Mass shooting in Orlando Nightclub

Bannasidhe wrote: »

FFS it's Imam.

I. M. A. M.

Im glad thats all you find objectionable in my post.


Anti ISIS protests Dublin, about fifty muslims turn up



Anti free speech/cartoons protest, in excess of 400 turn up



Takbir, allah akhbar indeed


Its clear whats really important, outside of the PR "nice face" to keep the liberal luvvies onside.

I was born and raised in Orlando. I left about 2.5 years ago to move to SF, but Orlando will always be my home. My family and most of my friends live there. They're all alright thankfully, but friends of friends have been killed or injured in this attack. My facebook feed is full of their pictures and updates as their fates have been revealed. Everyone is shaken up. My best friend and I would sometimes go to gay clubs and attended Pride events over the years as allies of the LBQT community.

I'm not naive enough to think that this recurring problem in American society can be solved by banning guns outright. I'm also not naive enough to think it can be solved by arming more people. I would like to see background checks and waiting periods implemented for everyone - no loopholes on private sales. I would like to see licensing and registration for all gun owners and weapons, similar to what we do for car owners like myself. Want to become a gun owner? You need to pass a test about safety and responsible gun ownership. You need to understand the weapon you are using. I had to pass both a written and road skills test to get a driver's license. I also update my registration yearly with the government. I don't see why gun owners can't do the same. Of course, gun owners won't like this. There seems to be a popular paranoia among them about the government knowing who owns guns. If you are one of these people, I want you to know that I genuinely, in no uncertain terms, give no flying fvcks about this paranoia of yours.
I don't think this will end all gun crimes, but what law does end all crimes it is intended to stop? That's a weak argument. America can't eradicate gun violence but we can reduce it and reigning in this gun culture is a start. At the very least, we owe it to ourselves to try some of the above because the status quo isn't working.

Mental health and religious extremism are also issues America needs to address. We are failing people who struggle with mental health (the majority of gun deaths in the US are suicides). That's a bit more complicated but if a person has a history of mental health issues or are on an FBI watchlist, I'm okay with them being denied access to a gun. I'm sure an industrious person can find another way - fine. Again, the point isn't eradication, it's reduction. At least they would then have to break a law to obtain a firearm and we're not just handing one over to them.

Anyway, I'm rambling, but I'm only just beginning to process these events. When people would ask me where I'm from, I would sometimes say jokingly, "I'm from the happiest place on earth!" It hurts my heart that my beautiful town will forever be linked to this tragedy. Most people killed during a gun massacre in the US - it's a title I never thought Orlando would hold.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Anti IRA rally 0 results

AntI water rally 250,000 people turn up.

It's clear what's really important; )

The IRA hung up its boots when the Internet was still a novelty . When was the last time they murdered dozens of people? An anti water rally, really? What a stupid statement. Nobody is anti-water, we are all about 60-70% water.

But they also attacked a load of metal fans in Paris. Ultimately we all know that Saturday was an attack on the western tolerance and support of homosexuality. Yes he was homophobic (clearly) but he was a Islamic fundamentalist psycho first and foremost. This was always about the "decadent west" primarily.

Michah wrote: »

Unfortunately, we, our children and grandchildren don't have 600 years to hang around and wait for them to get it together.

Indeed.

We need ordinary Muslims to wrest control from the extremists as happened in Christianity. It took a few hundred years but once the ol printing press got fired up things sped up dramatically so now that we have instant communication...

One observation is that I can't help but think that painting all Muslims as lunatic jihadists who want to destroy the West is unhelpful and downright counter-productive in this regard.

All of this however once again shows that despite the erosion of privacy and a massive intelligence and security apparatus the government once again has failed to protect it's citizens.

There were clear indications about this person and still he cleared a back ground check for a private security firm (which received several complaints from his co-workers), was able to purchase a weapon, travel to Saudi Arabia and was enrolled in an Islamic seminary run by ex-con who possible recruited terrorist.

Still G4S did not do anything. They should loose any government contracts they have for not doing their job.

Still Law Enforcement did not think that he posed a thread, so what the hell do we need this massive intelligence and security apparatus for?

The DEA wants to know which prescription drugs I get, police can now access everything of my phone (beside my actual phone calls) without a warrant and if I go to a library the PATRIOT act ensure that everything I read can be accessed, but still a guy who clearly was on the radar is able to go and commit these crimes?

I think it's time to have a debate about privacy (specifically how to get it back) and how we deal with potential crime (pre-crime) in an effective way.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Indeed.

We need ordinary Muslims to wrest control from the extremists as happened in Christianity. It took a few hundred years but once the ol printing press got fired up things sped up dramatically so now that we have instant communication...

One observation is that I can't help but think that painting all Muslims as lunatic jihadists who want to destroy the West is unhelpful and downright counter-productive in this regard.

Extremists in "Christianity" has not gone away, it has just shifted from violence to using money to shape the law to continue their believes based on obscure text interpretations.

Just because a charlatan wears a suit and directs his funds to ensure that law's are passed that discriminate does not make him less dangerous than a charlatan pretending to speak for Allah who calls for holy war.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

Extremists in "Christianity" has not gone away, it has just shifted from violence to using money to shape the law to continue their believes based on obscure text interpretations.

Just because a charlatan wears a suit and directs his funds to ensure that law's are passed that discriminate does not make him less dangerous than a charlatan pretending to speak for Allah who calls for holy war.

I keep saying that but apparently this makes me anti-Christian/ an apologist for the murderer/ embracer of Islam/ Niaf/blinkered etc etc etc.

Lollipops23 wrote: »

But they also attacked a load of metal fans in Paris. Ultimately we all know that Saturday was an attack on the western tolerance and support of homosexuality. Yes he was homophobic (clearly) but he was a Islamic fundamentalist psycho first and foremost. This was always about the "decadent west" primarily.

I think they attacked that concert because the genre of music at the show was one that originated in the west and is pretty unique to the west to even today, I just remember hearing that that concert hall and the particular band playing were chosen as targets for a reason.

wakka12 wrote: »

Maybe they do. But pretty irrelevant at this time as we discuss radical islamism. Both religions clearly have flaws that have contributed to the formation of radicalised worshippers respectively though this particular case is about an act of terror carried out by a radical muslim, so that is what we are discussing.But thank you for your contribution

Fundamentally all the Abrahamic religions are batsh1t insane. Essentially they all worship the evil mind parasite described the Old Testament. The vengeful god. Something, an idea, that could only be described as demonic in nature. All imagined BS of course, but very very real in the minds of those enslaved by religion as they act out their bogus beliefs in the real world.

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Why on earth would it be disappointing? It being one brand of religious lunatic over another that committed the atrocity is not going to do anything to bring those people back.

One the other hand Mr Trump seems to be finding the brand of religious lunatic rather pleasingly fortuitous in regard to his political campaign.

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Because it doesn't at all fit in with the evil whitey demonisation agenda. I could feel the collective sigh of extreme disappointment emitting from the self hating PC crowd when it was revealed to be a Muslim nutter expressing his religion, it was soooo disappointing for them. Not to worry though, they pulled themselves together and still managed to blame whitey in a roundabout way.

Actually, I have been reflecting on this and I have not been entirely honest in saying that I'm not disappointed. Although said disappointment is minor compared to the distress I feel for the heartbreaking loss of life, with no regard to who committed the atrocity.

I am disappointed that it was a Muslim terrorist, rather than a Christian terrorist or a random lunatic on a rampage without clear motive. See the difference is, that if it were a Christian hate crime, the evils of religious extremism would be a focus, but not Christianity as a whole. Individual innocent Christians would not be targeted, Irish Christians and British Christians and even other American Christians with the exception of their extremists, would not be held responsible. There could be a sermon in an RCC church next Sunday saying that Homosexuality is an abomination, and still the RCC would not be held responsible for Orlando shooting.

Not so when it's a Muslim terrorist. And with every Muslim terror attack, we move closer and closer to a political climate that is ripe for the implementation of policies that have not been seen in Western civilisation since the fall of the Third Reich!

So yes, you are right, second to feeling distress at the loss of life when these attacks occur, I do feel worried and disappointed when it comes to light that Muslim terrorists were responsible.

smash wrote: »

AKA: King on the nutties.

Psychos that wear silly hats have encouraged and promoted murder for thousands of years.

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Psychos that wear silly hats have encouraged and promoted murder for thousands of years.

Some still do, some even have their own state in which they can hide their criminals.

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Actually, I have been reflecting on this and I have not been entirely honest in saying that I'm not disappointed. Although said disappointment is minor compared to the distress I feel for the heartbreaking loss of life, with no regard to who committed the atrocity.

I am disappointed that it was a Muslim terrorist, rather than a Christian terrorist or a random lunatic on a rampage without clear motive. See the difference is, that if it were a Christian hate crime, the evils of religious extremism would be a focus, but not Christianity as a whole. Individual innocent Christians would not be targeted, Irish Christians and British Christians and even other American Christians with the exception of their extremists, would not be held responsible. There could be a sermon in an RCC church next Sunday saying that Homosexuality is an abomination, and still the RCC would not be held responsible for Orlando shooting.

Not so when it's a Muslim terrorist. And with every Muslim terror attack, we move closer and closer to a political climate that is ripe for the implementation of policies that have not been seen in Western civilisation since the fall of the Third Reich!

So yes, you are right, second to feeling distress at the loss of life when these attacks occur, I do feel worried and disappointed when it comes to light that Muslim terrorists were responsible.

There is nothing anybody could do if the RCC is making statements of that effect because they still are so deeply embedded into the state and it's function that nobody can really take them on.

However in difference to local Muslim preachers, the local religious soldier (priest) would not do so without permission from his military command or his command might recall him and do some PR.

I agree with you about the political climate and the further erosion of freedom, despite the clear failure of the intelligence / security apparatus in this case.

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Apparently 2 reports in US said that mass surveillance has not foiled a single terrorism plot.

The only things that stops terrorism is the ending of the mass transplant of people from the islamic world to the West. Keep importing people who hate you, and you will continue to have "homegrown" islamic terrorist attacks.