FireChan Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) Regardless of whether the Crusades were defensive or not, they were predated by another religious war, and another before that etc etc Is that the stance we are taking in these modern days? Continue the trend of religious violence? Or are we going to evolve at some point? I know, I know, it's improbable. I would have accepted this argument. Instead he tried to justify atrocities by saying "It's just how the world turns guys, it just happens, even by us" Depends on who you're asking. Haven't seen much organized Christian or Jewish violence these days. Those Buddhists are pretty peaceful. Your second point is dead on. The issue is that to even bring up the Crusades to make a point is ludicrous. It's like bringing up Hammurabi's Code to discuss how there are some other law codes that put women to death in ways we consider unfair. Or how the Iraq War wasn't so bad, just look at what Darius did to Macedonia. An appeal to thousands of years ago, where life was less sacred, times were tougher, and the morality of most was lesser as a comparison to an event today is a condemnation in itself. Edited February 7, 2015 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) I like how people act like they don't understand what Obama is doing/has done w/ regards to "Islam" and the Middle East. Each time he speaks people fake outrage. Agree or not, he's actively trying to keep a lid on Muslim bashing and middle-east bashing. Personally, I do a bit of that in my personal life (I do understand not all Muslims are bad but I don't have a problem calling it like I see it). Obama is the President though, and he seems to have decided that the Middle East and the people there aren't going anywhere...so his public remarks take that into consideration and are carefully chosen to condemn precisely and not say something that casts to wide a net. Where would we like to get? What kind of comments won't get us there? That's the analysis the WH has obviously conducted, and it's pretty clear where they came out on that one. Not really a story here. If you are outraged that someone dare compare ISIS's crusade to old Christian crusades then you are an idiot. It's almost as if some people have taken to defending the crusades b/c they're now an anti-Obama movement! lol [insert asinine comment about "no you don't get it, THIS president doesn't GET IT, there is no equivalency blah blah"] Edited February 7, 2015 by Rex'sOffense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I like how people act like they don't understand what Obama is doing/has done w/ regards to "Islam" and the Middle East. Each time he speaks people fake outrage. Agree or not, he's actively trying to keep a lid on Muslim bashing and middle-east bashing. Personally, I do a bit of that in my personal life (I do understand not all Muslims are bad but I don't have a problem calling it like I see it). Obama is the President though, and he seems to have decided that the Middle East and the people there aren't going anywhere...so his public remarks take that into consideration and are carefully chosen to condemn precisely and not say something that casts to wide a net. Where would we like to get? What kind of comments won't get us there? That's the analysis the WH has obviously conducted, and it's pretty clear where they came out on that one. Not really a story here. If you are outraged that someone dare compare ISIS's crusade to old Christian crusades then you are an idiot. It's almost as if some people have taken to defending the crusades b/c they're now an anti-Obama movement! lol [insert asinine comment about "no you don't get it, THIS president doesn't GET IT, there is no equivalency blah blah"] What effect does "keeping a lid on Middle East bashing," have? Have we seen a decrease in violence over there? Less folks getting burned to death? ISIS is falling apart because Obama hasn't called out them out? I don't know anyone outraged that they are comparing ISIS to the Crusades. Personally, I think it's a roundabout shot at Islamic Terrorism. "A thousand years ago when the Western world was full of savages, we did stuff similar to ISIS." But that goes against what you're saying, that we're appeasing extremists in WH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The saintly B.O. is obviously doing his best to keep us from harming ourselves by not letting us burn moslems in this country. He's terribly worried that if he utters those words-which-cannot-be-said that we'll all just grab our ropes, cans of gas, semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and handguns and storm the nearest mosque and let those low rider scum have what for. You know - what we used to do before there was a black/white man in the White House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The saintly B.O. is obviously doing his best to keep us from harming ourselves by not letting us burn moslems in this country. Then how am I supposed to heat my house? This is a conspiracy by Big Oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) What effect does "keeping a lid on Middle East bashing," have? Have we seen a decrease in violence over there? Less folks getting burned to death? ISIS is falling apart because Obama hasn't called out them out? I don't know anyone outraged that they are comparing ISIS to the Crusades. Personally, I think it's a roundabout shot at Islamic Terrorism. "A thousand years ago when the Western world was full of savages, we did stuff similar to ISIS." But that goes against what you're saying, that we're appeasing extremists in WH. Like Nanker said, it's more for us than them. Personally, I would still rather do nothing (at least nothing more than we are)...getting all emotional and puffing our chests out does nothing for me. They're burning people to death, crucifying children, raping women, etc...I get it and it does piss me off. I don't need our President puffing his chest out and rattling the population to prepare them for another US ground war. The neighbors have to put ISIS down and when it gets bad enough they will. There is no point to rant and rave about how backwards the Islamic world is. Obama doesn't need to act the way most of us feel. What would be the point of that? Edited February 7, 2015 by Rex'sOffense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Like Nanker said, it's more for us than them. Personally, I would still rather do nothing (at least nothing more than we are)...getting all emotional and puffing our chests out does nothing for me. They're burning people to death, crucifying children, raping women, etc...I get it and it does piss me off. I don't need our President puffing his chest out and rattling the population to prepare them for another US ground war. The neighbors have to put ISIS down and when it gets bad enough they will. There is no point to rant and rave about how backwards the Islamic world is. Obama doesn't need to act the way most of us feel. What would be the point of that? You're right. In reality, he should just go on like a professor about how we're as bad as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
What a Tuel Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) Depends on who you're asking. Haven't seen much organized Christian or Jewish violence these days. Those Buddhists are pretty peaceful. Your second point is dead on. The issue is that to even bring up the Crusades to make a point is ludicrous. It's like bringing up Hammurabi's Code to discuss how there are some other law codes that put women to death in ways we consider unfair. Or how the Iraq War wasn't so bad, just look at what Darius did to Macedonia. An appeal to thousands of years ago, where life was less sacred, times were tougher, and the morality of most was lesser as a comparison to an event today is a condemnation in itself. Oh I definitely agree, other religions are largely peaceful these days. Christians get bashed regularly, and they just deal with it. One only has to post a picture of the prophet mohammad to see how much of a "minority" of the islamic faith would turn to extremism. What should have happened with the Charlie Hebdo comics, (and maybe it has, but I didn't see it.), Newspapers and media all over the world should have covered the comic strip, published the one that stirred up the extremism, AND published the one after the attack and put them on the front page of newspapers, tv, across the world. Send a message that we will not be intimidated into sacrificing our rights. I know it's easy to sit here behind my computer screen and ask the media to do this, but all the same their reaction was just gutless. If you think the above "would just stir up unnecessary trouble" then we know what boat you are in. Not aimed at you FireChan, but wanted to get that out....somewhere. Edit: Instead we get this kind of crap: The publishing of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons of the Muslim prophet Mohammed was an act of provocation, showing a lack of respect of other peoples’ religion in the West and the backlash which came should have been expected, the recently departed head of MI6 has stated. In his first public appearance since standing down from the post of ‘C’ Sir John Sawers declared his support for Pope Francis who had spoken out against “provocateurs” on religious matters and warned that they can expect violence in return. Sir John wanted to stress that the 12 murders which resulted from the attack on the offices of the satirical magazine “cannot be justified on any basis whatsoever”. But he argued: “there is a requirement for some restraint on the side of those of us in the West. I rather agree with the Pope…. that respect for others peoples’ religion is an important part of this. If you show disrespect of others’ core values then you are going to provoke an angry response.” What about their disrespect for our core values? Like you know, free speech, and.....life? Edited February 7, 2015 by What a Tuel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted February 7, 2015 Author Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) Like Nanker said, it's more for us than them. Personally, I would still rather do nothing (at least nothing more than we are)...getting all emotional and puffing our chests out does nothing for me. They're burning people to death, crucifying children, raping women, etc...I get it and it does piss me off. I don't need our President puffing his chest out and rattling the population to prepare them for another US ground war. The neighbors have to put ISIS down and when it gets bad enough they will. There is no point to rant and rave about how backwards the Islamic world is. Obama doesn't need to act the way most of us feel. What would be the point of that? Well, I guess what irks me just a bit is that every once in a while ISIS, or whatever initial grouping identifies the terrorist de jour, sprinkles an American or two into the kidnap/burn/kill/rape schedule. I guess I'll have to wait a bit longer until "...it gets bad enough..." if I subscribe to your approach. I keep thinking that somewhere in the context of satellite and drone intelligence gathering, coupled with ghille-suit stealth, there's a way to put some industrial strength hurtin' on the moslem terrorists who appear to hold whole regions hostage. Edited February 7, 2015 by Keukasmallies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The neighbors have to put ISIS down and when it gets bad enough they will. Part of your problem is you say the neighbors will do something when it gets bad enough...and apparently, to you, bad enough does not include... They're burning people to death, crucifying children, raping women... If that's not bad enough for you, what is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The neighbors have to put ISIS down and when it gets bad enough they will. There is no point to rant and rave about how backwards the Islamic world is. Obama doesn't need to act the way most of us feel. What would be the point of that? You're a blithering idiot. That statement isn't even tenuously connected with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Like Nanker said, it's more for us than them. Personally, I would still rather do nothing (at least nothing more than we are)...getting all emotional and puffing our chests out does nothing for me. They're burning people to death, crucifying children, raping women, etc...I get it and it does piss me off. I don't need our President puffing his chest out and rattling the population to prepare them for another US ground war. The neighbors have to put ISIS down and when it gets bad enough they will. There is no point to rant and rave about how backwards the Islamic world is. Obama doesn't need to act the way most of us feel. What would be the point of that? It's more for us...what? What is your definition of "bad enough?" A frontal assault stateside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Haven't seen much organized Christian or Jewish violence these days. Those Buddhists are pretty peaceful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 But he also knows how to party. "Give me a steak - medium-rare." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Three Muslims at UNC were shot and killed by a guy because, according to preliminary reports, of a parking dispute. Will the media blow this up to epic proportions to make it a hate crime? Will the president comment? Will the media point at one person to convince everyone that the crusades are back? Will anyone react the same way when three black teens are murdered in Chicago this weekend at the hand of a black gangbanger? Someone fire up the Retardmobile, because the gatormans of the world are about to unleash their hypocritical venom yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Just like clockwork: Muslim Group Immediately Jumps In. Perhaps the President can explain to them that, like the deli in France, this was completely random. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 (edited) Folks Do the Randomest Things :Some random observations on random acts of non-Islamic violence. By Andrew C. McCarthy I don’t understand why folks are giving President Obama and his spokes-minions such a hard time over his insistence that Ahmedy Coulibaly, the terrorist who just happened to be Muslim committing terrorism that had nothing to do with Islam, was just “randomly” picking out folks in Paris to kill when he randomly came upon a grocery that just happened to be Jewish and, coincidentally, to have Jews in it, whom he randomly killed. Sure, we know Coulibaly called a French TV station during the siege, said he was loyal to the Islamic State that has nothing to do with Islam, and that he picked this kosher market because he was targeting Jews. But you can’t believe everything you hear on TV — just ask Brian Williams. Come to think of it, the Paris attack seems an awful lot like another random one in 2008. Back then, another group of Pakistani terrorists who just happened to be Muslim, and who belonged to the Lashkar-e-Taiba Islamic terrorist organization that has nothing to do with Islam, went looking for random folks to kill and just happened to stumble on the Nariman House, a Chabad Lubavitch Jewish center which, coincidentally, had Jews in it — Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka, then six months pregnant. Of course, when they were randomly detaining these two folks who happened to be Jewish before randomly killing them, the terrorists who happened to be Muslim were overheard in radio transmissions discussing how “the lives of Jews were worth 50 times those of non-Jews” in this jihad that had nothing to do with Islam. But hey, totally random, right? By the way, have you ever flipped randomly through Islamic scripture? I just happened to land on sura 5:82 — wasn’t looking for anything in particular, you see — and found that it says: “Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou find the Jews and pagans.” Could something have been mistranslated? Maybe the revelation to the prophet really said “folks” but got somehow got written down as “Jews”? More at the link: . Edited February 11, 2015 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Will the media point at one person to convince everyone that the crusades are back? Can't be a crusade. This guy is an atheist. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2948803/Man-arrested-3-shot-death-North-Carolina.html Shooting three people over a parking spot. Criminy. Of course since the guy was anything but Muslim we'll hear calls about "hate crime" for the next few days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Of course since the guy was anything but Muslim we'll hear calls about "hate crime" for the next few days. Not so fast. He's not just an atheist, but a progressive atheist to boot, according to his Facebook page, where he has 'likes' of all things progressive, including anti-Tea Party sites, so...pretty much...this story will be done by dinnertime. A review of the Facebook page of the man charged in these murders, Craig Hicks, shows a consistent theme of anti-religion and progressive causes. Included in his many Facebook “likes” are the Huffington Post, Rachel Maddow, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Freedom from Religion Foundation, Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” Neil deGrasse Tyson, gay marriage groups, and a host of anti-conservative/Tea Party pages. Remarkably, one of the four Facebook groups he had joined was “Religious Tolerance.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Bloomberg should add Progressives and non-religious people to the list of people that should not be allowed to own guns. Obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts