isadore;1856857 wrote:gosh a ruddies
a terrorist at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris made a mistake, brought a hammer to a gun fight.

Hopefully we start dropping bombs on innocent people to prevent this. Also need boots on the ground and make sure to never call them the 'JV Squad' because that matters. Maybe if these people were converted to Christianity their wouldn't be any problems because Christians never commit crimes or kill people.
















































​kappa

sleeper;1856858 wrote:I'm assuming by "cancer" you mean Islam. Did you pass 4th grade math? What happens when you divide a small number of instances over a very large number(~1.8 Billion)?

Saying Islam is the problem for ISIS is like saying black people are responsible for a robbery by a black guy. Oh wait, that is how the Republican party thinks and then that same party cries about being labeled a racist/bigot because of 'identity politics'.

No, not Islam... radicals that attack in Islam's name. So please restructure whatever you were trying to say. I know it's hard to get away from the narrative that you bought into, but I'm confident you can do it .

HitsRus;1856904 wrote:No, not Islam... radicals that attack in Islam's name. So please restructure whatever you were trying to say. I know it's hard to get away from the narrative that you bought into, but I'm confident you can do it .

This is what cracks me. Because an individual might lean conservative, it's assumed "oh shit, a Muslim bombed this or shot that so ALL Muslims are BAAAAAD !!" Most sensible people know that "all" Muslims are NOT bad. What most "sensible" people want is extreme vetting to do the best to weed out the whack jobs but somehow that's turned into "don't allow ANY Muslims in this country and kick out the ones who are already here." They only see what they want to see, Hits.

[video=youtube;B1gR37Wwakw][/video]

BR1986FB;1856921 wrote:This is what cracks me. Because an individual might lean conservative, it's assumed "oh shit, a Muslim bombed this or shot that so ALL Muslims are BAAAAAD !!" Most sensible people know that "all" Muslims are NOT bad. What most "sensible" people want is extreme vetting to do the best to weed out the whack jobs but somehow that's turned into "don't allow ANY Muslims in this country and kick out the ones who are already here." They only see what they want to see, Hits.

Thank you.

Extreme vetting will save lives.

You would think liberals would favor it, given their propensity to clamor for all things safety related.

BR1986FB;1856921 wrote:This is what cracks me. Because an individual might lean conservative, it's assumed "oh shit, a Muslim bombed this or shot that so ALL Muslims are BAAAAAD !!" Most sensible people know that "all" Muslims are NOT bad. What most "sensible" people want is extreme vetting to do the best to weed out the whack jobs but somehow that's turned into "don't allow ANY Muslims in this country and kick out the ones who are already here." They only see what they want to see, Hits.

We already do that....
The vetting for refugees is one of the strictest in the world.
It can take years for refugees to get into the U.S.

CenterBHSFan;1856924 wrote:[video=youtube;B1gR37Wwakw][/video]

Check into these things a bit before you post them. It took my all of 5 seconds to get the real story on this from several non political sites. Whoever Ezra Levant is, he is woefully wrong with his story.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1856958 wrote:Check into these things a bit before you post them. It took my all of 5 seconds to get the real story on this from several non political sites. Whoever Ezra Levant is, he is woefully wrong with his story.

Oh. Can you list these sites?

I'm asking for the sites because when I googled "cnn stages muslim demonstration" I found one non-biased/political site on the first page and it's one that I've never heard of.

https://pjmedia.com/video/cnn-denies-staging-muslim-demonstration-s

The other sites were from The Blaze, Gatewaypundit, Mediamatters, Breitbart, etc.

*Edit to add*

I did find one more: http://www.mrctv.org/blog/cnn-stages-fake-muslim-protest-after-london-attack

another attack today at Notre Dame cathedral in France...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/world/europe/notre-dame-paris-shooting.html?_r=0

Algerian with a student card, armed with a hammer and kitchen knives attacked a police officer.
Although the officer was not badly hurt, and the suspect was quickly shot, over 240 people have died as a result of Isis inspired terrorist attacks in France alone since 2015.

HitsRus;1856981 wrote:another attack today at Notre Dame cathedral in France...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/world/europe/notre-dame-paris-shooting.html?_r=0

Algerian with a student card, armed with a hammer and kitchen knives attacked a police officer.
Although the officer was not badly hurt, and the suspect was quickly shot, over 240 people have died as a result of Isis inspired terrorist attacks in France alone since 2015.

Ladies and gentlemen, the JV squad!

CenterBHSFan;1856966 wrote:Oh. Can you list these sites?

http://www.snopes.com/cnn-muslim-protests-london/

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1856992 wrote:http://www.snopes.com/cnn-muslim-protests-london/

savage.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1856958 wrote:Check into these things a bit before you post them. It took my all of 5 seconds to get the real story on this from several non political sites. Whoever Ezra Levant is, he is woefully wrong with his story.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1856992 wrote:http://www.snopes.com/cnn-muslim-protests-london/

Oh, I guess I misunderstood what several meant. No worries!

ptown_trojans_1;1856950 wrote:We already do that....
The vetting for refugees is one of the strictest in the world.
It can take years for refugees to get into the U.S.

My "vetting", and perhaps others might refer to it as "profiling", would start with males between the age of 12-50. Probably would want to include some females too as I guess they aren't above zealot behavior.

Sorry if this pisses people off but that seems to be roughly the sweet spot age group for these lunatics, although 12 might be a little young.

CenterBHSFan;1857021 wrote:Oh, I guess I misunderstood what several meant. No worries!

You can google this very easily. Snopes was an obvious one that explained the truth behind this.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1857230 wrote:You can google this very easily. Snopes was an obvious one that explained the narrative behind this.

Ftfy

BR1986FB;1857026 wrote:My "vetting", and perhaps others might refer to it as "profiling", would start with males between the age of 12-50. Probably would want to include some females too as I guess they aren't above zealot behavior.

Sorry if this pisses people off but that seems to be roughly the sweet spot age group for these lunatics, although 12 might be a little young.

A good place to start is adopting the procedures used by Israel at their airports which completely eliminated hijackings during the 1970's and ever since.

QuakerOats;1857257 wrote:A good place to start is adopting the procedures used by Israel at their airports which completely eliminated hijackings during the 1970's and ever since.

I don't know if it is true or not but I saw a map of Europe which said that Poland was the only country who refused to accept migrants. The map had spots marked where terrorist attacks took place such as England, France, etc. Poland was spot free.

BR1986FB;1857026 wrote:My "vetting", and perhaps others might refer to it as "profiling", would start with males between the age of 12-50. Probably would want to include some females too as I guess they aren't above zealot behavior.

Sorry if this pisses people off but that seems to be roughly the sweet spot age group for these lunatics, although 12 might be a little young.

Healthy adult males should be fighting for their countries. It's crazy that we take any of them as refugees.

BR1986FB;1856921 wrote:This is what cracks me. Because an individual might lean conservative, it's assumed "oh shit, a Muslim bombed this or shot that so ALL Muslims are BAAAAAD !!" Most sensible people know that "all" Muslims are NOT bad. What most "sensible" people want is extreme vetting to do the best to weed out the whack jobs but somehow that's turned into "don't allow ANY Muslims in this country and kick out the ones who are already here." They only see what they want to see, Hits.

Your politicians think you're stupid. It's "either/or".....there can be no measured or qualified opinions.

BR1986FB;1857287 wrote:I don't know if it is true or not but I saw a map of Europe which said that Poland was the only country who refused to accept migrants. The map had spots marked where terrorist attacks took place such as England, France, etc. Poland was spot free.

and neither have most of the former eastern bloc European countries who rejected the EU's "mandatory quotas"...Hungary, Czech Rep. Slovakia. I was in Prague in the summer of 2015 to attend the wedding of a close friend, who also returned the favor a year later when my son got married. We have had several discussions about immigration as it was a big issue in both countries but for different reasons at the time. There were protests in Wenceslaus Square demanding the Czech government let in thousands of refugees as others in the EU did......Of course, orchestrated by socialists using/duping people either to young to remember, or ignorant of the historical struggle the Czechs have had in attaining their cultural identity. For hundreds of years these people have sought to be free from domination from/by others...the Austrian Hungarian empire and Prussia prior to WWI, being slammed together with the Slovaks by the western powers as part of the Treaty of Versaiilles, then Berlin and the Nazi's, and finally Moscow and the Russian Communists.
Needless to say, the majority of Czechs, especially the ones who remembered the communists, were in no mood to lose control of immigration in their country and take orders from Germany (again). In the words of our own Thomas Paine, "what one obtains too cheaply, one esteems too lightly"....and these Eastern European countries have hungered for and paid dearly for their cultural identities.

It appears to be have paid off for them....at least for now.

This is what I don't like about the EU. The more I learn about all of the fine details and other background stuff, the more I realize that nation states have no true autonomy on the things that they should. And the fact that despite the unelected president of this "body", Angela Merkel seems to be the true driving decider.

@Boogie

I think it goes to show my own bias against what CNN has become in recent years. When I find more impartiality and straight news on Morning Joe (MSNBC) than at any point of the day on CNN, there's a problem within that organization. Not to mention the fact that CNN has been busted altering or preventing their output if they don't like what is being said is another huge problem.

Also, Snopes has also had to change their articles (see Moldylocks) in the past because they take what they initially see or what they've initially been told and put it out as fact, only to change it later. I only know of a few times that this has happened, and to be fair news organizations have done this too. But it still seems to me that it would be better to wait for a few hours and do some digging before you label something as True/False/Mostly True/Mostly False. Otherwise you end up with a Michael Brown syndrome.

But yes, I'm leary of just taking somebody elses word for things and try to look for more than one source (which is in itself sometimes hard to do).

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/22/the-daily-mail-snopes-story-and-fact-checking-the-fact-checkers/#5868edb8227f