Je Suis Charlie (1 Viewer)

[Frothingslosh]

I'm not talking about the recipients - I'm talking about the hospital. As in, "You can't get a blood transfusion because it's against my beliefs."

Or how about "Your insurance won't cover psychiatric or psychological care because my religion says they don't work."

Edit: Also, even though it's illegal in Michigan for a store to refuse service to (or even fire!) people because of their ethnicity, political beliefs, religious beliefs, gender, or marital status, the Michigan Religious Freedom Restoration Act will allow you to discriminate against them due to their sexual orientation as long as you can claim 'my religion says dem faggots is icky'.

 

[Twincam]

It works, if your expectations are realistic. It's insanely complicated and people have deeply held fundamental beliefs that are poles apart.

The middle ground isn't a calm place.

The problem is the people who want to impose their fundamental belief on others. They're always bad news. If you disagree with them it's clearly bad news, but even if you agree with them, all they are doing is causing conflict, stopping people listening to reason and delaying the change you are hoping for.

Speaking of changes people are hoping for... back to work.

 

[Twincam]

As to freedoms, I still maintain Ben Franklin had the right idea: "Those who give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety in the end deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

I've never heard that before. Powerful stuff. You've got me questioning myself now.

The medical stuff is horrific. UK, by the way, where we're fighting to keep the National Health Service from being gradually privatised out of existence.

 

[Bladerunner]

Okay, first off, since we went off and started talking the definition of terrorism while I was busy sleeping, let me jump back there and throw this in:

According to the Oxford Dictionary, terrorism is defined as

and that is pretty much the way I've always read it. A terrorist can be religiously or politically inspired, [/QOUTE]

It also states that terrorism produces "fear and submission therein" Websters Dictionary,,,,,,,#2 def for terrorism.

The rest I am not even going after. It is a waste of my time but as we state here in this thread : IT is your opinion

 

[Frothingslosh]

I've never heard that before. Powerful stuff. You've got me questioning myself now.

Yeah, Benjamin Franklin first used that quote in 1755 when writing for the Pennsylvania Assembly in its Reply to the Governor, and then again in "An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania". Admittedly, he was a rebel and and a firebrand by British standards at the time, but if you've ever read our Declaration of Independence, you'll understand that the American Founding Fathers had reason to be so very inflexible when it came to preserving individual freedoms.

The medical stuff is horrific. UK, by the way, where we're fighting to keep the National Health Service from being gradually privatised out of existence.

Oh, crap, they're trying to force you into an American-style system, where you're allowed all the health care you can afford and not a whit more? You have my sympathies. "Oh, you have cancer? You have to go into our high-risk program, with 90% lower payouts and 400% higher premiums, and if you ever have a lapse, say from losing your job after spending 125 days in the hospital, then you can never again get insurance due to having a pre-existing condition." (That, by the way, was stopped by Obamacare, and is precisely what Bladerunner and the Republican Party want to reinstate.)

 

[Frothingslosh]

The rest I am not even going after. It is a waste of my time but as we state here in this thread : IT is your opinion

Of course you're not - all of us here know your position is indefensible, even if you refuse to admit it.

 

[Bladerunner]

I have read all the post including the URLs. I find nothing new that I already did not know about your ideology. If you want to live in a 'pie in the sky' world' I am happy to let you. I only hope that "when the defecation hits the rotary oscillator", I will have the ability to protect my family without relying on others who will not be there. (i.e. The French sent to protect Charlie Hebdo two weeks before because of death threats)

Oh, by the way, I heard that the French have charged the four men who were responsible. It appears they are all Dead. REALLY! Are they going to get a Jury trial? LOL

have a safe day.

 

[Bladerunner]

Okay, first off, since we went off and started talking the definition of terrorism while I was busy sleeping, let me jump back there and throw this in:

Nowhere in there is there a requirement that terrorists be Muslim, and as was pointed out, many many terrorists aren't. Just look at Ted Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, Guy Fawkes, the KKK, the IRA, Scott Roeder, Anders Breivik, and many, many more - they ALL were trying to force political change of some sort through violence and terror.[/QOUTE]

It is little wonder why you left out Bill Ayers and company among other liberal left wing nuts who want to transform a free society to one like France. A socialist state.

 

[Bladerunner]

So the killer at Sandy Hook, I think I've got that right, was a terrorist?

Brian

Terrorism, Yes but it was not called that. In fact the fort Hood shooting was not called a Terrorist act but a work place situation.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Actually, I left him out because I'd never heard of him, as he was active from a period beginning before I was born and ending while I was a toddler, and in an area I never really studied much. I would absolutely call him a terrorist as well. Of course, you'll just dig up more, I know, as I cannot possibly list every single terrorist who ever lived, and instead just named well-known ones. I'm guessing you took offense beause they tended to be reactionaries like you for some reason.

Of course, you cannot but help but ascribe evil motives to me, I know, as without an enemy ravening at your door, your whole worldset will fall apart. That's the only reason I can think of for why you are so utterly opposed to actually doing what your religion tells you to.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Terrorism, Yes but it was not called that. In fact the fort Hood shooting was not called a Terrorist act but a work place situation.

So you are calling the killer at Sandy Hook at terrorist, so what killers are not terrorists?

As to Fort Hood, which incident? 2009 or 2014?

The 2009 classification appears to be in dispute, it does not appear to be a terrorist attack to me.

I think 99.9% of the people would not classify a lone nutcase as a terrorist, there would have to be an agenda other than just a personal one.

Brian

 

[ConnorGiles]

I think you may have missed my answer Brian :

"A gunman walks into a large public space and begins shooting, killing or wounding some bystanders and forcing others to cower under tables or run away in fear."

would you call that terrorism? Because I would.

And you left a question here :

"The 2009 classification appears to be in dispute, it does not appear to be a terrorist attack to me."

What about the 2014 event?

 

[Bladerunner]

So you are calling the killer at Sandy Hook at terrorist, so what killers are not terrorists?

As to Fort Hood, which incident? 2009 or 2014?

The 2009 classification appears to be in dispute, it does not appear to be a terrorist attack to me.

I think 99.9% of the people would not classify a lone nutcase as a terrorist, there would have to be an agenda other than just a personal one.

Brian

Hi Brian: again I stated :"Not all Muslims are terrorist but 99.5% of all terrorist are Muslim. I am sure you deal with percentages all the time and like I said "where there is smoke, there is Fire".

I think you will find that I am right if you really get down to pulling up all the terrorist acts, (including those that were not called terrorist acts by our liberal government...i.e. Fort Hood Killings) you will find that they are within the 0.5% and the majority of terrorist acts (99%) around the world after 2001 has been performed by Muslims. I stand by my figures whether you want to believe them or not. The sooner the better.

Yes, I put parameters on it because if I did not, some of you would go back to the bible days and say, now who were the terrorist simply to get some kind of a point across.

Have a safe day.

Blade

 

[Frothingslosh]

I think you may have missed my answer Brian :

"A gunman walks into a large public space and begins shooting, killing or wounding some bystanders and forcing others to cower under tables or run away in fear."

would you call that terrorism? Because I would.

And you left a question here :

What about the 2014 event?

That's only terrorism if he's attempting to cause some sort of political change with the shooting. If it's just a case of some nutjob trying to kill as many people as he can, it's "only" mass murder.

The desire to cause political change is what differentiates terrorism from simple murder - it's violence for a purpose, not for the sake of violence.

Edit: Aaand here we go. Any wagers on how many consecutive posts Blade will make this time? My money's on 4.

 

[Bladerunner]

That's only terrorism if he's attempting to cause some sort of political change with the shooting. If it's just a case of some nutjob trying to kill as many people as he can, it's "only" mass murder.

The desire to cause political change is what differentiates terrorism from simple murder - it's violence for a purpose, not for the sake of violence.

Edit: Aaand here we go. Any wagers on how many consecutive posts Blade will make this time? My money's on 4.

guess you did not read my Webster's Dictionary #2 definition of Terrorist. No, I guess you would not because it would not get your point across.

 

[ConnorGiles]

That's only terrorism if he's attempting to cause some sort of political change with the shooting. If it's just a case of some nutjob trying to kill as many people as he can, it's "only" mass murder.

The desire to cause political change is what differentiates terrorism from simple murder - it's violence for a purpose, not for the sake of violence.

Edit: Aaand here we go. Any wagers on how many consecutive posts Blade will make this time? My money's on 4.

I guess it comes down to your personal opinion of terrorism. I personally would say that someone who inflicts terror on the public via violence would class as a terrorist.

 

[Brianwarnock]

That's only terrorism if he's attempting to cause some sort of political change with the shooting. If it's just a case of some nutjob trying to kill as many people as he can, it's "only" mass murder.

The desire to cause political change is what differentiates terrorism from simple murder - it's violence for a purpose, not for the sake of violence.

Edit: Aaand here we go. Any wagers on how many consecutive posts Blade will make this time? My money's on 4.

So I keep trying to get across to Connor, while Blade appears to have totally misread the thread.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

I guess it comes down to your personal opinion of terrorism. I personally would say that someone who inflicts terror on the public via violence would class as a terrorist.

I get terrified by some drivers, are they terrorists?

Brian

 

[Frothingslosh]

guess you did not read my Webster's Dictionary #2 definition of Terrorist. No, I guess you would not because it would get your point across.

There is no second definition.

Nice try, though.

Hi Brian: again I stated :"Not all Muslims are terrorist but 99.5% of all terrorist are Muslim. I am sure you deal with percentages all the time and like I said "where there is smoke, there is Fire".

I think you will find that I am right if you really get down to pulling up all the terrorist acts, (including those that were not called terrorist acts by our liberal government...i.e. Fort Hood Killings) you will find that they are within the 0.5% and the majority of terrorist acts (99%) around the world after 2001 has been performed by Muslims. I stand by my figures whether you want to believe them or not. The sooner the better.

Yes, I put parameters on it because if I did not, some of you would go back to the bible days and say, now who were the terrorist simply to get some kind of a point across.

The red text is classic moving of the goalposts. Blade gets proven wrong? He'll just change the data until he can force it to say what he wants! If he can't do that, he'll just make up his own numbers!

Blade, you're the one making the ridiculous claim, so it's on you to provide your proof. Of course, you never will, because there is none. Everyone here knows you just pulled that number out of your ass in order to fit your complete fear and hatred of brown people.

So I keep trying to get across to Connor, while Blade appears to have totally misread the thread.

To be fair, to Blade, EVERY thread is either about bashing liberals or screaming that the Muslim-colored sky is falling. I really need to stop egging him on - it's starting to feel like I'm clubbing baby seals.

 

[Brianwarnock]

The fact that Blade got from "was the Sandy Hook killer a terrorist" to bashing Muslims is disturbing, was the Sandy Hook killer a radical Muslim?

Brian