Mass shooting in Orlando, Florida USA 20 dead

[Town Heretic]

It is quite simple. Making ad hominem remarks and personal judgements in a debate is unreasonable.

It really depends on what was said (see: Winston Churchill, Disraeli, etc.). But responses to an aggressive messenger should be aimed toward the message and never at the expense of it.

Also, there's this:

I'm not American. I was only making suggestions. I have said this many times.

Preceding:

...No, Anna, I know the meanings of words. You are hiding... Is it because you actually love Muslims and want them to come freely to your country and assimilate into your culture?

So when you write...

However, it is common amongst judgemental people.

Everyone is judgmental and most of us get a little personal now and then...so it's common among people. That's why you're comfortable inferring I'm judgmental and how you said what you did to anna.

"gives the appearance" is a judgement on your part

Agreed.

"You were doing more than simply observing from the outside" is the same.

Also agreed. But it's also hard to miss. I'm betting anna didn't. Or, tell me what's objective and impersonal about telling her that she must love Muslims, etc.

In any event I'll be kinder to you than you were to her and reiterate that I never called you dishonest. I don't believe you are. I believe you're bias blinded and a little hypocritical, that you're the hero of your narrative, as we all tend to be for ourselves, and that you might want to pause on the point.

But, again, I don't think you're dishonest and I've credited you with an otherwise demonstrably capable mind.

Just because I point out a fact doesn't mean I have a bias. Judgementalism owns you.

lain: That's how it always is, DR. The other guy is judgmental. We're just giving informed opinion.

All you had to do was say 'sorry, didn't mean it like that'

I did say I wasn't calling you dishonest. Twice. I don't tend to apologize for not doing what someone thought I was doing when I wasn't doing it, unless I agree with the judgment, think it's reasonable to mistake me on the point. I think you took an inference that you were bias blinkered or playing coy in the worst possible way and I don't think that's reasonable. But I am sorry you saw it like that.

 

[Nick M]

Anna doesn't love Muslims. She just hates what is right so much that she sides with whomever is wrong.

 

[kmoney]

That's an excellent argument. Just compare your opponent to Nazis and the argument is all yours. I really can't believe I am reading this. From supposedly mature adults.

I wasn't claiming any argument, just presenting a similarity :idunno:

Look, I don't think for a second that you would support the extreme measures that the Nazis took. I don't even know if you actually support all the 'brainstorming' ideas you mentioned. However, I'm sure you know the phrase about repeating history and there was a similarity between your list and what the Nazis did to the Jews. And your ideas were getting support from others on TOL. Reaching the end begins with the first step. It's not a step I want to take.

 

[kmoney]

Something is wrong if you can hate people with no remorse. I know you don't like gang banger welfare society , women with numerous baby daddies and the rest of the culture that goes with that. Most people don't. It's a culture they adopted to cope with the greater outside culture that hated them for generations. A white dominated social structure arose that systematically made the possibility of lifting themselves out of the lower rungs nearly impossible. Have some sympathy. Trying locating some blacks outside of that aforementioned culture and have a serious talk with them. Maybe they can show you that your hate is misplaced. You have to be a friend in order for someone to be a friend to you. Just avoiding a whole race of people out of disgust will never make their behavior more tolerable toward you .

:up:

 

[Nick M]

However, I'm sure you know the phrase about repeating history and there was a similarity between your list and what the Nazis did to the Jews.

It is exactly the same. The muslims want to do to the west what the nazis did to the Jews. Not coincidentally, they share the same values in all things political.

 

[kmoney]

I've been trying to figure out how the terror watch list works. Here's some of what I'm finding, and I'm not sure it's 100% accurate, so definitely open to to fact-checking.

For clarification, the terms terror watch list and no-fly list are often used interchangeably, but they're not the same, the no-fly list is a subset of the terror watch list.
Decisions are made about people on the terror watch list through the powers of the executive branch alone.
The language of the terror watch list (criteria for inclusion on it) is secretive, vaguely defined, and imprecisely applied.
Arguments for and against the watch list aren't strictly divided down ideological lines, liberal and conservative sources argue both ways.

Based on that list, I don't think I can support restricting gun rights. It would need to be clear and give people recourse.

I do think there should be a line. I'm not sure where that line should be though. And I'm not sure where the current laws are, what actually gets you arrested right now.

 

[kmoney]

Trump wants to profile.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-idUSKCN0Z50PV

Republican Donald Trump said on Sunday the United States should consider more racial profiling, in response to a question about whether he supported greater law enforcement scrutiny of Muslim Americans after the Orlando mass shooting.

"I think profiling is something that we're going to have to start thinking about as a country," Trump told CBS' "Face the Nation."

"You look at Israel and you look at others, and they do it and they do it successfully. And you know, I hate the concept of profiling, but we have to start using common sense," he said when asked if he supported increased profiling of Muslims in America.

Trump made similar comments last December about profiling, the targeting of specific demographic groups for extra scrutiny, after a Muslim American and his wife killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California.

 

[Town Heretic]

Trump wants to profile.

I've seen his profile. It's not that great. :nono: Same goes for the idea.

 

[kmoney]

This government thinks it can go over there and do things like meddle in very complex religious and political issues and there not be any consequences. They like to instigate and encourage violence over there and think it cannot follow them back here. But they sit in their Obamabunkers safe while everyone else gets to pay the price for this foolishness. And what is the government’s answer going to be for this? Right. More violence over there. We kill them, they kill us, we kill more of them to retaliate, they kill us in revenge for that, then we kill more of them to show them killing is wrong, and this cycle goes on and on without end.

The other answer the government will have is taking away what little freedom we have left in order to defend freedom. Here’s a thought. How about pulling out of the Middle East and letting that region decide their own destiny for a change? Oh, right, that’s giving in to terrorism. Yeah, well, the people that say that are not the ones dying because of that stubborn dogma the government clings to. The people that die because of these “foreign policy” decisions are the people that had nothing to do with making them. That’s why the government continues doing this. Because if it was their butts on the line, they’d have pulled out of the Middle East decades ago.

A lot of me agrees with this post. Two things though. First, while I do agree that our involvement in the Middle East at least increases the threats we face, it's not proven that our pulling out would remove all threats. So if they continue, what's your response? Second, even if it did, it would be hard for me to simply turn a blind eye to the suffering that the terrorists cause on the people living over there.

 

[kmoney]

I thought it did. He wants to protest the speech of the pastor, peacefully. I suspect he hopes that will make more people aware of the particular nature of the pastor's comments and cause them to consider their own response to them. Sometimes that's all you can do.

If he's free to speak that from a pulpit then they're free to speak in opposition, or simply stand silently in protest. Isn't that how free speech works?

I believe in the right to speak your mind within the limits of the law. I don't think anyone is entitled to enter my home and begin a political speech I didn't invite, by way of (though I can't keep the Republicans or Democrats from trying, over the phone). Or, no right is without limitations that come with competing rights and interests and possessions.

:up:

Not exactly the same but I'm reminded of the calls I hear saying that Muslims should speak out against the terrorists more. Here is a fellow Christian speaking against what he feels is against Christianity.

 

[rocketman]

Trump wants to profile.

Awesome! it is a perfectly logical way to find a needle in a haystack.

 

[Nick M]

We already profile. The only time we don't is when Obama orders LEOs and military to ignore the jihadists because it is islamaphobia.

 

[gcthomas]

It is exactly the same. The muslims want to do to the west what the nazis did to the Jews. Not coincidentally, they share the same values in all things political.

You are wrongly comparing a population (Muslims) to a political minority of another population (Nazis, not Germans).

A better analogy would be to compare ISIS to Nazis, but if you did that you would have to be discriminating in your disapproval and accept that most Muslims are not terrorists, just as most Germans were not Nazis.

 

[rocketman]

You are wrongly comparing a population (Muslims) to a political minority of another population (Nazis, not Germans).

A better analogy would be to compare ISIS to Nazis, but if you did that you would have to be discriminating in your disapproval and accept that most Muslims are not terrorists, just as most Germans were not Nazis.

Yet the muslims applaud and share in the carnage of ISIS just as the average German did at the carnage of the Nazi's. The German people were well aware of what was going on in their country with the Nazi's and did nothing to stop it because they agreed with it ideologically, just as the muslims agree ideologically with ISIS, Al Queda, Taliban, and every other radical sect under the banner of Islam. Too broad brush? tough that is how it is, at least for the majority of Islam, and just occasionally you see a moderate muslim in America protest against it but, certainly the majority are aligned ideologically with the radicals.

 

[gcthomas]

Yet the muslims applaud and share in the carnage of ISIS just as the average German did at the carnage of the Nazi's. The German people were well aware of what was going on in their country with the Nazi's and did nothing to stop it because they agreed with it ideologically, just as the muslims agree ideologically with ISIS, Al Queda, Taliban, and every other radical sect under the banner of Islam. Too broad brush? tough that is how it is, at least for the majority of Islam, and just occasionally you see a moderate muslim in America protest against it but, certainly the majority are aligned ideologically with the radicals.

You are distorting reality to help you rationalise your objectionable racist opinions.

After extremist islamist atrocities, I see queues of Muslims offering blood to the hospitals, I see Muslim leaders on the news expressing horror and appealing to the extremists to follow peaceful traditions, I see Muslims preaching peace and tolerance and to anger at how they are being portrayed by the more rabid press.

Muslims DO NOT agree in general with the Islamist ideologies, especially those living close to the biggest trouble: here is the Pew Research on the matter,

View attachment 24405

 

[chair]

You are distorting reality to help you rationalise your objectionable racist opinions.

After extremist islamist atrocities, I see queues of Muslims offering blood to the hospitals, I see Muslim leaders on the news expressing horror and appealing to the extremists to follow peaceful traditions, I see Muslims preaching peace and tolerance and to anger at how they are being portrayed by the more rabid press.

Muslims DO NOT agree in general with the Islamist ideologies, especially those living close to the biggest trouble: here is the Pew Research on the matter,

View attachment 24405

People tend to see what they want to see. Call it confirmation bias, if you like. The picture is complex. Muslims are not all the same. After a terror attack, there are those who donate blood- and there are those who distribute candy and celebrate. There are both.

There should be a balance. Accept that there is Islamic extremist terror, and also understand that it is not all Muslims.

There is danger in ignoring Islamic violence, and there is danger in heading towards fascism.

Your Pew poll, by the way, asks a very specific question, about attitudes towards ISIS, which is one particular extreme Sunni group. If they had asked about Shiite terror, they may have gotten quite different answers in places like Lebanon.

 

[patrick jane]

The police and SWAT waited too long for only one gunman. They seemingly wasted three hours and who knows how many more dead. They dropped the ball big time

 

[patrick jane]

P.S. The latest gun bills have failed and are failing

 

[Nick M]

The Orlando mass murderer is
1. Muslim
2. Homo
3. Democrat
4. Hillary supporter

 

[Town Heretic]

P.S. The latest gun bills have failed and are failing

Did you hear about the S. Ct. refusing to hear challenges by the gun lobby to CT and NY bans on a number of assault weapons?

Here's the link. It looks like the Court is leaving that end of the question in the hands of states.