Florida Pulse gay club attacked

[Borillar]

Honey, both sides have guilty parties here. No mention from you that 2 rw are trying to post the facts and mentioning the seriousness of this event from you. You are part of the problem here.

This event will twist our USMB nutbags into weird shapes. Containing their excitement over a bunch of dead gay people while condemning the perpetrator will require discipline. Can they do it?

Indeed.

Check you out. You are practically creaming in your jeans over this one. Dead gays! Possible Muslim connection! Weeeeeeeeeeee! Win win!

Yep. A trifecta. Dead gays, muslim terrorism the cause, tie Obama to it because he didn't nuke them.

 

[2aguy]

The killer carried an assault rifle and a pistol, making it as easy as shooting fish in a barrel and accumulate huge numbers of murdered victims.

Maybe one should ask - WHY does a person need an assault rifle? WHY should he have been able to get it? Same thing with the San Diego shooters - they had an arsonal and bullet proof armor. We need to look at extremist ideology yes, but we also need to look at the factors that help to create such a huge death toll.

He entered a confined space, packed with 350 people, in the dark, with loud music and strobe lights....and most of them were in some form of intoxication and some under the influence of drugs....

and they were all in a gun free zone......so your gun control laws actually worked, not one innocent gay person in that dance club had a gun.....

those are the real factors, not the rifle....

The rifle had nothing to do with the body count...he could have used a gym bag full of revlovers and gotten the same result....

there are 3,750,000 AR-15s in private hands......

one was used illegally to commit the illegal act of murder....

that means that 3,749,999 AR-15s in private hands were not used for any form of crime.....

Do you understand what those numbers mean?

Law abiding Americans use the AR-15 rifle and others like it for self defense, hunting, competition and collecting and never use them for anything else.....

your logic is that banning 3,749,999 AR-15s that were not used to commit murder would stop the one guy from committing murder with one rifle.....

While the AR-15 and actual fully automatic rifles are completely illegal in France...they have 0 AR-15s in France.......let me repeat...they have 0 AR-15s in France....and islamic terrorists on government watch lists got illegal, fully automatic rifles...AK-47s which are also completely illegal in france and murdered 140 people...and injured hundreds of others............

So how does your post make any sense at all........

The rifle had nothing to do with the body count...he could have used a gym bag full of revlovers and gotten the same result....

I disagree - he would have had to stop, pick up a fresh gun each time, and that could have allowed time for someone to intervene.

Read up...learn something before you post...

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?

The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.

LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.

News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.

There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.

In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.

Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

 

[Czernobog]

Yes, it was under W's watch.

Because Clinton didn't act...

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

 

[Rustic]

Because Clinton didn't act...

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

All career politicians, you can not expect a career politician to protect the American people… not in their nature

 

[2aguy]

The killer carried an assault rifle and a pistol, making it as easy as shooting fish in a barrel and accumulate huge numbers of murdered victims.

Maybe one should ask - WHY does a person need an assault rifle? WHY should he have been able to get it? Same thing with the San Diego shooters - they had an arsonal and bullet proof armor. We need to look at extremist ideology yes, but we also need to look at the factors that help to create such a huge death toll.

He entered a confined space, packed with 350 people, in the dark, with loud music and strobe lights....and most of them were in some form of intoxication and some under the influence of drugs....

and they were all in a gun free zone......so your gun control laws actually worked, not one innocent gay person in that dance club had a gun.....

those are the real factors, not the rifle....

The rifle had nothing to do with the body count...he could have used a gym bag full of revlovers and gotten the same result....

there are 3,750,000 AR-15s in private hands......

one was used illegally to commit the illegal act of murder....

that means that 3,749,999 AR-15s in private hands were not used for any form of crime.....

Do you understand what those numbers mean?

Law abiding Americans use the AR-15 rifle and others like it for self defense, hunting, competition and collecting and never use them for anything else.....

your logic is that banning 3,749,999 AR-15s that were not used to commit murder would stop the one guy from committing murder with one rifle.....

While the AR-15 and actual fully automatic rifles are completely illegal in France...they have 0 AR-15s in France.......let me repeat...they have 0 AR-15s in France....and islamic terrorists on government watch lists got illegal, fully automatic rifles...AK-47s which are also completely illegal in france and murdered 140 people...and injured hundreds of others............

So how does your post make any sense at all........

The rifle had nothing to do with the body count...he could have used a gym bag full of revlovers and gotten the same result....

I disagree - he would have had to stop, pick up a fresh gun each time, and that could have allowed time for someone to intervene.

Wrong...I have posted a study that looked exactly at that.....it doesn't happen....this was, again...

A packed location with 350 people in it....

It was dark,

the music was loud,

The people were likely intoxicated or high...

And he came in with surprise and determination.....he could have killed just as many people with a bag full of revolvers....

Ya, you could right...point taken

Thanks......it is unusual to have an actual point taken into consideration...I appreciate that......you are not a bad poster.....

 

[2aguy]

Because Clinton didn't act...

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

You mean Bush's twin tower bombing......after the first time they tried it under Clinton....you mean that one?

Those organizations are all muslim organizations...but nice deflection moron.

 

[Asclepias]

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

All career politicians, you can not expect a career politician to protect the American people… not in their nature

You cant expect any politician to protect america unless they are out there on the front lines fighting.

 

[Coyote]

No Dorkface. He was a rightwing gun nut with a right wing gun nut mother enabling him. Geez, you guys can't even own your own?

Right wingers are radical Muslims in your area?

We were referring to SANDY HOOK. Sheesh, can't you guys follow a conversation?

A Progressive socialist, the hate we saw acted out on a bunch a little kids...

Clutching at straws here.

OK, show us where Adam Lanza was a conservative?

Truth is, he had no identifiable political leanings, though rightwingers claim he was a registered democrat there is no evidence to support he was registered in any party.

Were the Five Recent/Worst Mass Murderers in the US Democrats?
The Sandy Hook Shooter, Adam Lanza, also named in this list, was psychologically disturbed from an early age and had no known political affiliation or leanings. He was home schooled by his controlling mother…who also happened to be an active survivalist, stockpiling weapons and provisions and training her sons in semi-automatic weapons use in expectation of a violent future event. There is evidence that the shooting was triggered by his mother’s stated intention to have him institutionalized.

His mother on the other hand, was a rightwing gun nut.

 

[Czernobog]

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

You mean Bush's twin tower bombing......after the first time they tried it under Clinton....you mean that one?

Those organizations are all muslim organizations...but nice deflection moron.

That has to be about the most asinine thing I have ever read, you retard. So, what? "They're all just a bunch of camel jockeys to me," right?

And, I notice that your retarded responses addresses neither the fact that the Intelligence community gave Clinton no actionable intelligence concerning Al Qaida, or that there were an additional dozen different terrorist attacks against the US under Bush.

 

[2aguy]

Because Clinton didn't act...

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists?

You mean besides invading two muslim countries and reshaping the entire American intelligence system....besides that?

 

[Iceweasel]

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

Well he WAS way too liberal but how is obama stacking up in your count?

 

[2aguy]

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

You mean Bush's twin tower bombing......after the first time they tried it under Clinton....you mean that one?

Those organizations are all muslim organizations...but nice deflection moron.

That has to be about the most asinine thing I have ever read, you retard. So, what? "They're all just a bunch of camel jockeys to me," right?

No asshole...that is racist...the fact that they are all radical muslims is the fucking point.......

 

[Rustic]

Right wingers are radical Muslims in your area?

We were referring to SANDY HOOK. Sheesh, can't you guys follow a conversation?

A Progressive socialist, the hate we saw acted out on a bunch a little kids...

Clutching at straws here.

OK, show us where Adam Lanza was a conservative?

Truth is, he had no identifiable political leanings, though rightwingers claim he was a registered democrat there is no evidence to support he was registered in any party.

Were the Five Recent/Worst Mass Murderers in the US Democrats?
The Sandy Hook Shooter, Adam Lanza, also named in this list, was psychologically disturbed from an early age and had no known political affiliation or leanings. He was home schooled by his controlling mother…who also happened to be an active survivalist, stockpiling weapons and provisions and training her sons in semi-automatic weapons use in expectation of a violent future event. There is evidence that the shooting was triggered by his mother’s stated intention to have him institutionalized.

His mother on the other hand, was a rightwing gun nut.

And he shot her dead...

 

[Czernobog]

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists?

You mean besides invading two muslim countries and reshaping the entire American intelligence system....besides that?

And, yet, he allowed 13 different attacks against American targets. And who was it that accomplished what he couldn't - getting Bin Laden? Furthermore The enemy is Muslims?!?! As in all Muslims?!?!? Really you bigoted fuck?!?!?

 

[Muhammed]

One of the fun things about being an old man is that one can still remember history that happened in their own lifetime. For example:

Carter decided that America would boycott the Olympics, because the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. He even sent Ali to African Countries to get them to do the same. They laughed at Ali over American hypocrisy, and Ali asked to come home.

Reagan armed the afghans to fight the Soviets.

Bush invaded Afghanistan, who fought back using weapons supplied by Reagan

We occupied Afghanistan for 13 years, and then were amazed to discover that Afghanistan resented that fact.

...and the beat goes on....

Your ignorance does not impress me at all.

 

[Crixus]

I have no idea! I would start by clamping down on the people that are committing these horrific barbaric acts, MUSLIMS.

White christians are committing these horrible acts as well. Should we put white christians in concentration camps?

Link it.. Don't tell me, SHOW ME PROOF.

No...Christians are not doing these things...nothing in Christianity allows followers to commit murder...murder is part of Islamic doctrine....

You can't call yourself a vegan then go and eat a steak......if you eat the steak you are not a vegan....

Both those guys declared themselves christian. You may be uncomfortable with that fact but it doesnt change reality.

Declared or not, Muslims, self proclaimed or not are Killing more people then Christians are in the name of Gawd. For all the hate directed at Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, or any of the other big TV Christian guys you have yet to see any of them alive or dead directing Christians to go kill apostates during Christmas, Hannuka, or Easter. This Is the case with the religion of peace. These Muslems are directed to kill and they are. When they get sick of killing us in the name of their god they will go back to Killing and raping each other in the name of Allah. It's a fact.

 

[Czernobog]

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

You mean Bush's twin tower bombing......after the first time they tried it under Clinton....you mean that one?

Those organizations are all muslim organizations...but nice deflection moron.

That has to be about the most asinine thing I have ever read, you retard. So, what? "They're all just a bunch of camel jockeys to me," right?

No asshole...that is racist...the fact that they are all radical muslims is the fucking point.......

With entirely different leadership structures you ignorant asshat! Which means they can't all be lumped together as one big pot o' "Muslim Fuckheads". Jesus Christ how do we produce such stupid people in this country!!!!

 

[LoneLaugher]

Really? You wanna go down that rabbit hole? How about because Regan armed, and trained Bin Laden, and his terrorists.

So, how far back you wanna take this?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Clinton had attack after attack on this country and did nothing asswipe....the Kobar Towers, the first World trade center bombing, the attack on the Cole....and couldn't be bothered with it because it would have distracted him and his wife from selling the lincoln bedroom....

Three on US soil in 8 years, one of which was Timothy McVey, so he doesn't really count. Khobar Tower was Hezbollah, so how that is at all related to the 9/11 Al Qaida attack, I have no idea. If you're referring to the Bojinka Plot, it never got anywhere. So, you got 6 attacks, total in 8 years, only three of which actually happened on US soil, of which 2 wsere Al Qaida. Furthermore, the most actionable intelligence that Clinton got from the intelligence comunity was the Al Qaida was going to do something not nice to America, sometime in the future, But Bin Laden should have been Clinton's highest priority. Meanwhile, Bush, who got multiple reports that an Al, Qaida attack was "imminent", and the the US should strengthen its security - which he ignored - should get a pass on the attack that was on his watch, and we should blamed Clinton for that.

But, I'm the asswipe. Feel free to piss up a rope with your partisan bullshit.

They knew about the islamic threat and the attacks on the Kobar Towers, the Cole, the First world Trade center........and they knew about bin laden........and he ignored it....having bribes to accept....

More partisan bullshit. The "Islamic threat" was reported by the intelligence professionals as vague, and non-actionable. That is the fact you simply cannot get around, when you try to lay Bush's Twin Tower bombings at the feet of Clinton. Hell, you're even lumping in organizations that had nothing to do with 9/11 into the mix to try and make it sound worse than it was. You're no better than Bush, and Cheney, trying to tie Hussein to Bin Laden in the minds of Americans to justify their War of Choice against Iraq.

By the way, why wasn't Bush more aggressive, and vigilant with terrorists? He had 13 different terrorist attacks under his 8 years compared to Clinton's 6. Anyway you look at it Cowboy Dubya was a clusterfuck of a President.

All career politicians, you can not expect a career politician to protect the American people… not in their nature

What are you, a baby? You need protection?

There has never been a safer time to be an American. Ever.

 

[Asclepias]

White christians are committing these horrible acts as well. Should we put white christians in concentration camps?

Link it.. Don't tell me, SHOW ME PROOF.

No...Christians are not doing these things...nothing in Christianity allows followers to commit murder...murder is part of Islamic doctrine....

You can't call yourself a vegan then go and eat a steak......if you eat the steak you are not a vegan....

Both those guys declared themselves christian. You may be uncomfortable with that fact but it doesnt change reality.

Declared or not, Muslims, self proclaimed or not are Killing more people then Christians are in the name of Gawd. For all the hate directed at Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, or any of the other big TV Christian guys you have yet to see any of them alive or dead directing Christians to go kill apostates during Christmas, Hannuka, or Easter. This Is the case with the religion of peace. These Muslems are directed to kill and they are. When they get sick of killing us in the name of their god they will go back to Killing and raping each other in the name of Allah. It's a fact.

OK guy.

 

[dani67]

God damn Democrats, always hatin' on the gays....

He was a registered Democrat, he did some hate'n on them gays at that nightclub... Lol

You aren't really taking your cues from some unconfirmed internet meme, are you? No one in law enforcement has given any such information. No news source is providing such details. But, if an anonymous internet meme said it, it must be so, right?

Progressives always side with Islam...
The God of Islam
MUHAMMAD

Muslims are sanctified by the blood of murdered kafirs. If the prophet of Islam, Mohammed, was alive today he would be sitting on death row somewhere waiting for his execution.

What is important to understand is that none of these depraved and criminal acts are seen as crimes to Muslims, except if they are committed by someone else. They are all holy, divine acts that their own prophet indulged in and therefore they have been given the stamp of validation as the moral code to be emulated by all Muslim men. They are all Sunna [The traditional portion of Muslim law based on Muhammad’s words or acts, accepted (together with the Koran) as authoritative by Muslims].

• Molested his wife – six-year-old Baby Aisha. One of Baby Aisha’s wifely duties was to clean semen stains from the prophet’s clothes. The prophet would take a bath with Baby Aisha and ‘thigh’ with Baby Aisha, meaning she was too small to be penetrated so he would take his penis and rub it up and down her thighs and against her vagina. Being a man of ‘mercy’ he did not penetrate Baby Aisha until she was nine.

• Raped Baby Aisha when she was nine (texts have altered her age when Muslims could not explain why their prophet married and consummated the marriage with a small child. Koranic texts makes it clear that Mohammed married her when she was six years old. For a marriage to be legally deemed valid it had to be sexually consummated. The Hadith clearly proves that Mohammed was a notorious pedophile). Advocated sex with baby girls.

• Raped a retarded woman. Murdered a woman. Had sex with his dead aunt.

• Captured women and raped them. Kept women as sex slaves. Muhammad had sex with 61 women: many he raped. There is no consensual sex between a child girl and a man. There is no consensual sex between a master and his sex slave. There is no consensual sex between a woman conquered in war and her husband conqueror. All such sexual acts are rape. RAPE IS RAPE.

• Had eleven wives at one time. Sexually abused his wives. Raped his wives. Forced sex during their menstruation including Baby Aisha. Mentally abused his wives. Can you imagine taking a child (or any aged woman) and molesting with your hand/fist her menstruating vagina?

• Beheaded his enemies. 600/900 Jewish men at one massacre. Had Jewish boys as young as 13 years old beheaded after pulling down their pants and inspecting groin for pubic hair.

• Ordered the murder, torture, terrorization of Christians and Jews if they did not convert to Islam. Forced Christians and Jews from Saudi Arabia (the mass exile).

• Assassinated people for insulting him or Islam. Established totalitarian rule. Had followers and their families burnt alive in their homes for missing prayer.

• Ordered the extermination, torture and terrorization of kafirs. Instigated 60 massacres and personally participated in 27 of them.

• Owned and sold slaves. Enslaved women and children.

• Called his black slaves pug noses and compared them to Satan.

• Treated his black slaves as beasts of burden.

• Lied and cheated. Mohammed encouraged his men to lie to deceive someone in order to get what he wanted.

• Caused division and hatred. Ordered no befriending with Christians and Jews.

• Subjugated and oppressed Muslim women. Required them to cover their faces.

• Married his daughter–in–law.

• Approved prostitution.

• Encouraged the rape of women in front of their husbands.

• Recommended wife beating. Hit his wife – Baby Aisha.

• Murdered prisoners of war. Committed acts of terror.

• Advocated suicide attacks.

• Executed apostates and homosexuals.

• Beat children who didn’t pray. Abolished adoption.

• Honor killings of Muslim women and children.

• Beat alcoholics. Lied.

• Stoned adulators to death. Stoned a woman to death after she had given birth.

• Ordered thief’s hands/feet chopped off.

• Tortured a man out of greed.

• Looted and plundered.

• Preached hate for people of other religions.

• Extorted money from other religions

• Forced conversions to Islam

• Allowed his companions to execute, behead, rape and enslave.

• Leviticus 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them."

So... you saying the terrorist was doing God's will?

no