'Suicidal' Political Correctness Run Amuck

[jc456]

How by not calling them names? You cant tell who is the enemy without it?

'The Enemy That Shall Not Be Named'?! WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

We aren't going up against 'Voldemort'!

well I just would like some logic on why we can't call it terrorism. I mean, does it take away from something? WTF. I'm truly confused by these leftist who have no morals or patriotism.

I dont understand how calling it whatever you dare someone to call it will solve any problem at all.

so why do you care? do you get a buck if it isn't terrorism?

 

[easyt65]

I dont understand how calling it whatever you dare someone to call it will solve any problem at all.

No, at this point you don't WANT to see it.

I have fully explained why in a war you must specifically define your enemy for several reasons.

The REAL reasons, IMO, liberals do not WANT to label Islamic Extremism 'Islamic extremism' is because

1) They are ruled by Political Correctness

2) They think by calling them ISLAMIC Extremists they will offend the peaceful Muslims who also believe these people have hijacked their faith

3) They think by calling them Islamic EXTREMISTS they will offend the EXTREMISTS who are trying to kill us. After all, Loretta Lynch said to defeat them we must lay down our arms and use the 'weapon' of 'LOVE' instead...good luck with that

4) Barry is an Islamic Extremist Sympathizer...sorry, face it. When your ALLIES are launching a SURPRISE attack against ISIS, after they just perpetrated the largest attack on France since WWII and YOU (Barry) drops leaflets ahead of the attack to warn ISIS that the attack is coming....'Sympathizer' is being nice (Nicer than calling him a 'Traitor').

Some may apply. All need not apply. Decide as you will. Enough justifying, though, of why we must not call terrorists / Islamic Extremists what they are.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I dont understand how calling it whatever you dare someone to call it will solve any problem at all.

MUST

PROTECT

ISLAM

 

[ClosedCaption]

How by not calling them names? You cant tell who is the enemy without it?

'The Enemy That Shall Not Be Named'?! WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

We aren't going up against 'Voldemort'!

well I just would like some logic on why we can't call it terrorism. I mean, does it take away from something? WTF. I'm truly confused by these leftist who have no morals or patriotism.

I dont understand how calling it whatever you dare someone to call it will solve any problem at all.

so why do you care? do you get a buck if it isn't terrorism?

Whenever you cant explain your goofy logic you try to make it about someone else.

 

[SwimExpert]

Bring me evidence.

cause I have it right here. where do these people come from, I mean, excuse me, can't stop laughing either.

If by "these people" you are referring to people rely on facts and logic to support assertions, as opposed to jumping half cocked to whatever feelgood assumption someone wants to make, then the answer is that we came from millions of years of evolution that developed a powerful homo sapiens brain capable of high level complex thoughts.

Where did you come from?

 

[SwimExpert]

2. Are you saying explosive backpacks and pressure cookers filled with ball-bearings and nails do NOT constitute a 'terrorist attack'? The victims of the Boston marathon Bombing would probably disagree with you.

In and of themselves, no. And while it's a very natural first guess to suspect terrorism, I would still like to see evidence before resting on such a conclusion.

i think it was a love affair gone bad and someone just wanted to go blow up something. how's that, cause that makes so much more sense right?

Bring me evidence.

why? what will you do with it? why does it matter so much to you? you owe someone something or what?

Why? Why should I want evidence to support a conclusion, instead of assumptions? If you have to ask, then the answer is beyond your faculties.

 

[jc456]

Bring me evidence.

cause I have it right here. where do these people come from, I mean, excuse me, can't stop laughing either.

If by "these people" you are referring to people rely on facts and logic to support assertions, as opposed to jumping half cocked to whatever feelgood assumption someone wants to make, then the answer is that we came from millions of years of evolution that developed a powerful homo sapiens brain capable of high level complex thoughts.

Where did you come from?

no, I'm referring to stupid fks like you that can't figure out that they don't rule the world and free speech is free speech. And those people like you who can't think for themselves and need a directive to communicate with. Those people. Like you!

 

[jc456]

2. Are you saying explosive backpacks and pressure cookers filled with ball-bearings and nails do NOT constitute a 'terrorist attack'? The victims of the Boston marathon Bombing would probably disagree with you.

In and of themselves, no. And while it's a very natural first guess to suspect terrorism, I would still like to see evidence before resting on such a conclusion.

i think it was a love affair gone bad and someone just wanted to go blow up something. how's that, cause that makes so much more sense right?

Bring me evidence.

why? what will you do with it? why does it matter so much to you? you owe someone something or what?

Why? Why should I want evidence to support a conclusion, instead of assumptions? If you have to ask, then the answer is beyond your faculties.

it's none of your business is it? I mean what are you working for the FBI and need it?

 

[jc456]

How by not calling them names? You cant tell who is the enemy without it?

'The Enemy That Shall Not Be Named'?! WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

We aren't going up against 'Voldemort'!

well I just would like some logic on why we can't call it terrorism. I mean, does it take away from something? WTF. I'm truly confused by these leftist who have no morals or patriotism.

I dont understand how calling it whatever you dare someone to call it will solve any problem at all.

so why do you care? do you get a buck if it isn't terrorism?

Whenever you cant explain your goofy logic you try to make it about someone else.

cause you can't explain your goofy logic. I ask you why it's important to hold off on saying terrorism and you got nothing. WTF!!! what do you expect afterward? nicey nicey?

 

[HenryBHough]

Why the rush to judgment to declare it a terrorist attack?

Why not gather the facts first?

What a cool head! Able to think of explosions as fun, a day in the park, terror? Nawwwww.....just life in the city, enjoy it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

'The Enemy That Shall Not Be Named'?! WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

We aren't going up against 'Voldemort'!

well I just would like some logic on why we can't call it terrorism. I mean, does it take away from something? WTF. I'm truly confused by these leftist who have no morals or patriotism.

I dont understand how calling it whatever you dare someone to call it will solve any problem at all.

so why do you care? do you get a buck if it isn't terrorism?

Whenever you cant explain your goofy logic you try to make it about someone else.

cause you can't explain your goofy logic. I ask you why it's important to hold off on saying terrorism and you got nothing. WTF!!! what do you expect afterward? nicey nicey?

Just because you dare someone to use your newest line doesnt mean its important to hold off. They're just not taking your bait.

I asked how calling it anything will solve it and you got nothing. Want to try now or will you follow up with double dog dares?

 

[Mac1958]

The Regressive Left and Islam -- What is happening here?

 

[easyt65]

I asked how calling it anything will solve it and you got nothing. Want to try now or will you follow up with double dog dares?

You LIE. I gave you the very reason it is important. You, however, keep demonstrating you don't WANT to hear it....not my issue. That's yours. Want the answer - go back and look at it again. You won't...as I said, you don't want to hear the answer. Stick to your ignorance on this - it's what you know and trust.

 

[SwimExpert]

In and of themselves, no. And while it's a very natural first guess to suspect terrorism, I would still like to see evidence before resting on such a conclusion.

i think it was a love affair gone bad and someone just wanted to go blow up something. how's that, cause that makes so much more sense right?

Bring me evidence.

why? what will you do with it? why does it matter so much to you? you owe someone something or what?

Why? Why should I want evidence to support a conclusion, instead of assumptions? If you have to ask, then the answer is beyond your faculties.

it's none of your business is it? I mean what are you working for the FBI and need it?

You're not really getting the point here. I personally do not need the evidence. But the complain of the OP is that the authorities are not jumping to conclusions, and are instead making statements about the evidence they have and what it does (or does not) support. I want the authorities to collect evidence. I don't want them jumping to conclusions. If they have no evidence that an event was terrorism, then they have no evidence. If they suspect terrorism despite not yet having evidence, I want them to investigate and collect evidence. I don't want them simply settling on unsubstantiated assumptions and calling it a day. I do not want the authorities reporting suspicions as evidence.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I asked how calling it anything will solve it and you got nothing. .

If you did, there was your chance and you decided to use it to whine about how you did it and again call names. You're not fooling anyone.

What page? What was the summary of your answer? Post number? link?

I bet you cant answer any of those because you told me already right hahaha

 

[easyt65]

I asked how calling it anything will solve it and you got nothing. .

If you did, there was your chance and you decided to use it to whine about how you did it and again call names. You're not fooling anyone.

What page? What was the summary of your answer? Post number? link?

I bet you cant answer any of those because you told me already right hahaha

Learn to use quotes...

 

[ClosedCaption]

Fixed it

 

[easyt65]

Fixed it

 

[jc456]

i think it was a love affair gone bad and someone just wanted to go blow up something. how's that, cause that makes so much more sense right?

Bring me evidence.

why? what will you do with it? why does it matter so much to you? you owe someone something or what?

Why? Why should I want evidence to support a conclusion, instead of assumptions? If you have to ask, then the answer is beyond your faculties.

it's none of your business is it? I mean what are you working for the FBI and need it?

You're not really getting the point here. I personally do not need the evidence. But the complain of the OP is that the authorities are not jumping to conclusions, and are instead making statements about the evidence they have and what it does (or does not) support. I want the authorities to collect evidence. I don't want them jumping to conclusions. If they have no evidence that an event was terrorism, then they have no evidence. If they suspect terrorism despite not yet having evidence, I want them to investigate and collect evidence. I don't want them simply settling on unsubstantiated assumptions and calling it a day. I do not want the authorities reporting suspicions as evidence.

so then you're thinking the authorities are monitoring the US Messageboard looking for posts as their basis for conclusions? I mean so fking what if someone on here wants to say it was a terrorist? you got stock in terrorists do you? do you have some entitlement or something? Why the fk do you care if someone thinks someone is a terrorist or not? Your shit is what turns me off to libturds wanting and needing to have things their way.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Link? Page number? Summary of your answer?