open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked U.S. Congress women shot in head (not dead) + 6 killed, 11 wounded
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

Author Topic

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:15:00 - [121]
 

Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 09/01/2011 03:20:19
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 09/01/2011 03:06:41
Originally by: Ademaro Imre
Tea party, Sarah Palin, tea party.........

Has it ever occured to you ONCE, that there may be a link between Loughner's atheism, his likes of the Communist Manifesto, and Mein Kampf, and Giffords being a Jew?

Did Loughner have links and "likes" about Sarah Palin as much as he did for The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf?



So under your theory, it's just pure coincidence that the person he picked to kill just happened to be a politician the tea party has used violent language/images about?


Exactly. Unless you can show that Loughner actually saw this mailing, and was even effected by it. If you were to follow any political election, every politician is a "target" or some other organization looking to raise money.

You are being silly to even coming up with such a connection, without having addressed how his professed like of Mein Kampf and Giffords being a Jew, has no connection. I am not saying it does, but before you jump off the cliff into absurdity, at least try to jump over a rock.

You are saying Sarah Palin's fundraising letter to select supporters carried more weight than Loughner's professed like of:

Originally by: Hit ler in Mein Kampf
the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.
has no weight, but Sarah Palin's "target Gabrielle Giffords in a republican leaning state for the 2009 election" carries all the weight for Loughner to kill with, even though no one can even show that Giffords was on Palin's mailing list?


Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:17:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: Joe Phoenix
tell me merin, obviously you are not very smart and have some social problems, but let me ask you, what does VSO stand for?Rolling Eyes


Could it be http://www.vso.org.uk/?





PS: nice job trying to change the subject, but you're still a sociopath.

Joe Phoenix
The Commonwealth Federation
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:18:00 - [123]
 

Originally by: Jada Maroo
Originally by: Merin Ryskin


2) You may notice a tiny little detail here: Obama isn't hinting at violent revolution, last time I checked.


No, he's just close friends with, and mentored by, someone who actually tried to do it.


Jada don't make his head explode, it would cause a horrible mess.

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:22:00 - [124]
 

I actually doubt any Democrat politicians of any significance, or any legitimate left leaning pundits, are going to seriously try to link any of this to Sarah Palin and this whole discussion is a moot point. Not only does it sound ridiculous laying the blame of an certifiable schitzophrenic's actions at Sarah Palin's snow boots, but it comes off as disgustingly sleazy political opportunism and that's the sort of thing that backfires bigtime.

So I guess, in a way, I hope they're actually dumb enough to try.

Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:23:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: Ademaro Imre
You are being silly to even coming up with such a connection, without having addressed how his professed like of Mein Kampf and Giffords being a Jew, has no connection.



The point is that one of them leads to a plausible motive, while the other doesn't.


Listening to tea party propaganda has a very clear motive, and it's not hard to see how how someone who already has serious problems could identify with the tea party platform, see that kind of propaganda, and decide "it's time to deal with this problem myself".


Hating Jews just doesn't produce a motive that makes any sense. If that was really what his motivation was, why pick this specific target? Why kill a random politician who happens to be a Jew instead of someone who is an active and important figure in Jewish religion/culture/etc? Why not go shooting at a pro-Israel rally? Etc.

Selinate
Amarr
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:24:00 - [126]
 

Edited by: Selinate on 09/01/2011 03:24:52
Originally by: Jada Maroo
I actually doubt any Democrat politicians of any significance, or any legitimate left leaning pundits, are going to seriously try to link any of this to Sarah Palin and this whole discussion is a moot point. Not only does it sound ridiculous laying the blame of an certifiable schitzophrenic's actions at Sarah Palin's snow boots, but it comes off as disgustingly sleazy political opportunism and that's the sort of thing that backfires bigtime.

So I guess, in a way, I hope they're actually dumb enough to try.


Politicians. Campaign managers. Translated: Mudslingers. Someone will try to do it, somewhere. Also, it might not be a Democrat, it might be a Republican, since Republicans and Tea Party candidates often butt heads in elections, since that map is more Tea Party related than Republican...

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:26:00 - [127]
 

The shooter was stupid, everyone knows a rifle is way better than a sidearm. Headshot with a rifle and there's pretty much no such thing as critical condition Razz

Joe Phoenix
The Commonwealth Federation
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:27:00 - [128]
 

A sociopathic humanitarian? Merin i don't run anti-malaria treatement programs in the gambia because i like the ****ing weather out there! People like you make me loss faith in humanity...Rolling Eyes

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:27:00 - [129]
 

Originally by: Merin Ryskin


Hating Jews just doesn't produce a motive that makes any sense. If that was really what his motivation was, why pick this specific target? Why kill a random politician who happens to be a Jew instead of someone who is an active and important figure in Jewish religion/culture/etc? Why not go shooting at a pro-Israel rally? Etc.


Perhaps, that particular jew was his representative in a government be believed practiced mind control and grammar control. He's crazy. But you need to first eliminate the obvious, and demonstrate how Mein Kampf, and Giffords being a jew has no relation before you get into Sarah Palin. Do crazy people need a motive? Mein Kampf was enough for Hit ler, so - it could be enough for other crazy people.

Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:33:00 - [130]
 

Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 09/01/2011 03:34:33
Originally by: Joe Phoenix
A sociopathic humanitarian? Merin i don't run anti-malaria treatement programs in the gambia because i like the ****ing weather out there! People like you make me loss faith in humanity...Rolling Eyes



Yeah, and all the racists who say "I'm not a racist, one of my friends is black" are not racists...




Like it or not, publicly announcing that you don't think murdering politicians is something to care about makes you a sociopath. The more you brag about your volunteering like this, the more you make it look like the only reason you volunteer is for the same reason as other sociopaths: to make themselves look good.




Originally by: Ademaro Imre
Perhaps, that particular jew was his representative in a government be believed practiced mind control and grammar control. He's crazy. But you need to first eliminate the obvious, and demonstrate how Mein Kampf, and Giffords being a jew has no relation before you get into Sarah Palin. Do crazy people need a motive? Mein Kampf was enough for Hit ler, so - it could be enough for other crazy people.



Why is your personal theory the one that needs to be explained first? Why not the other way around?



Now, if he'd gone to a pro-Israel rally and started shooting, I (and everyone else) would be putting the blame elsewhere, but he didn't.

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:41:00 - [131]
 

This might turn out to be a more interesting case than we know. They're saying there's a suspected bomb found at her office. I wonder if this might have been the same nutcase sending exploding packages in the mail complaining about electronic traffic signs?

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.09 03:52:00 - [132]
 

Originally by: Jada Maroo
I actually doubt any Democrat politicians of any significance, or any legitimate left leaning pundits, are going to seriously try to link any of this to Sarah Palin and this whole discussion is a moot point. Not only does it sound ridiculous laying the blame of an certifiable schitzophrenic's actions at Sarah Palin's snow boots, but it comes off as disgustingly sleazy political opportunism and that's the sort of thing that backfires bigtime.

So I guess, in a way, I hope they're actually dumb enough to try.


Call me cynical, but even if the Democrats don't make an issue out it, do you think the conservative talk show hosts will let that stop them? Meaning, Rush/Glenn/etc., will go ahead and accuse the Democrats of using the shooting to their advantage even if the Democrats don't bring it up.

Personally, IMHO, the Republican/Conservative/whatever machine has stopped even trying to campaign or debate on the issues. They just seem make stuff up and their supporters believe it blindly and repeat it as gospel truth. It's just freaking scary to watch that many people turn off the rational side of their brains.


(The Democrats, by comparison, are just idiots who think other people's problems can be solved with your money.)

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2011.01.09 04:08:00 - [133]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux

Call me cynical, but even if the Democrats don't make an issue out it, do you think the conservative talk show hosts will let that stop them? Meaning, Rush/Glenn/etc., will go ahead and accuse the Democrats of using the shooting to their advantage even if the Democrats don't bring it up.



Typically they would play some video or audio clip of a Democrat or a left leaning news source like MSNBC making the accusation before responding. So really, it's up to the Democrats to bring it on themselves.

Harrigan VonStudly
Original Sin.
Underworld Excavators
Posted - 2011.01.09 04:09:00 - [134]
 

People who are not allowed to own guns are subjects. Typical knee jerk reactions in this thread. OMFG ban guns blah blah blah. Research the statistics of gun ownership before you start talking about taking away my rights. Yes, it is a right in the U.S. Isn't it funny how people want to remove rights yet privileges such as driving licenses are thought of as a right by the very people who don't understand rights.

Frankly, I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner. This guy wasn't left or right. Regardless of what they find out about him. He was a psycho nut job. The sad part is that this incident will be used by the left to once again come after guns. Guns aren't allowed on school campus. Gee, wonder why we have so many school shootings? Because psychos know there isn't anyone to stop them before they kill um-teen ****ing people. That's why.

While legal gun carrying people may not prevent someone from doing a mass shooting it could certainly keep it to a minimum. In a lot of these shooting had law abiding CCW permit holders been allowed to actually exercise their right to carry a firearm most of the shooting very well may have ended with a lot less deaths/injuries or not happened at all. Read the stats knee jerkers. Honest stats. Not made up **** from special interests with an agenda.

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2011.01.09 04:48:00 - [135]
 

Edited by: Jada Maroo on 09/01/2011 04:50:03
Bo Dietl made a really good point tonight on Geraldo At Large for anyone who will sleazily try to insist that this shooting was politically motivated instead of just a flat-out nutjob... how are they going to explain the 9 year old victim?

Let me guess, Sarah Palin once spanked one of her kids when they were nine which of course is an obvious "hint" that she supports murdering children?

Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente
Sigma Special Tactics Group
Posted - 2011.01.09 05:10:00 - [136]
 

Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer on 09/01/2011 05:15:07
Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Jada Maroo
I actually doubt any Democrat politicians of any significance, or any legitimate left leaning pundits, are going to seriously try to link any of this to Sarah Palin and this whole discussion is a moot point. Not only does it sound ridiculous laying the blame of an certifiable schitzophrenic's actions at Sarah Palin's snow boots, but it comes off as disgustingly sleazy political opportunism and that's the sort of thing that backfires bigtime.

So I guess, in a way, I hope they're actually dumb enough to try.


Call me cynical, but even if the Democrats don't make an issue out it, do you think the conservative talk show hosts will let that stop them? Meaning, Rush/Glenn/etc., will go ahead and accuse the Democrats of using the shooting to their advantage even if the Democrats don't bring it up.

Personally, IMHO, the Republican/Conservative/whatever machine has stopped even trying to campaign or debate on the issues. They just seem make stuff up and their supporters believe it blindly and repeat it as gospel truth. It's just freaking scary to watch that many people turn off the rational side of their brains.


(The Democrats, by comparison, are just idiots who think other people's problems can be solved with your money.)




It's all theater.


BTW the biggest threat of the Tea Party is against the establishment elements of the GOP (better known as the Neocons).

I refer to the real Tea Party that has been around for at least 10 years. The media has attempted to install Sarah Palin (protege of Bill Kristol - top Neocon) as the leader of this "movement" only after it started to give the establishment GOP a lot of trouble on the state convention level.


It is even speculated that around 40 percent of the Tea Party are democrats and independent voters.

Jhagiti Tyran
Muppet Ninja's
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
Posted - 2011.01.09 06:27:00 - [137]
 

Originally by: Yiffi
Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran
Rubbish, its no coincidence than in England the type of gun most often used in crime is the gun that is the easiest to obtain legally.



So then why are handguns which are banned in the UK, used in more criminal offences then shotguns with the latter being the more easier to legally obtain?


http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF05.htm

Those statistics count converted replica and blank firing firearms as "handguns" and the type most likely to be used in crime, the government introduced strict new laws about the sale of replicas etc that could be converted.

Hence my comment about the easiest to legally obtain being the most common gun being used in crime.




baltec1
Posted - 2011.01.09 09:05:00 - [138]
 

Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer

It's an either or situation. Sometimes the gun is stolen, sometimes it was obtained through legal channels. What is generally accepted in the US is that a criminal who is motivated enough will eventually find a way to get a gun no matter what the laws are, and this is actually proven. Just like drugs, when someone wants it enough and spends enough time at it, they eventually get it. Therefore people are not in favor of new laws to restrict those who don't have all the time in the world. A person who is not a criminal who can spend all day every day looking for a black market gun will not be able to defend themselves.



Difference between the uk and the US is the US has so many guns everywhere it is a hell of a lot easyer to get your hands on one. It also seems stupidly easy for nutjobs to get their hands on them for some reason. We are only 8 days into 2011 and already you have had a mass shooting involving a high ranking polition and its only a matter of time before school shooting happens this year. I shudder to think what it is going to take before Americans do something about the gun problems.

Kalle Demos
Amarr
Helix Protocol
Posted - 2011.01.09 09:28:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer

It's an either or situation. Sometimes the gun is stolen, sometimes it was obtained through legal channels. What is generally accepted in the US is that a criminal who is motivated enough will eventually find a way to get a gun no matter what the laws are, and this is actually proven. Just like drugs, when someone wants it enough and spends enough time at it, they eventually get it. Therefore people are not in favor of new laws to restrict those who don't have all the time in the world. A person who is not a criminal who can spend all day every day looking for a black market gun will not be able to defend themselves.



Difference between the uk and the US is the US has so many guns everywhere it is a hell of a lot easyer to get your hands on one. It also seems stupidly easy for nutjobs to get their hands on them for some reason. We are only 8 days into 2011 and already you have had a mass shooting involving a high ranking polition and its only a matter of time before school shooting happens this year. I shudder to think what it is going to take before Americans do something about the gun problems.


This

Not only that, if drugs were legal it would be easier to get hold of it, which makes you think about how stupid the rules are.

Weed is illegal but guns arent.

Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente
Sigma Special Tactics Group
Posted - 2011.01.09 09:45:00 - [140]
 

Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer

It's an either or situation. Sometimes the gun is stolen, sometimes it was obtained through legal channels. What is generally accepted in the US is that a criminal who is motivated enough will eventually find a way to get a gun no matter what the laws are, and this is actually proven. Just like drugs, when someone wants it enough and spends enough time at it, they eventually get it. Therefore people are not in favor of new laws to restrict those who don't have all the time in the world. A person who is not a criminal who can spend all day every day looking for a black market gun will not be able to defend themselves.



Difference between the uk and the US is the US has so many guns everywhere it is a hell of a lot easyer to get your hands on one. It also seems stupidly easy for nutjobs to get their hands on them for some reason. We are only 8 days into 2011 and already you have had a mass shooting involving a high ranking polition and its only a matter of time before school shooting happens this year. I shudder to think what it is going to take before Americans do something about the gun problems.



It's because of your island and the statistics coming from it that we refuse to do anything about any "gun problem". You have an ISLAND and did crime drop? Last I heard, you people were talking about "knife control".

What has changed from now and 100 years ago? Do we churn out more nut jobs or less? Do you see all that "progressivism" being rolled back when these incidents occur? Guns were around long before social engineers, psychology, and television came around.

And if someone can argue that "the Second Amendment was written when the main weapon of the day was only a musket before self-loading repeating weapons!" then I would have say say that the First Amendment (free speech) was written when there was only the printing press before TV, Radio, Fax, and Internet. Should that be curtailed too?

We have watched England from afar where people cannot protect themselves in their own homes. And I got news for you, American politicians love crime. I have seen city-level elections based on who manages to install more street lamps to "deter crime" as they put it except that in reality it allows criminals to free up a hand that they would have instead had to use to hold a flashlight. The whole false left-right paradigm in this country is based on one party having the appearance of being "soft on crime" and the other having the appearance of being "tough on crime".

Now take a moment to think about that. "soft on crime" versus "tough on crime" in a country that has more people incarcerated for victimless crimes than any other nation except perhaps China or North Korea and AT THE SAME TIME has more hardened criminals around too. Do you really think it's sensible to want to be disarmed in a climate like this with a two party duopoly playing on fears that really does nothing about real crime while becoming more tyrannical with each election cycle?

Politicians would love an England/Australia style ban because it would give them more power over security. We have already seen them take over a lot of power there. There are large cities in the USA like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington DC, and Boston that have very strict control on guns and they have worse violent crime statistics than all of the other large cities. I lived in Florida for a while where people moving from New York or New Jersey would, even before they were moved in, be the victims of a home invasion because criminals had a better chance of making a correct assumption that their victims, coming from a gun control zone, would be unarmed.

Finally, keep in mind that I take time to explain something to you, but real liberty is not asking for acceptance or permission, even in the face of ignorance. We will not be giving up our guns. Period. And if that should come to war, we are waiting for it.


CCP StevieSG

Posted - 2011.01.09 10:27:00 - [141]
 

Locking this thread as per the forum rules. Please note that political discussion is not permitted on these forums.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only