Anti Muslim Group's Cartoon Contest Attacked

[AUUSN 823]

It's an open forum, not a chat session. Whine about being called out for saying we killed anyone because of their religion when that's a ludicrous & absurd assertion, that says much about you.

I stand by that statement. I'm sorry you cant grasp the complexity of it. Sucks to be you.

[AURaptor 1,125]

The Complexity of Stupid.

Right. I'll never get that.

Oh, and a quick review of the thread....

...our lax enemy identification standards in executing drone strikes have led to people being killed simply because they are Muslim.

Now see, if I had accused our Commander OF Chief targeting Muslims to kill, simply because they're Muslim, why, I don't know what sort of hateful names I'd be called.

But golly, our Commander OF Chief is ...well, at the very least friendly towards Muslims, having BEEN one, and being the son of one and all.. gee, why on EARTH would anyone accuse HIM of murdering folks, JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE MUSLIM ???

It's a real brain twister, that one.

[homersapien 11,392]

So, the answer is no.

Got it.

In a simpleton's mind the answer is no.

You can't cite anywhere that US policy was to kill ANYONE because of their religion. F this parsing of words & game you're trying to play. Stop being a mf'n troll. There are Christians in the Mid East being genocided BECAUSE of their religion!

Simpleton is you, a hole.

So, you have now changed the question to one of policy? Nice touch.

We've killed lots and lots of Muslims who were not terrorists as collateral damage or otherwise being in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's just common sense.

Now you can argue the nuance of why we killed them, but no one has suggested it was due to a policy of killing Muslims simply because they are Muslims.

(Although I wouldn't doubt that - war being war - some American soldiers deliberately killed Muslims for simply being there. It happened in Viet Nam (for example) and probably every other war we've fought.

[homersapien 11,392]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

While I don't fence myself into an ideology worthy of being labeled, I don't think anyone should go out of their way to insult anyone's religion. I was deeply offended over piss Christ. Sorry I wasn't a member of this Forum when it happened; I would have expressed my outrage.

I was offended too, as were many Christians. But the nearly universal response from the liberal side of things was acclaim for the artists and patronizing speeches about freedom of expression to Christians. Has there been a universal shift toward being against these sorts of exhibits or is this another one of those "all religions are equally superior to Christianity" deals?

I call BS on this.

That may be the way you remember it but the "liberal side of things" is hardly that monolithic. :-\

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

My problem with the event is that it was done to incite the exact type of response that it got. It was done in my home area and where my family works which potentially puts them in danger.

I assure you if the radical (or whatever label you prefer) Christians of Central Africa show up here, start killing individuals for the above mentioned or similar offenses by you, and groups start hosting conventions to do so in an attempt to incite that violence I will have the exact same thoughts and concerns.

If Buddha monks suddenly get upset about being viewed as fat and killing people, then I will have the exact same thoughts on a convention that has a fat buddha statue contest.

For me this has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with attempting to incite violence with no care or thought to the consequences to the surrounding community for personal agenda.

[TheBlueVue 177]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

While I don't fence myself into an ideology worthy of being labeled, I don't think anyone should go out of their way to insult anyone's religion. I was deeply offended over piss Christ. Sorry I wasn't a member of this Forum when it happened; I would have expressed my outrage.

I was offended too, as were many Christians. But the nearly universal response from the liberal side of things was acclaim for the artists and patronizing speeches about freedom of expression to Christians. Has there been a universal shift toward being against these sorts of exhibits or is this another one of those "all religions are equally superior to Christianity" deals?

I call BS on this.

That may be the way you remember it but the "liberal side of things" is hardly that monolithic. :-\

Really? Im not so sure as it has been demonstrated on too many occasions to recount that the liberal idea of diversity is a room filled with both sexes, sexual orientation, sexual identity, ethnicity and race all thinking the same thoughts as anything that diverges from the liberal liturgy is considered by ALL to be nothing short of heresy.

[homersapien 11,392]

So, the answer is no.

Got it.

In a simpleton's mind the answer is no.

You can't cite anywhere that US policy was to kill ANYONE because of their religion. F this parsing of words & game you're trying to play. Stop being a mf'n troll. There are Christians in the Mid East being genocided BECAUSE of their religion!

Simpleton is you, a hole.

You are letting your belly button show by resorting to name calling.

I swear, some people on this forum couldn't have a civil exchange to save their life.

[homersapien 11,392]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

While I don't fence myself into an ideology worthy of being labeled, I don't think anyone should go out of their way to insult anyone's religion. I was deeply offended over piss Christ. Sorry I wasn't a member of this Forum when it happened; I would have expressed my outrage.

I was offended too, as were many Christians. But the nearly universal response from the liberal side of things was acclaim for the artists and patronizing speeches about freedom of expression to Christians. Has there been a universal shift toward being against these sorts of exhibits or is this another one of those "all religions are equally superior to Christianity" deals?

I call BS on this.

That may be the way you remember it but the "liberal side of things" is hardly that monolithic. :-\

Really? Im not so sure as it has been demonstrated on too many occasions to recount that the liberal idea of diversity is a room filled with both sexes, sexual orientation, sexual identity, ethnicity and race all thinking the same thoughts as anything that diverges from the liberal liturgy is considered by ALL to be nothing short of heresy.

Piling BS on top of BS doesn't change the nature of BS.

[homersapien 11,392]

( ones service to country does not shield them from being accountable for their remarks. Or at least it shouldn't ).

But the issue here is you and a few others bringing up the fact they are in the military in your responses.

There's absolutely no reason for you to use their military status to criticize them if they are not trying to justify their remarks with it.

It works both ways. You are bringing up and disrespecting their military status when it is irrelevant.

[AURaptor 1,125]

homer, if you'd bother to follow the WHOLE thread, you'd see how the discussion evolved.

Persecution of xtians in the M.E., and then this gem gets dropped...

Is this the point where I post the number of Muslims killed executing the war on terror?

In CONTEXT, the issue of Christians being murdered, simply because of their religion, was some how replied to with this idiocy.

I stated, as fact, that we're not killing Muslims , that NO ONE is killing Muslims , because they are Muslim. It's an asinine claim, which has absolutely nothing to back it up, yet our GLORIOUS member of the military double downed, and tried to justify his position w/ some irrelevant minutia about droning, which only his COMMANDER ...oh, never mind. It's too much for you follow.

[TheBlueVue 177]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

While I don't fence myself into an ideology worthy of being labeled, I don't think anyone should go out of their way to insult anyone's religion. I was deeply offended over piss Christ. Sorry I wasn't a member of this Forum when it happened; I would have expressed my outrage.

I was offended too, as were many Christians. But the nearly universal response from the liberal side of things was acclaim for the artists and patronizing speeches about freedom of expression to Christians. Has there been a universal shift toward being against these sorts of exhibits or is this another one of those "all religions are equally superior to Christianity" deals?

I call BS on this.

That may be the way you remember it but the "liberal side of things" is hardly that monolithic. :-\

Really? Im not so sure as it has been demonstrated on too many occasions to recount that the liberal idea of diversity is a room filled with both sexes, sexual orientation, sexual identity, ethnicity and race all thinking the same thoughts as anything that diverges from the liberal liturgy is considered by ALL to be nothing short of heresy.

Piling BS on top of BS doesn't change the nature of BS.

and it doesn't change the truth about so called liberal diversity

[homersapien 11,392]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

My problem with the event is that it was done to incite the exact type of response that it got. It was done in my home area and where my family works which potentially puts them in danger.

I assure you if the radical (or whatever label you prefer) Christians of Central Africa show up here, start killing individuals for the above mentioned or similar offenses by you, and groups start hosting conventions to do so in an attempt to incite that violence I will have the exact same thoughts and concerns.

If Buddha monks suddenly get upset about being viewed as fat and killing people, then I will have the exact same thoughts on a convention that has a fat buddha statue contest.

For me this has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with attempting to incite violence with no care or thought to the consequences to the surrounding community for personal agenda.

This is similar to the Koran burning demonstrations held by the wacky preacher not long ago.

Exercising your rights for the purpose of deliberately insulting or provoke others is certainly legal, but that doesn't make it a good thing to do.

[homersapien 11,392]

I see some Muslims and liberals, while condemning the attacks, whining about the event itself. And while I think it's in poor taste and wouldn't do one myself, where's the outrage when someone satirizes or does sacriligeous or "blasphemous" art about Christianity? I don't remember many (if any) liberals getting their panties in a twist over "Piss Christ" or "The Holy Virgin Mary", do you? When did the left get so weak-kneed about free speech and freedom of expression?

While I don't fence myself into an ideology worthy of being labeled, I don't think anyone should go out of their way to insult anyone's religion. I was deeply offended over piss Christ. Sorry I wasn't a member of this Forum when it happened; I would have expressed my outrage.

I was offended too, as were many Christians. But the nearly universal response from the liberal side of things was acclaim for the artists and patronizing speeches about freedom of expression to Christians. Has there been a universal shift toward being against these sorts of exhibits or is this another one of those "all religions are equally superior to Christianity" deals?

I call BS on this.

That may be the way you remember it but the "liberal side of things" is hardly that monolithic. :-\

Really? Im not so sure as it has been demonstrated on too many occasions to recount that the liberal idea of diversity is a room filled with both sexes, sexual orientation, sexual identity, ethnicity and race all thinking the same thoughts as anything that diverges from the liberal liturgy is considered by ALL to be nothing short of heresy.

Piling BS on top of BS doesn't change the nature of BS.

and it doesn't change the truth about so called liberal diversity

Adding a final dollop of your demented world view doesn't help either.

[AUUSN 823]

homer, if you'd bother to follow the WHOLE thread, you'd see how the discussion evolved.

Persecution of xtians in the M.E., and then this gem gets dropped...

Is this the point where I post the number of Muslims killed executing the war on terror?

In CONTEXT, the issue of Christians being murdered, simply because of their religion, was some how replied to with this idiocy.

I stated, as fact, that we're not killing Muslims , that NO ONE is killing Muslims , because they are Muslim. It's an asinine claim, which has absolutely nothing to back it up, yet our GLORIOUS member of the military double downed, and tried to justify his position w/ some irrelevant minutia about droning, which only his COMMANDER ...oh, never mind. It's too much for you follow.

That comment elicited the response I was looking for and I know I'm glorious, no need to restate it. Thanks.

[AURaptor 1,125]

You're a troll, and intentionally lied, just to start a ruckus on a message board.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Accusing ms Geller of " hate ", while Muslim radicals tried to carry out mass murder ?

Here's your sign .

I do think the msm are playing up the isis claims of being involved are over the top. No proof so far has been found, & isis more likely is trying to ride the coattails of the attack for free PR reasons.

Props to DHS, CIA, DOJ, FBI & the military for... oh, wait. Never mind. They all did jack squat in stopping this attack. A local traffic cop with a sidearm took out the perps with two head shots.

Gun control = a firm grip & a steady aim.

Not an accusation. The woman was even banned from entering the United Kingdom because of it.

Her and the shooters are full of hate, and they both will put innocents in the line of far to get their war.

[AUUSN 823]

You're a troll, and intentionally lied, just to start a ruckus on a message board.

Then put me ignore and shut up.

[AURaptor 1,125]

Not an accusation. The woman was even banned from entering the United Kingdom because of it.

Her and the shooters are full of hate, and they both will put innocents in the line of far to get their war.

So what ? The UK doesn't have the 1st Amendment protection of free speech. Her being banned for calling out radical Islam means nothing. Apparently, you hate free speech. Might want to pack up your bags and head over the pond. Seems you'd be in good company there.

[homersapien 11,392]

homer, if you'd bother to follow the WHOLE thread, you'd see how the discussion evolved.

Persecution of xtians in the M.E., and then this gem gets dropped...

Is this the point where I post the number of Muslims killed executing the war on terror?

In CONTEXT, the issue of Christians being murdered, simply because of their religion, was some how replied to with this idiocy.

I stated, as fact, that we're not killing Muslims , that NO ONE is killing Muslims , because they are Muslim. It's an asinine claim, which has absolutely nothing to back it up, yet our GLORIOUS member of the military double downed, and tried to justify his position w/ some irrelevant minutia about droning, which only his COMMANDER ...oh, never mind. It's too much for you follow.

Well, you actually said: "Number of Muslims killed in war on terror for being Muslim is exactly zero."

While that's precisely and technically correct, it can easily be misconstrued for what USN was getting at - we've knowingly killed plenty of non-enemy or even friendly Muslims in the prosecution of this war.

In fact, one could argue that such (accepted) collateral damage does in fact constitute killing Muslims simply because they are Muslims.

I think that was the point USN was making. No one suggested we have simply kill Muslims as a matter of policy.

So why can't you take your technically accurate statement and expand or explain it without being an a**hole? You'd both get your point across, and USN would even agree with you.

In other words, you don't have to be a dipwad at every opportunity.

[homersapien 11,392]

The Complexity of Stupid.

Right. I'll never get that.

Oh, and a quick review of the thread....

...our lax enemy identification standards in executing drone strikes have led to people being killed simply because they are Muslim.

Now see, if I had accused our Commander OF Chief targeting Muslims to kill, simply because they're Muslim, why, I don't know what sort of hateful names I'd be called.

But golly, our Commander OF Chief is ...well, at the very least friendly towards Muslims, having BEEN one, and being the son of one and all.. gee, why on EARTH would anyone accuse HIM of murdering folks, JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE MUSLIM ???

It's a real brain twister, that one.

And just in case you are wondering, this is what I mean by acting like a dipwad. ^^

[AURaptor 1,125]

In fact, one could argue that such (accepted) collateral damage does in fact constitute killing Muslims simply because they are Muslims.

No, one could not honestly argue that fact. There was no intent to kill them because they were Muslim.

And yes, that IS exactly the point usn was trying to make as he made in IN RESPONSE to the issue of xtians being genocided in the Middle East, .. why ? BECAUSE THEY ARE FREAKING CHRISTIANS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[AURaptor 1,125]

Sadly, I just have to accept that proggies are intellectually incapable of having rational , logical discussion.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Sadly, I just have to accept that proggies are intellectually incapable of having rational , logical discussion.

That being said, it makes their superciliousness down right comical

[AUUSN 823]

It this the point where I post the number of Muslims killed executing the war on terror?

[TheBlueVue 177]

It this the point where I post the number of Muslims killed executing the war on terror?

Yeah, post it. i understand that ISIS executed 600 christians in one day last week