Jump to content

The Charleston Church Shooting

EspressoBuzz
 Share

The Charleston Church Shooting  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Terrorism or Not?


Recommended Posts

The_Field_Ager Newbie

The_Field_Ager

Posted
Posted (edited)

Number 2 certainly describes the media reaction in response to this drug addled, school drop-out gone wrong. He probably couldn't even spell 'terrorism'. There also didn't seem to be any overt or clear-cut political goal here. This was mass-murder, not terrorism.

Edited by Papist
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr VJP Newbie

Mr VJP

Posted
Posted (edited)

There is an absolute desire, by supporters of Islam in America, to be able to point to violent events perpetrated by non-Muslims, as evidence there are more terrorists acts carried out by others. 

 

This leads to racist acts, such as this latest one, being desperately labelled as a terrorist act.

 

The fallacy in this argument is in the ideology of the attacker.  This kid was a racist that felt blacks were harming America and the white race.  It was a racially motivated mass murder.  There have been similar cases where blacks have attacked groups of whites, which are also not terrorists acts, but racially motivated ones.

 

Radical Islamist terrorist attacks carried out on American soil, or even American friendly soil, against Americans and our friends, are always done with hatred of America in mind.  Those radical Islamists want ALL Americans dead, not just certain ones, or certain races.  Their attacks are against everyone and anyone they can kill.  They do not target specific races, segments or genders of Americans in their attacks.  And they do it to instill fear of Islam and use it to gain power.  They are at war with America and are part of a huge group of radicals.  It's organized and political.  

 

Terrorism's goal is to instill fear.  Racism in America has no ability to instill fear in those it hates, it can only act out violently because of the hatred.

 

What I expect to see coming in the near future is a government attempt to label this act "domestic terrorism" and couple that with a push for more control.  The targets of that control will be American gun owners and anyone unfriendly to this administration's leftist, progressive agenda.  The people Obama and the Left want labelled as "terrorists".

 

It's a classic example of misdirection to achieve a goal, because there will not be a corresponding higher level of scrutiny of foreign terrorists.  There will be a higher level of scrutiny turned inward on certain American citizens though.  

 

Ask yourself why the TSA spends the majority of it's time dealing with average people, when they could be profiling like the Israeli's do.  They are much more effective in stopping terrorist threats and use far fewer agents to do it.  Of course their agents are not just people picked up off the inner city streets that vote for Leftists and need jobs.

 

I firmly believe this administration, as well as half of the US population, believes America is threatened more by some of it's own citizens, than it is by foreigners who want us all dead.

 

 

Edited by Mr VJP
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat junkie Contributor

wildcat junkie

Posted
Posted

Number 2 certainly describes the media reaction in response to this drug addled, school drop-out gone wrong. He probably couldn't even spell 'terrorism'. There also didn't seem to be any overt or clear-cut political goal here. This was mass-murder, not terrorism.

He wanted to start a "civil war". That sounds like a "political goal" to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr VJP Newbie

Mr VJP

Posted
Posted

Racism and war are not political goals.  They're the end result of hatred.

 

Dividing the country along racial lines is a political goal.  This kids actions are the end result of that division.  Guns are not to blame for this travesty.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr VJP Newbie

Mr VJP

Posted
Posted (edited)

"Some members just had to point to Isalm even when it has nothing to do with this."

Seriously?  When anything involving terrorism is discussed, it is impossible not to include the world's #1 practicioner.

 

Islam was pointed out because they practice "terrorism" not mass murder.  It has nothing to do with anything else, no matter how much jaundice runs through your thoughts.

 

The DC sniper, who killed a lot of people in the Wash D.C. area a few years back, did it to cover up his hope of killing his ex-wife at some point.  By your conclusion, I guess he was a terrorist.

 

Edited by Mr VJP
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ATbuckhunter Rising Star

ATbuckhunter

Posted
Posted

"Some members just had to point to Isalm even when it has nothing to do with this."

Seriously? When anything involving terrorism is discussed, it is impossible not to include the world's #1 practicioner.

Islam was pointed out because they practice "terrorism" not mass murder. It has nothing to do with anything else, no matter how much jaundice runs through your thoughts.

The DC sniper, who killed a lot of people in the Wash D.C. area a few years back, did it to cover up his hope of killing his ex-wife at some point. By your conclusion, I guess he was a terrorist.

100 percent both were terrorists in my eyes. As you know my position is that it's the people who are the terrorists and not the religion but as I said before it has nothing to do with this case. I don't see any difference between this or anything any radical does.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ants Newbie

ants

Posted
Posted

100 percent both were terrorists in my eyes. As you know my position is that it's the people who are the terrorists and not the religion but as I said before it has nothing to do with this case. I don't see any difference between this or anything any radical does.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So then you would agree with me that the Fort Hood "Shooter" was a terrorist..Right??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The_Field_Ager Newbie

The_Field_Ager

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't see any difference between this or anything any radical does.

 

 

It is foolish and blind to deliberately fail, as a matter of personal policy, to recognize the individual motivating forces behind the the things people do.Claiming that all people are the same, ie that their motivations are irrelevant, is absolutely nonsensical and blinkered.

 

You can never claim to propose solutions to any problem if you refuse to look at the causes.

Edited by Papist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...