Hello Friend,

If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.

It will be the most efficient use of your time.

And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.

Thank you for visiting and have a great day!

ISIS wing claims responsibility for Minnesota mall attack

B

BlueAlpha1

Guest
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/18/us/minnesota-mall-stabbing/

Bush Fault.
Religion Of Peace.
We Have Failed Them.
Not All Muslims Are Terrorists.
#NotInMyName.
Mental Disorders

Pick one...................
After briefly condemning the actual knifing itself, "moderate" Muslims will then shift to the alleged inevitable backlash of "Islamophobia" that will soon follow (except, it never does.) Then they'll blame 240 year old America or 75 year old Israel for 1,400 years of Jihad.

Islam - the beginning, middle, and end of terrorism. There is no nuance, and there is no such thing as Islamophobia. Fearing Islam is rational, and being averse to it is noble.
 

samspade

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
7,996
Reaction score
5,054
B

BlueAlpha1

Guest
None. Your chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist is one in 3.6 million. Quit buying into what politicians trying to keep their jobs are selling you.
Are you saying radical Islam is not one of the major problems threatening the entire world right now, simply because in a country where they make up only 0.8% of the population they can't do as much damage as they'd like?
 

samspade

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
7,996
Reaction score
5,054
Are you saying radical Islam is not one of the major problems threatening the entire world right now, simply because in a country where they make up only 0.8% of the population they can't do as much damage as they'd like?
Sure, it's a problem, I can't dispute that. But not one to get bent out of shape over. You're more likely to die from heart disease. Politicians and media want you to believe that Islamic terrorism is the biggest threat to your daily life. Why? Money, money, money. And with all the money the government extorts from you and throws at the problem, has it solved anything? We wouldn't need a Homeland Security department if we weren't constantly d!cking around in the same foreign countries that churn out terrorists. Besides, if some guy is going to go to a mall and stab people, there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
 

samspade

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
7,996
Reaction score
5,054
Sure, it's a problem, I can't dispute that. But not one to get bent out of shape over. You're more likely to die from heart disease. Politicians and media want you to believe that Islamic terrorism is the biggest threat to your daily life. Why? Money, money, money. And with all the money the government extorts from you and throws at the problem, has it solved anything? We wouldn't need a Homeland Security department if we weren't constantly d!cking around in the same foreign countries that churn out terrorists. Besides, if some guy is going to go to a mall and stab people, there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
Speaking of heart disease, the family of the suspect arrested in the NYC bombing owns a fried chicken restaurant in NJ. Attacking from all sides.
 
B

BlueAlpha1

Guest
Sure, it's a problem, I can't dispute that. But not one to get bent out of shape over. You're more likely to die from heart disease.
This isn't a very sound argument. Stating that because Problem B, C, and D exist does not downplay the severity of Problem A. We can walk and chew gum by addressing both heart disease and Muslim terror.

We wouldn't need a Homeland Security department if we weren't constantly d!cking around in the same foreign countries that churn out terrorists.
That's not true. Holland is a largely isolationist country and it is being overrun by Islamists. I've been there. It's as much about Islam dominating the entire world as it is our misadventures.

Besides, if some guy is going to go to a mall and stab people, there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
In the case of mental illness fine, but if he's doing it in the name of Islam, a stupid ideology, there's plenty we can do. We can begin to scrutinize the ideology for what it is with logic and reason so that less people are motivated by stupid ideologies, and stop protecting it with stupid words like "Islamophobia" that are meant to shut people up.

Over 3,200 people have been murdered since the turn of the century by a segment of the population that makes up less than 1% of the country. This means there is something rotten intrinsic to the belief system. Do you want that segment to become 25% as it has in Amsterdam?

Now, if it weren't for the what's going on in Europe in just the last year, I'd agree that it wouldn't be a major voting issue for me. Prior to 2015 it wasn't. But the Muslim INVASION of Germany, Holland, France, and England going on right now is a VERY serious problem and now HAS to be a voting issue in 2016. Germany, which has been the envy of the world for 70 years now, had four terror attacks in one week back in June.

Crooked Hillary wants a 500% increase in "Syrian refugees", 70% of whom are military aged men. Two years ago I'd have granted radical Islam wasn't THE biggest problem facing our country before, although I still thought it was far more dangerous than you did, but it certainly could be THE issue if this country votes wrong.
 
B

BlueAlpha1

Guest
NO AMERICAN should be dying on our soil to foreign born terrorists.

NOT ONE.

It does not matter what the odds are, one is too many.
I love when the radical lying leftists were citing studies that said you were more likely to be killed by "white nationalists" or "anti-government right wingers" here in the USA "since 9/11." The thesis went something like: since 9/11, 48 people have been killed by anti-government white nationalists, and 26 by Jihadists.

Nevermind the fact that they're comparing totals between 63% of the population (whites) to 0.8% of the population (Muslims). Nevermind that they're comparing a race to an ideology. Nevermind the fact that since then, we had Orlando and San Bernardino which was 64 deaths between 2 attacks..the Jihadis are taking the lead and running away with it since the "study" came out.

But get this: they omitted 9/11 entirely. What the hell does "since 9/11" mean? What an odd day to start your polling data on terrorism, the day after the largest terrorist attack in American history. Confirmation bias much?

I like samspade, but he's simply wrong here. Given how few Muslims live in the country, the numbers are TERRIFYING. And they make a strong case for profiling mosques. Yes, I said it. Not racial profiling. If you find a mosque that is 100% white converts, profile the hell out of it.
 

samspade

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
7,996
Reaction score
5,054
I love when the radical lying leftists were citing studies that said you were more likely to be killed by "white nationalists" or "anti-government right wingers" here in the USA "since 9/11." The thesis went something like: since 9/11, 48 people have been killed by anti-government white nationalists, and 26 by Jihadists.

Nevermind the fact that they're comparing totals between 63% of the population (whites) to 0.8% of the population (Muslims). Nevermind that they're comparing a race to an ideology. Nevermind the fact that since then, we had Orlando and San Bernardino which was 64 deaths between 2 attacks..the Jihadis are taking the lead and running away with it since the "study" came out.

But get this: they omitted 9/11 entirely. What the hell does "since 9/11" mean? What an odd day to start your polling data on terrorism, the day after the largest terrorist attack in American history. Confirmation bias much?

I like samspade, but he's simply wrong here. Given how few Muslims live in the country, the numbers are TERRIFYING. And they make a strong case for profiling mosques. Yes, I said it. Not racial profiling. If you find a mosque that is 100% white converts, profile the hell out of it.
Yeah but I never said "since 9/11." Believe me, I agree with a lot of what you say, and I think it's daft that we sweep radical Islam under the rug because of political correctness. 9/11 in fact accounts for 98% of all deaths to foreign-born terrorists over the past four decades. But even if you include that massive outlier, statistically your chances of dying in such an attack are slim.

It's definitely a problem worth combating. I'm impressed with the collective resourcefulness and efficiency with which the latest bomber in New York was apprehended. That was a total effort by ordinary citizens, thieves, homeless people, and police officers. (I'm less impressed with politicians like Bill de Blasio refraining from using the term "terrorism," let alone "Islam.")

My point is more about the rhetoric of the politicians seeking office. Listen to them speak: There are always "enemies" lurking about. Remember, the government is one big, unorganized mafia, ready to take your protection money. "Terrorists" have been around since at least the American revolution. Think critically about whose interests might be at stake before you allow yourself to be "terrified."

And FWIW, I was just south of Chelsea on Saturday evening, and also was within about 15 or 20 minutes of being in the World Trade Center on September 11. I'm not trying to play a card here, I totally get that people died because of a warped ideology. I'm just skeptical of the fearmongering of politicians - but to be fair, I'm also skeptical of their pu$$y-footing.
 

backseatjuan

Banned
Joined
Nov 2, 2011
Messages
4,474
Reaction score
1,657
Age
43
Location
Россия

samspade

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
7,996
Reaction score
5,054
Yes there are "always enemies about", but we are importing large numbers of these enemies who are FAR MORE LIKELY to attack us and who's religious beliefs are completely at odds with our culture.

There is absolutely NO good reason to not just kick them out and back to their own countries. Yet there is every reason we should do so.
True that. Can't argue with that. BUT ~ I'm not going to depend on the government for my safety and security. It does some things right, but all the policy in the world won't protect the individual when the shyt hits the fan. What I see from the Trump/Obama/Hillary/Bush supporters is a lot of running to the government for protection and security. Are they really free? Every man dies, not every man truly lives.
 
B

BlueAlpha1

Guest
The job of the government is to protect its citizens. Not by restricting gun ownership, but by keeping out invaders.

This is exactly one of the reasons I feel Trump is by far the better option.
Brilliant. That is this entire election in a nutshell.
 

AttackFormation

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
4,128
Reaction score
3,666
Age
31
Location
Sweden
ISIS and terrorism in general is a freaking inside job, isn't it obvious? or do you really think that for example the US army is actually unable to root them out and that's why they could appear and persist? middle eastern terrorism like al-qaeda and ISIS are simply more elaborate false flag operations than what has been done over and over in history. And every single state that the US opposes has something in common: it is resisting or aligned with resistance against the global banking parasites based in the US who work through the dollar, because they don't or have plans not to rely on the dollar. The US military is the muscle man of these parasites which Smedley D. Butler recognised even a hundred years ago, and islam is the latest fear mongering now that there's no longer the red scare. Can there still be actual muslim terrorists/radicals? hell yeah, but those are collaterals to the big plan. Oh yeah and by the way, even the communists (and nazis) were funded by these same people way back, just like the "terrorists" now. And guess what, this war and fear is good for profit and serves the interests of certain people. Russia has been a convenient enemy for a long time, but do you guys think it's an accident that China is getting bad press what with their plans to become more independent of the dollar? they recognized even back in the 70s that the dollar imperialism was backed up by nuclear force... ah why the fvck am I trying...
 
Last edited:

Vantagepoint34

Master Don Juan
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
873
Reaction score
79
Location
Land of slow.
ISIS and terrorism in general is a freaking inside job, isn't it obvious? or do you really think that for example the US army is actually unable to root them out and that's why they could appear and persist? middle eastern terrorism like al-qaeda and ISIS are simply more elaborate false flag operations than what has been done over and over in history. And every single state that the US opposes has something in common: it is resisting or aligned with resistance against the global banking parasites based in the US who work through the dollar, because they don't or have plans not to rely on the dollar. The US military is the muscle man of these parasites which Smedley D. Butler recognised even a hundred years ago, and islam is the latest fear mongering now that there's no longer the red scare. Can there still be actual muslim terrorists/radicals? hell yeah, but those are collaterals to the big plan. Oh yeah and by the way, even the communists (and nazis) were funded by these same people way back, just like the "terrorists" now. And guess what, this war and fear is good for profit and serves the interests of certain people. Russia has been a convenient enemy for a long time, but do you guys think it's an accident that China is getting bad press what with their plans to become more independent of the dollar? they recognized even back in the 70s that the dollar imperialism was backed up by nuclear force... ah why the fvck am I trying...
He died in 2006 was an Italy PD that tried to control U.N. so his name would last the ages Haha. SRSLY
 

Attachments

Top