying to promote unity over making sure that's brought up? Or what's the purpose? You're not referring to him as an Islamic extremist but a gay democrat...

You're whole argument is baseless... You can call me whatever you want and people are still going to do or feel whatever they want... The victims of using such speech usually show when people like trump want to ban all Muslims because you know it could be any one of them!!! You talk about psychological affects here like its a defense for republicans and taking blame over something instead of it actually being something helpful... You don't seem to take anything into account other than yourself and those that agree with you...

Yes, but that is completely missing the point of my post. I realize tangents may lead to more comfortable ground, but they don't help when I know what you're doing.

So you acknowledge my point. Kudos.


I'm all for calling a spade a spade. I think the president knows exactly why he's choosing his words so carefully, and I think it has to do with prioritizing American political expediency over all else. He knows he can manipulate the narrative, and he does it every single time a tragedy occurs.

How tough would it have been to kill nazis if we purposefully never knew who they were?

Are you being serious with this comment? Lol...

Nazi wasn't a quick was of pointing out people who were genocidal *** until after the world learned German Nazi's were genocidal ***.

way*

GDI Rooks.

Idk... Seems to be more like you're trying to make this out to be a blame Islam thing to make an excuse for the ongoing gun debate we've had in America for quite a long time now... So who's prioritizing politics? Who's making sure they point out the shooter was a registered democrat every time it's brought up? I mean I don't see you calling him an Islamic extremist when you talk about it... Just a democrat... Lol... Then you accuse others of making it political... Just wow...

There's 'facts' and then there's being intellectually honest, which you've never been.

I haven't heard about the man being a democrat, but if it is true, it's about as fair as a woman saying, "troubled men who glorifies groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda go and shoot up a gay night club".

Keep it up. I want to see if insulting me is the hill you're willing to die on.


It was an example of how the narrative is being twisted.

Is it "Miss the Point Day"?

Labels: terrible unless they're being used against the competition, apparently.

That's some grade A projection. The only time the semantics gets whipped out is to point empty criticism at the president. Nothing more than political distraction.

It's on purpose, they know what you are saying but want to distract and draw you away from your initial point and then bait you into saying something they can either report you on or proudly claim "gotch!". Basically they trolling you, ignore them and move on.

The president has no problem labeling political opponents with blanket terms that demonize them. If he were some saint that was always above the label treatment, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I'll make sure to redirect your words if you ever throw around terms like "bigot", though.

In other words, you're hoping a mod comes and saves you from me.

It's not as scathing as you hope it is.

I'll go ahead and reiterate what I said either. The problem with you is that you pride yourself on being blunt and straight forward, and you confuse that with being an objective thinker. You're not aware that you view everything through your own political lens, like the rest of us. That's why you feel so bold and confident about calling the shooter, who took 49 lives just a week ago, a democrat. Pretty sure even Trump can't get away with that one, and he gets away with most everything.

Because the people assaulting Muslims in the United States actually give a ***whether they're extremists or not.

It's really not unless you can't acknowledge your own biases. It's been explained over and over how "radical Islam" draws an unclear distinction between extremists and non-extremists and plays into the propaganda war that the west is at war with Islam. It's let's of an issue for us here because we don't view the term as being so general, but our perception isn't really the issue.

so, isn't there a lot of info at this point suggesting this guy had no real connection to any terror group and did this more because of his huge repression of his homosexuality? they found no real info suggestion his was hyper religious and his mental profile fits with it. it seems more like he used the whole, "I <3 ISIS!", to help cover so people wouldn't find out his love of man butt.


that is an important distinction to make, because his repression is part of the bigotry that runs rampant and prevents people like him from being able to accept himself.

Democrat: check
glorified ISIS: check
shot up gay nightclub: check

I don't really see a twisted view here, looks like facts to me.

He was a registered Democrat. I didn't make that up. And I only even said that because it was part of a point I was making about how the narrative is being manipulated and projected onto a completely unrelated group.

Man. I'm used to seeing people on here playing defense, but this is getting ridiculous.

Proof, please. I've been hearing a lot of contradicting stuff to this statement recently.

The shooter's also been confirmed as a carbon-based life form. Which is about as crucial and relevant to the discussion as him being a Democrat.

Well, at this point it's harder to say he didn't glorify ISIS than it is to say he did. He certainly glorified them in speech on various occasions, but his actual motives remain unclear.

I think we should ban the word ISIS cause it triggers bad memories for me.

Confirmed. "Miss the Point Day" is now on my calendar. I feel sorry for my daughter sharing her birthday with it, but at least I'll have more of a heads up next year.

I dunno. When someones parents says "My son was a raging homophobe with intense reactions of unreasonable amounts of anger at gay people showing affection to each other."

I think the motives behind his actions are pretty blatant.