Islamic Terrorism in the West ( Mega thread)
- Thread starter George Wallace
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 2,735
- Points
- 1,260
White grapes, not virgins apparently ;D
- Reaction score
- 3,627
- Points
- 1,160
They get Signallers....?Loachman said:
- Reaction score
- 1,399
- Points
- 1,260
June 14, 2016
Pro-ISIS group identifies Toronto Pride Parade as ‘excellent target’ for attack
http://globalnews.ca/news/2761693/pro-isis-group-identifies-toronto-pride-parade-as-excellent-target-for-attack/
Pride organizers met representatives of the RCMP, city police and the prime minister’s office on Monday to discuss security concerns.
Pride Toronto vows to continue despite pro-Daesh threat
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/06/14/pride-toronto-vows-to-continue-despite-pro-daesh-threat.html
Police are aware of post from Daesh supporter on German jihadi channel against Toronto parade.
Toronto Pride Parade included in posts on pro-ISIL channel threatening North American attacks
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/toronto-pride-parade-included-in-posts-on-pro-isil-channel-threatening-north-american-attacks
TORONTO — Security for next month’s Toronto Pride Parade was being “evaluated on an ongoing basis,” a Toronto Police spokesman said Tuesday after a threat to the event was posted on a pro-ISIL propaganda channel.
Pro-ISIS group identifies Toronto Pride Parade as ‘excellent target’ for attack
http://globalnews.ca/news/2761693/pro-isis-group-identifies-toronto-pride-parade-as-excellent-target-for-attack/
Pride organizers met representatives of the RCMP, city police and the prime minister’s office on Monday to discuss security concerns.
Pride Toronto vows to continue despite pro-Daesh threat
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/06/14/pride-toronto-vows-to-continue-despite-pro-daesh-threat.html
Police are aware of post from Daesh supporter on German jihadi channel against Toronto parade.
Toronto Pride Parade included in posts on pro-ISIL channel threatening North American attacks
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/toronto-pride-parade-included-in-posts-on-pro-isil-channel-threatening-north-american-attacks
TORONTO — Security for next month’s Toronto Pride Parade was being “evaluated on an ongoing basis,” a Toronto Police spokesman said Tuesday after a threat to the event was posted on a pro-ISIL propaganda channel.
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 6,008
- Points
- 1,160
Fair enough, percent wise it's not a large number. When you think of a single person blowing away 50 that 300'000 seems more significant.Remius said:
Ultimately my point is I don't care what Christians or Islam did 1000, 500 or even 50 years ago;I care about today and tomorrow.
The problem isn't just Toyota pickup driving black bandana wearing extremists. The problem is so called "every day" Muslims who go from zero to murder their daughter for dishonouring the family name at a drop of a hat. Or go berserk if someone insults Islam.
Two police offices were just murdered in France by someone claiming aligence to Isis.
It's a world wide problem.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,677
- Points
- 1,160
Irony is that you can self-identify as any gender that you want in the west, but they will deny someone self identifying as a terrorist.
- Reaction score
- 2,735
- Points
- 1,260
PuckChaser said:
And there are still folks who say that you are what you are no matter what you say or feel, too - if self-ID isn't enough in these situations, is it enough in others? Or just one tile in the mosaic? With the Orlando attack, it looks like there's WAY more tiles to consider than in other, more straightforward cases.Colin P said:
- Reaction score
- 1,399
- Points
- 1,260
milnews.ca said:
Regarding San Bernardino and Orlando,
06/14/16
Because EMS could not get to them during the standoff many victims probably just bled to death.
http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20160614/orlando-shooting-stirs-dec-2-memories-for-emergency-doctors
San Bernardino Doctor wants to save lives of mass shooting victims by getting EMS Paramedics to them faster.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,505
- Points
- 1,010
Jarnhamar said:
To be fair here, Jarnhamar, the muslims that go berserk when someone allegedly insults Islam are usually found in countries that call themselves Muslim countries (not in the West) and where the general population that "go berserk" likely hasn't a clue what has been said about Islam or where, and are riled up about it by local Islamic leadership, without which they would not even know that "Islam has been insulted".
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
The Daily Caller http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/14/exclusive-obamas-counter-terrorism-policies-guarantee-another-terror-attack-before-election/#ixzz4BfnI3JMI (Plenty of links in the article)
Terror Expert: Obama’s Practically Guaranteeing Another Attack Before Election
Christian Datoc
8:36 PM 06/14/2016
In an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller, foreign policy and terrorism expert Patrick Poole stated that the Obama administration’s counter-terrorism policies make it impossible for government agencies to prevent terror attacks and that the Orlando nightclub shooting will not be “the last attack on U.S. soil we’ll see before the election.”
Poole states that principles outlined in the Countering Violent Extremism doctrine - Obama’s politically correct guidelines that dictate how agencies conduct security operations - “border, if not pass, the line of criminal negligence.”
“In all three areas (below), by the White House’s own standards, the CVE has been a complete failure.”
•Enhance engagement with local communities
•Build government and law expertise for preventing violent extremism
•Counter violent extremist propaganda
He argues that the “inability to identify the ideological drivers is a feature, not a bug, of CVE.”
Sponsored Links by
“It’s completely designed for that, to completely remove any ideological discussion or examination from anything doing with counterterrorism. That’s its purpose, so in that effect it’s the only thing about CVE that’s working.”
Poole pointed to the purging of FBI training materials and the dissolution of the State Department’s Center for Strategic Communications to illustrate the CVE’s serious shortcomings.
“The Washington Post actually reported back in [December],” about the ineffectiveness of the CSS. “It’s such a fucking catastrophe, that they had to shut the whole thing down. They did an internal report about their effectiveness and found out it was worse than doing nothing. It was actually aiding the enemy.”
INCOMPETENCE AND PARTISAN POLITICS
Poole explicitly stated that the Obama Administration is not intentionally hampering America’s ability to effectively counter domestic terrorists.
Instead, he argues the flaws, inherent within White House policies, are produced by a combination of government officials’ incompetence and partisan politics.
“A lot of these people - I don’t want to say are dumb, they’re highly educated - they just have no fucking idea what they’re talking about,” he told TheDC. “There is a knowledge aspect, ‘well we don’t want to go make some sweeping statement about Islamic law,’ to which my immediate response is ‘what manuals of Islamic law, what Sharia have you actually read?’ They haven’t read any. That, in and of itself, is a professional failure to do their job.”
“If they’re out speaking about this, and they say this isn’t something we need to worry about - and that they have no idea what’s actually in it - there’s a professional negligence in not doing that.”
Poole noted that popular Sharia texts, like “Reliance of the Traveler,” “are available in English. You can go to any Islamic bookstore and buy these things.”
Furthermore, the vehicle for properly identifying terrorist threats totally breaks down “when you add politics into it.”
“The people in these agencies, particularly the decision makers, they’re not going to say anything that gets them uninvited to the cocktail parties or that they get a phone call from the White House,” he explained. “The result of that, time and time again, is that we see dead people. People are dying because of this.”
“Every single one of these incidents is testimony to how the utterly bizarre policy combined with their inbred penchant for political correctness has directly led to the loss of American lives on American soil.”
KNOWN WOLF TERRORISTS
Nothing exemplifies government agencies’ inability to stop terror attacks from occurring on U.S. soil better than the concept of a “known wolf terrorist,” a pattern which Poole himself characterized.
In Poole’s words, the “known wolf” is “a case where the FBI knew about them before hand and didn’t do anything,” and this list of terrorists include Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan, the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston Bombing) and the Orlando nightclub gunman Omar Mateen.
“Major Hasan was emailing with [deceased Al-Qaeda recruiter] Anwar Al-Awlaki, where the second-to-last email was about justifying attacks on his fellow soldiers,” Poole said of the former Army psychiatrist who murdered 13 soldiers and wounded 30 others in Fort Hood, TX in 2009. “The FBI put out a press release saying ‘oh, that email correspondence, it was just about religious matters’ so we closed the case.”
“It took us years to get the emails, and then we found out that was complete horse shit,” Poole added.
He also explained how the Russian Federation’s intelligence agency had in fact alerted the FBI to the possibility that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been radicalized before he and his brother bombed the Boston Marathon in 2013, killing 3 and injuring more than 200 in the process.
“The FSB [Russian intelligence service] warned the FBI twice about Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s contacts over in Dagestan. The FBI did absolutely nothing with it. It’s almost the same thing we saw with Orlando.”
Just like the Tsarnaev brothers and Major Hasan, Omar Mateen was on the FBI’s terror watch list before committing his heinous attack on the Pulse Nightclub on Sunday.
Mateen had previously been the subject of a federal investigation, yet the case was dropped after investigators deemed the terroristic threats he made to coworkers as reactions to “being marginalized because of his Muslim faith.” (RELATED: FBI Called Off Investigation Of Orlando Shooter Because They Thought His Coworkers Were Racist)
REAL WORLD CONSEQUENCES
In Poole’s eyes, Obama’s counter-terrorism policies make it impossible to label and prevent terror attacks, which is effectively worse than not having any protocols in the first place.
“Was it a surprise that the FBI wasn’t able to see that Omar Mateen was a serious problem? Of course not. They can’t identify the threat.”
“The inability to define the threat has real world consequences. How do you tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy. So how the administration’s policies have played out, you’re not able to distinguish. The extremists use the American-Muslim community as a shield. If you’re criticizing me, you’re criticizing all Muslims.”
Poole also told TheDC that in addition to hampering law enforcement efforts, Obama’s policies “end up stigmatizing the Muslim community,” leaving them vulnerable to attack from American vigilantes, disillusioned by the government’s inability to keep them safe.
“I’m surprised we haven’t seen it already,” he noted. “You’re going to have some knuckleheads go out there and say, ‘damnit I’m mad they’re not doing anything. I’m going to go shoot up a mosque.’ The administration’s policies are endangering American-Muslims.”
In closing, Poole warned that terrorist “threats are proliferating.”
“I don’t think this is the last attack on U.S. soil we’ll see before the election.”
Terror Expert: Obama’s Practically Guaranteeing Another Attack Before Election
Christian Datoc
8:36 PM 06/14/2016
In an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller, foreign policy and terrorism expert Patrick Poole stated that the Obama administration’s counter-terrorism policies make it impossible for government agencies to prevent terror attacks and that the Orlando nightclub shooting will not be “the last attack on U.S. soil we’ll see before the election.”
Poole states that principles outlined in the Countering Violent Extremism doctrine - Obama’s politically correct guidelines that dictate how agencies conduct security operations - “border, if not pass, the line of criminal negligence.”
“In all three areas (below), by the White House’s own standards, the CVE has been a complete failure.”
•Enhance engagement with local communities
•Build government and law expertise for preventing violent extremism
•Counter violent extremist propaganda
He argues that the “inability to identify the ideological drivers is a feature, not a bug, of CVE.”
Sponsored Links by
“It’s completely designed for that, to completely remove any ideological discussion or examination from anything doing with counterterrorism. That’s its purpose, so in that effect it’s the only thing about CVE that’s working.”
Poole pointed to the purging of FBI training materials and the dissolution of the State Department’s Center for Strategic Communications to illustrate the CVE’s serious shortcomings.
“The Washington Post actually reported back in [December],” about the ineffectiveness of the CSS. “It’s such a fucking catastrophe, that they had to shut the whole thing down. They did an internal report about their effectiveness and found out it was worse than doing nothing. It was actually aiding the enemy.”
INCOMPETENCE AND PARTISAN POLITICS
Poole explicitly stated that the Obama Administration is not intentionally hampering America’s ability to effectively counter domestic terrorists.
Instead, he argues the flaws, inherent within White House policies, are produced by a combination of government officials’ incompetence and partisan politics.
“A lot of these people - I don’t want to say are dumb, they’re highly educated - they just have no fucking idea what they’re talking about,” he told TheDC. “There is a knowledge aspect, ‘well we don’t want to go make some sweeping statement about Islamic law,’ to which my immediate response is ‘what manuals of Islamic law, what Sharia have you actually read?’ They haven’t read any. That, in and of itself, is a professional failure to do their job.”
“If they’re out speaking about this, and they say this isn’t something we need to worry about - and that they have no idea what’s actually in it - there’s a professional negligence in not doing that.”
Poole noted that popular Sharia texts, like “Reliance of the Traveler,” “are available in English. You can go to any Islamic bookstore and buy these things.”
Furthermore, the vehicle for properly identifying terrorist threats totally breaks down “when you add politics into it.”
“The people in these agencies, particularly the decision makers, they’re not going to say anything that gets them uninvited to the cocktail parties or that they get a phone call from the White House,” he explained. “The result of that, time and time again, is that we see dead people. People are dying because of this.”
“Every single one of these incidents is testimony to how the utterly bizarre policy combined with their inbred penchant for political correctness has directly led to the loss of American lives on American soil.”
KNOWN WOLF TERRORISTS
Nothing exemplifies government agencies’ inability to stop terror attacks from occurring on U.S. soil better than the concept of a “known wolf terrorist,” a pattern which Poole himself characterized.
In Poole’s words, the “known wolf” is “a case where the FBI knew about them before hand and didn’t do anything,” and this list of terrorists include Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan, the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston Bombing) and the Orlando nightclub gunman Omar Mateen.
“Major Hasan was emailing with [deceased Al-Qaeda recruiter] Anwar Al-Awlaki, where the second-to-last email was about justifying attacks on his fellow soldiers,” Poole said of the former Army psychiatrist who murdered 13 soldiers and wounded 30 others in Fort Hood, TX in 2009. “The FBI put out a press release saying ‘oh, that email correspondence, it was just about religious matters’ so we closed the case.”
“It took us years to get the emails, and then we found out that was complete horse shit,” Poole added.
He also explained how the Russian Federation’s intelligence agency had in fact alerted the FBI to the possibility that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been radicalized before he and his brother bombed the Boston Marathon in 2013, killing 3 and injuring more than 200 in the process.
“The FSB [Russian intelligence service] warned the FBI twice about Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s contacts over in Dagestan. The FBI did absolutely nothing with it. It’s almost the same thing we saw with Orlando.”
Just like the Tsarnaev brothers and Major Hasan, Omar Mateen was on the FBI’s terror watch list before committing his heinous attack on the Pulse Nightclub on Sunday.
Mateen had previously been the subject of a federal investigation, yet the case was dropped after investigators deemed the terroristic threats he made to coworkers as reactions to “being marginalized because of his Muslim faith.” (RELATED: FBI Called Off Investigation Of Orlando Shooter Because They Thought His Coworkers Were Racist)
REAL WORLD CONSEQUENCES
In Poole’s eyes, Obama’s counter-terrorism policies make it impossible to label and prevent terror attacks, which is effectively worse than not having any protocols in the first place.
“Was it a surprise that the FBI wasn’t able to see that Omar Mateen was a serious problem? Of course not. They can’t identify the threat.”
“The inability to define the threat has real world consequences. How do you tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy. So how the administration’s policies have played out, you’re not able to distinguish. The extremists use the American-Muslim community as a shield. If you’re criticizing me, you’re criticizing all Muslims.”
Poole also told TheDC that in addition to hampering law enforcement efforts, Obama’s policies “end up stigmatizing the Muslim community,” leaving them vulnerable to attack from American vigilantes, disillusioned by the government’s inability to keep them safe.
“I’m surprised we haven’t seen it already,” he noted. “You’re going to have some knuckleheads go out there and say, ‘damnit I’m mad they’re not doing anything. I’m going to go shoot up a mosque.’ The administration’s policies are endangering American-Muslims.”
In closing, Poole warned that terrorist “threats are proliferating.”
“I don’t think this is the last attack on U.S. soil we’ll see before the election.”
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
The Daily Caller http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/13/lgbt-gun-group-on-orlando-guns-did-not-do-this-a-human-being-did-this/#ixzz4BftaoWWF
LGBT Gun Group On Orlando: GUNS Did Not Do This. A Human Being Did This
Amber Randall
1:25 PM 06/13/2016
A LGBTQ group dedicated to the legal and safe use of firearms for the LGBTQ community put out a press release Sunday that urged people to focus on the Orlando shooter’s heinous actions and not on guns as the problem.
Oman Mir Seddique Mateen killed 49 people in a shooting at a gay nightclub Saturday night in Orlando, Fla. Gwendolyn Patton, the first speaker of the Pink Pistols, came forward Sunday to urge Americans to not automatically blame firearms as the primary cause of the mass shooting.
“The Pink Pistols gives condolences to all family and friends of those killed and injured at Pulse,” Patton said. “This is exactly the kind of heinous act that justifies our existence. At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer’s guns. Let us stay focused on the fact that someone hated gay people so much they were ready to kill or injure so many. A human being did this. The human being’s tools are unimportant when compared to the bleakness of that person’s soul.
Pink Pistols is a group dedicated to the “legal, safe and responsible use of firearms for the sexual minority community.” The group emphasizes teaching LGBTQ people to arm and protect themselves legally.
Patton continued, “I say again, GUNS did not do this. A human being did this, a dead human being. Our job now is not to demonize the man’s tools, but to condemn his acts and work to prevent such acts in the future. It is difficult, if not impossible, to foresee such an event.” But if they cannot be prevented, then they must be stopped as fast as someone tries to start them.”
“It’s sad that we must consider such things, but when there are persons out there who mean us harm, we must find ways to protect ourselves within the law,” Patton concluded.
LGBT Gun Group On Orlando: GUNS Did Not Do This. A Human Being Did This
Amber Randall
1:25 PM 06/13/2016
A LGBTQ group dedicated to the legal and safe use of firearms for the LGBTQ community put out a press release Sunday that urged people to focus on the Orlando shooter’s heinous actions and not on guns as the problem.
Oman Mir Seddique Mateen killed 49 people in a shooting at a gay nightclub Saturday night in Orlando, Fla. Gwendolyn Patton, the first speaker of the Pink Pistols, came forward Sunday to urge Americans to not automatically blame firearms as the primary cause of the mass shooting.
“The Pink Pistols gives condolences to all family and friends of those killed and injured at Pulse,” Patton said. “This is exactly the kind of heinous act that justifies our existence. At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer’s guns. Let us stay focused on the fact that someone hated gay people so much they were ready to kill or injure so many. A human being did this. The human being’s tools are unimportant when compared to the bleakness of that person’s soul.
Pink Pistols is a group dedicated to the “legal, safe and responsible use of firearms for the sexual minority community.” The group emphasizes teaching LGBTQ people to arm and protect themselves legally.
Patton continued, “I say again, GUNS did not do this. A human being did this, a dead human being. Our job now is not to demonize the man’s tools, but to condemn his acts and work to prevent such acts in the future. It is difficult, if not impossible, to foresee such an event.” But if they cannot be prevented, then they must be stopped as fast as someone tries to start them.”
“It’s sad that we must consider such things, but when there are persons out there who mean us harm, we must find ways to protect ourselves within the law,” Patton concluded.
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
I wouldn't go so far as to call that POS a human being.
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
The Daily Caller http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/14/omar-mateen-was-a-registered-democrat-but/#ixzz4BgJRKQIU
Omar Mateen Was A Registered Democrat, BUT…
Jim Treacher
8:55 AM 06/14/2016
If you’re wondering why the Democrats have been screaming about the NRA ever since the Orlando massacre, it’s because they don’t want to talk about the fact that the shooter was one of their own.
Courtesy of Snopes.com, here’s Omar Mateen’s voter registration:
omar-mateen-democrat
Now, you may think that just because Mateen was a registered Democrat, that somehow means Mateen was a registered Democrat. But it’s not that simple, according to Snopes’ Kim LaCapria:
"What that lone fact means is the subject of a good deal of speculation, with possibilities ranging from Mateen’s being a supporter of Democratic ideology to his simply having chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered. Mateen didn’t appear on the FBI’s radar until 2013, and it’s possible that in the ten years between 2006 and 2016 his political outlook (whatever it was to begin with) might have changed radically, even if his voter registration did not)."
In other words, we have a solid fact - Mateen was a registered Democrat - but it makes LaCapria and a lot of other people uncomfortable. So that fact becomes a “Mixture” of true and false. Just because Mateen was a Democrat doesn’t necessarily mean he was a Democrat-Democrat.
You see, being a Democrat makes you a good person. How could a Democrat do something so awful? Well then, he probably wasn’t really a Democrat, even though he was definitely a Democrat.
And that’s how you “think” like a Democrat.
We’re also learning that Mateen was a regular at that same gay nightclub for years, and he used a gay dating app. So, he was a gay Muslim Democrat. He hit the trifecta of victimhood. That means it has to be the gun’s fault, and the NRA’s fault, and the GOP’s fault, and Christians’ fault, and white people’s fault. It’s everybody’s fault but the gay Muslim Democrat who pulled the trigger.
Katie Frates has a terrific piece on this cognitive dissonance among the Democrats. Read the whole thing. Their behavior seems baffling, until you realize that they have to tell themselves these lies just to get through the day. And then they rage at you for reminding them of the truth.
If you’re gay and you think the Democrats give a damn about you, you’re wrong. They’re glad to ruin a baker’s life for refusing to make you a wedding cake, but when a Muslim terrorist comes after you for being who you are, you’re on your own.
P.S.
This weekend's mass shooting in Orlando is another perfect opportunity for Congress to ignore common sense.https://t.co/2myKeufZrn
- Full Frontal (@FullFrontalSamB) June 14, 2016
A gay Muslim Democrat just killed a bunch of people. Common sense dictates that we blame everybody but him. https://t.co/2vWD8v9pOW
- Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) June 14, 2016
Omar Mateen Was A Registered Democrat, BUT…
Jim Treacher
8:55 AM 06/14/2016
If you’re wondering why the Democrats have been screaming about the NRA ever since the Orlando massacre, it’s because they don’t want to talk about the fact that the shooter was one of their own.
Courtesy of Snopes.com, here’s Omar Mateen’s voter registration:
omar-mateen-democrat
Now, you may think that just because Mateen was a registered Democrat, that somehow means Mateen was a registered Democrat. But it’s not that simple, according to Snopes’ Kim LaCapria:
"What that lone fact means is the subject of a good deal of speculation, with possibilities ranging from Mateen’s being a supporter of Democratic ideology to his simply having chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered. Mateen didn’t appear on the FBI’s radar until 2013, and it’s possible that in the ten years between 2006 and 2016 his political outlook (whatever it was to begin with) might have changed radically, even if his voter registration did not)."
In other words, we have a solid fact - Mateen was a registered Democrat - but it makes LaCapria and a lot of other people uncomfortable. So that fact becomes a “Mixture” of true and false. Just because Mateen was a Democrat doesn’t necessarily mean he was a Democrat-Democrat.
You see, being a Democrat makes you a good person. How could a Democrat do something so awful? Well then, he probably wasn’t really a Democrat, even though he was definitely a Democrat.
And that’s how you “think” like a Democrat.
We’re also learning that Mateen was a regular at that same gay nightclub for years, and he used a gay dating app. So, he was a gay Muslim Democrat. He hit the trifecta of victimhood. That means it has to be the gun’s fault, and the NRA’s fault, and the GOP’s fault, and Christians’ fault, and white people’s fault. It’s everybody’s fault but the gay Muslim Democrat who pulled the trigger.
Katie Frates has a terrific piece on this cognitive dissonance among the Democrats. Read the whole thing. Their behavior seems baffling, until you realize that they have to tell themselves these lies just to get through the day. And then they rage at you for reminding them of the truth.
If you’re gay and you think the Democrats give a damn about you, you’re wrong. They’re glad to ruin a baker’s life for refusing to make you a wedding cake, but when a Muslim terrorist comes after you for being who you are, you’re on your own.
P.S.
This weekend's mass shooting in Orlando is another perfect opportunity for Congress to ignore common sense.https://t.co/2myKeufZrn
- Full Frontal (@FullFrontalSamB) June 14, 2016
A gay Muslim Democrat just killed a bunch of people. Common sense dictates that we blame everybody but him. https://t.co/2vWD8v9pOW
- Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) June 14, 2016
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
The Daily Caller http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/13/an-islamic-terrorist-slaughtered-gay-men-and-democrats-wont-admit-it/#ixzz4BgK4WuAR
An Islamic Terrorist Slaughtered Gay Men, And Democrats Won’t Admit It
Katie Frates
10:51 PM 06/13/2016
The Democratic Party is facing an identity crisis: one of its favorite minorities just slaughtered 49 members of one of its other favorite minorities.
Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen entered Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla., early in the morning Sunday and proceeded to massacre 49 innocent people and wound 53 others before police killed him hours later. He was allegedly enraged at seeing two men kissing a couple months prior to the shooting, according to his father, Mir Seddique. Seddique insists the rampage had nothing to do with religion, but Mateen called 911 and pledged allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi before entering Pulse.
If you’re unaware of ISIS’s position on homosexuality, the radical Islamic group likes to throw gay men off buildings.
The Democratic Party, liberal media and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton have danced around any association between Islam and radicalism for years. Clinton finally admitted the existence of “radical Islamism” Monday during a speech about the Orlando attack after dodging the phrase during the San Bernardino and Paris attacks. President Barack Obama, Clinton, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, and outlets like MSNBC and CNN have all attacked Republicans for connecting the barbarism of ISIS, al-Qaida and terrorists like Mateen, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Mali to Islam.
So what happens when a minority Democrats have championed for decades is attacked by something Democrats say doesn’t exist?
Perhaps nothing immediately, but it’s impossible to ignore the carefully-selected sentences, vague, nondescript platitudes, and finger-pointing at gun control. None of which is the Democratic Party standing up for the LGBT community and condemning a radical sect of Islam. A sect which unwaveringly declares it’s violent hatred for the LGBT community.
Maybe it was easy to ignore because no radical Muslim had targeted the LGBT community in America until now. The atrocities were safely tucked away on another continent, separated by vast oceans, America’s fatigue of anything in the Middle East, and our short attention spans. It never directly impacted the Democratic Party’s voters, until now.
Muslim Americans lean heavily Democrat, and so do LGBT Americans. Pew Research Center found in 2011 that 70 percent of Muslims identify as Democratic or lean Democratic. A measly 11 percent identify as Republican or lean Republican, and 19 percent identify as independent or don’t lean either way. A 2012 Gallup survey showed 44 percent of LGBT Americans identifying as Democratic and a paltry 13 percent Republican. Forty-three percent identify as independent.
The Democratic Party is walking a tightrope, and it’s stumbling. When you refuse to stand up for anything, you stand up for nothing; A community of people is wounded, and the party they’ve looked to as a champion of their civil rights is refusing to acknowledge an undeniable fact.
A radical Islamic terrorist murdered 49 defenseless gay people, and the LGBT community knows it.
An Islamic Terrorist Slaughtered Gay Men, And Democrats Won’t Admit It
Katie Frates
10:51 PM 06/13/2016
The Democratic Party is facing an identity crisis: one of its favorite minorities just slaughtered 49 members of one of its other favorite minorities.
Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen entered Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla., early in the morning Sunday and proceeded to massacre 49 innocent people and wound 53 others before police killed him hours later. He was allegedly enraged at seeing two men kissing a couple months prior to the shooting, according to his father, Mir Seddique. Seddique insists the rampage had nothing to do with religion, but Mateen called 911 and pledged allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi before entering Pulse.
If you’re unaware of ISIS’s position on homosexuality, the radical Islamic group likes to throw gay men off buildings.
The Democratic Party, liberal media and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton have danced around any association between Islam and radicalism for years. Clinton finally admitted the existence of “radical Islamism” Monday during a speech about the Orlando attack after dodging the phrase during the San Bernardino and Paris attacks. President Barack Obama, Clinton, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, and outlets like MSNBC and CNN have all attacked Republicans for connecting the barbarism of ISIS, al-Qaida and terrorists like Mateen, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Mali to Islam.
So what happens when a minority Democrats have championed for decades is attacked by something Democrats say doesn’t exist?
Perhaps nothing immediately, but it’s impossible to ignore the carefully-selected sentences, vague, nondescript platitudes, and finger-pointing at gun control. None of which is the Democratic Party standing up for the LGBT community and condemning a radical sect of Islam. A sect which unwaveringly declares it’s violent hatred for the LGBT community.
Maybe it was easy to ignore because no radical Muslim had targeted the LGBT community in America until now. The atrocities were safely tucked away on another continent, separated by vast oceans, America’s fatigue of anything in the Middle East, and our short attention spans. It never directly impacted the Democratic Party’s voters, until now.
Muslim Americans lean heavily Democrat, and so do LGBT Americans. Pew Research Center found in 2011 that 70 percent of Muslims identify as Democratic or lean Democratic. A measly 11 percent identify as Republican or lean Republican, and 19 percent identify as independent or don’t lean either way. A 2012 Gallup survey showed 44 percent of LGBT Americans identifying as Democratic and a paltry 13 percent Republican. Forty-three percent identify as independent.
The Democratic Party is walking a tightrope, and it’s stumbling. When you refuse to stand up for anything, you stand up for nothing; A community of people is wounded, and the party they’ve looked to as a champion of their civil rights is refusing to acknowledge an undeniable fact.
A radical Islamic terrorist murdered 49 defenseless gay people, and the LGBT community knows it.
- Reaction score
- 5,022
- Points
- 1,060
Oldgateboatdriver said:
So Germany, France and Britain are Muslim countries now?
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
National Review http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436670/orlando-shooting-jihadist-terror-liberals-blame-christians?
Christians Didn’t Commit the Orlando Massacre
David French June 15, 2016 2:41 PM
Omar Mateen did.
We are now fully through the looking glass. A Muslim man walked into a gay nightclub and gunned down 49 men and women, most of them gay or lesbian. He paused in the middle of his massacre to call 911 and a local television station, making clear that he wanted the world to know he had pledged allegiance to ISIS. There are no dog whistles here. This is a textbook example of jihadism in action, plain and simple.
Yet somehow, Omar Mateen’s massacre has put American Christians on the defensive.
Yesterday, Anderson Cooper grilled Florida attorney general Pam Bondi, accusing her of hypocrisy for expressions of support for slain Floridians. Why was she hypocritical? Because she opposed same-sex marriage:
Today, the New York Times editorialized about the domestic threat to LGBT Americans and declared that they were “casualties of a society where hate has deep roots.” The “society” the Times condemned wasn’t the ISIS caliphate — it was America, and specifically states such as Texas and North Carolina that are fighting federal edicts that demand that men should have access to women’s restrooms. The Times couldn’t bring itself to condemn Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, but it attacked North Carolina governor Pat McCrory and Texas governor Greg Abbott.
Even well-meaning Christians are adopting the secular-progressive line. In a viral Facebook post, popular writer and speaker Jen Hatmaker declared, “We cannot with any integrity honor in death those we failed to honor in life.” She then proceeded to offer a standard leftist broadside against Evangelicals, arguing that Christian “anti-LGBTQ sentiment has paved a long runway to hate crimes.”
The principles, such as they exist, seem to be this: If you oppose same-sex marriage or mixed-gender bathrooms, then you not only can’t legitimately grieve the loss of gay lives, you’re partially responsible for the massacre in Orlando. Conservative efforts to protect religious freedom and freedom of association from unprecedented infringement will kill people. Never mind that all the actual evidence in the case points to Islamic motivations extrapolated from well-known and widely shared interpretations of Shariah law, somehow those darn Baptists are to blame.
Does this mean that Barack Obama would have been complicit in the massacre if it had happened four years ago, before he publicly changed his stance on same-sex marriage? What about Hillary Clinton? She opposed gay marriage until 2013. Her husband signed the Defense of Marriage Act. The Orlando shooter lived for years under Democratic administrations that opposed same-sex marriage. I guess Bill Clinton shares some blame as well.
Some on the left simply refuse to believe what terrorists say about themselves and about their intentions.
I don’t have the words adequate to express my contempt for this view. Does any living, sentient being believe that if a Christian had launched this attack, these same liberals wouldn’t blame his religious beliefs? The so-called “reality-based community” ignores the actual evidence in the attack - Mateen’s own loudly declared jihadist beliefs - in an attempt to shame a community whose primary “sin” is opposing the sexual revolution.
But there is something even more sinister at work than garden-variety anti-Christian bigotry, aided and abetted by gullible believers such as Hatmaker: Americans are being purposefully and intentionally distracted from our true enemies. Once again, the jihadist threat is being minimized.
Some on the left simply refuse to believe what terrorists say about themselves and about their intentions. Osama bin Laden couldn’t have really attacked the World Trade Center in part out of a desire to avenge Christians’ 15th-century conquest of Muslim Spain. Iranian leaders don’t really mean “death to America.” Muslim nations that mandate the death penalty or other draconian criminal punishments for homosexuality don’t truly express the will of their people.
The result is bigotry running two ways - an unreasoning, irrational hatred of American Christians and a comprehensive denial of Muslim moral agency. American Christians are responsible for things they don’t believe. Sharia-observant Muslims, by contrast, aren’t responsible for the things they do believe.
And make no mistake, said Muslims don’t care a whit what the New York Times, Anderson Cooper, Jen Hatmaker, or any other anti-Evangelical terror apologist has to say. To them, one American life taken is as good as any other. They will attack again, maybe at another gay bar, or another office Christmas party, or a coffee house, or a sporting event, or a church. And when they do, there will surely be some Americans who excuse their actions out of eagerness to blame other Americans, instead.
- David French is an attorney, and a staff writer at National Review.
Christians Didn’t Commit the Orlando Massacre
David French June 15, 2016 2:41 PM
Omar Mateen did.
We are now fully through the looking glass. A Muslim man walked into a gay nightclub and gunned down 49 men and women, most of them gay or lesbian. He paused in the middle of his massacre to call 911 and a local television station, making clear that he wanted the world to know he had pledged allegiance to ISIS. There are no dog whistles here. This is a textbook example of jihadism in action, plain and simple.
Yet somehow, Omar Mateen’s massacre has put American Christians on the defensive.
Yesterday, Anderson Cooper grilled Florida attorney general Pam Bondi, accusing her of hypocrisy for expressions of support for slain Floridians. Why was she hypocritical? Because she opposed same-sex marriage:
Today, the New York Times editorialized about the domestic threat to LGBT Americans and declared that they were “casualties of a society where hate has deep roots.” The “society” the Times condemned wasn’t the ISIS caliphate — it was America, and specifically states such as Texas and North Carolina that are fighting federal edicts that demand that men should have access to women’s restrooms. The Times couldn’t bring itself to condemn Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, but it attacked North Carolina governor Pat McCrory and Texas governor Greg Abbott.
Even well-meaning Christians are adopting the secular-progressive line. In a viral Facebook post, popular writer and speaker Jen Hatmaker declared, “We cannot with any integrity honor in death those we failed to honor in life.” She then proceeded to offer a standard leftist broadside against Evangelicals, arguing that Christian “anti-LGBTQ sentiment has paved a long runway to hate crimes.”
The principles, such as they exist, seem to be this: If you oppose same-sex marriage or mixed-gender bathrooms, then you not only can’t legitimately grieve the loss of gay lives, you’re partially responsible for the massacre in Orlando. Conservative efforts to protect religious freedom and freedom of association from unprecedented infringement will kill people. Never mind that all the actual evidence in the case points to Islamic motivations extrapolated from well-known and widely shared interpretations of Shariah law, somehow those darn Baptists are to blame.
Does this mean that Barack Obama would have been complicit in the massacre if it had happened four years ago, before he publicly changed his stance on same-sex marriage? What about Hillary Clinton? She opposed gay marriage until 2013. Her husband signed the Defense of Marriage Act. The Orlando shooter lived for years under Democratic administrations that opposed same-sex marriage. I guess Bill Clinton shares some blame as well.
Some on the left simply refuse to believe what terrorists say about themselves and about their intentions.
I don’t have the words adequate to express my contempt for this view. Does any living, sentient being believe that if a Christian had launched this attack, these same liberals wouldn’t blame his religious beliefs? The so-called “reality-based community” ignores the actual evidence in the attack - Mateen’s own loudly declared jihadist beliefs - in an attempt to shame a community whose primary “sin” is opposing the sexual revolution.
But there is something even more sinister at work than garden-variety anti-Christian bigotry, aided and abetted by gullible believers such as Hatmaker: Americans are being purposefully and intentionally distracted from our true enemies. Once again, the jihadist threat is being minimized.
Some on the left simply refuse to believe what terrorists say about themselves and about their intentions. Osama bin Laden couldn’t have really attacked the World Trade Center in part out of a desire to avenge Christians’ 15th-century conquest of Muslim Spain. Iranian leaders don’t really mean “death to America.” Muslim nations that mandate the death penalty or other draconian criminal punishments for homosexuality don’t truly express the will of their people.
The result is bigotry running two ways - an unreasoning, irrational hatred of American Christians and a comprehensive denial of Muslim moral agency. American Christians are responsible for things they don’t believe. Sharia-observant Muslims, by contrast, aren’t responsible for the things they do believe.
And make no mistake, said Muslims don’t care a whit what the New York Times, Anderson Cooper, Jen Hatmaker, or any other anti-Evangelical terror apologist has to say. To them, one American life taken is as good as any other. They will attack again, maybe at another gay bar, or another office Christmas party, or a coffee house, or a sporting event, or a church. And when they do, there will surely be some Americans who excuse their actions out of eagerness to blame other Americans, instead.
- David French is an attorney, and a staff writer at National Review.
- Reaction score
- 290
- Points
- 980
National Review http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436626/obama-orlando-speech-downplaying-radical-islam-helps-trump?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Wednesday%20Trending%20Email%20Reoccurring%202016-06-15&utm_term=NR5PM
Obama: Whose Side Is He On?
by Mona Charen June 14, 2016 6:29 PM
The president has a pattern of downplaying Islamist motivations and dismissing Americans’ fears.
Whole doctoral dissertations could be devoted to the question of what makes President Obama angry and what does not. His Tuesday broadside against Donald Trump stood in marked contrast to Sunday’s somewhat cold response to the Orlando massacre. This is a pattern.
Mr. Obama did not name Trump, referring to him only as a “politician who tweets and appears on cable-news shows.” I’m not inclined to defend Trump, and will not do so now - his notion that we bar all Muslims from traveling to the United States is laden with unintended consequences. But President Obama’s studied refusal to acknowledge the reality of Islamic-inspired violence has helped to create the Trump phenomenon. In fact, it may well be the greatest contribution to Trump’s success. Some say that presidential elections are often referenda on the last guy: Carter was the anti-Nixon, Reagan was the anti-Carter, Clinton was the anti-Bush, and Obama was the anti-Bush. Thus, Trump is the anti-Obama.
Mr. Obama fumed at those who criticize his administration for refusing to use the words “radical Islam.” He mocked the idea that language matters: “Not once has an adviser of mine said, ‘Man, if we use that phrase, we are going to turn this whole thing around,’ not once.” He never tires of slaying straw men. It’s not a matter of intoning magic words. The critique of Obama is that he has so often projected the image of Islam’s defense counsel instead of America’s commander-in-chief.
In fairness (though Obama is rarely fair to those he differs with), it should be noted that George W. Bush was also at pains to shun the impression that the U.S. was at war with Islam. But here’s the difference: Bush never gave the impression that he wasn’t on America’s side, and Obama consistently does. Moreover, when Obama or members of his administration stubbornly refuse to acknowledge what everyone knows to be true, it makes people feel unsafe.
In 2009, Colonel Nidal Hasan, marinated in the writings of Islamic extremists, jumped on a table shouting “allahu akbar” and opened fire on 45 soldiers, killing 13. Mr. Obama was unsure of his motive and warned Americans not to “jump to conclusions.” Until late 2015, the administration declined to call Fort Hood a terrorist attack, preferring the Newspeakish “workplace violence.”
When ISIS-linked terrorists decapitated their American captive James Foley, and released the video on the Internet, Obama went golfing. He later said he regretted this, but that couldn’t erase the signal of indifference.
Bush never gave the impression that he wasn’t on America’s side, and Obama consistently does.
After Islamic extremists in Paris attacked the Charlie Hebdo offices and a Jewish supermarket in January 2015, Mr. Obama spoke of vicious killers who “randomly shoot a bunch of folks at a deli in Paris.” But the attacks could not have been more pointed — a satirical magazine that had caricatured Mohammed and a Jewish store. Did Obama misspeak, or was he downplaying the Islamic-extremist element? When 50 world leaders, including those of Great Britain, France, Germany, Israel, and Russia marched in Paris to show solidarity against terrorism, Mr. Obama skipped the event and failed to send a high-ranking surrogate.
After Muslim terrorists turned the Brussels airport into an abattoir in March, Mr. Obama attended a baseball game in Cuba. Before the bodies had all been buried, he danced the tango in Argentina.
It’s not that Mr. Obama is soft on religiously inspired violence. At the National Prayer Breakfast, he cautioned Americans against “getting on our high horse,” because during the Crusades and the Inquisition, terrible deeds were committed “in the name of Christ.” While Obama played historical tit for tat, terrorists were plotting their next strike.
The pattern has recurred throughout his presidency - from the Boston marathon bombing, to the Paris attacks, to “clock boy,” to the San Bernardino shootings and now the Orlando attack, Obama has downplayed Islamist motivations and dismissed American fears. He reminded The Atlantic magazine that you were more likely to die in your bathtub than in a terror attack.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch expressed the administration’s view succinctly when, after San Bernardino, she confided that her “greatest fear” was of an anti-Muslim violent backlash in the United States. That has ever been the president’s chief worry as well, though there has been precious little justification for it. Ironically, Obama has helped to make such a backlash more likely in the future. By steadfastly refusing to make distinctions among Muslims based upon ideology and conduct - by insisting that Muslims are no more plagued by violent extremism than, say, Presbyterians - he has opened the door to Trump, who also makes no distinctions.
- Mona Charen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
Obama: Whose Side Is He On?
by Mona Charen June 14, 2016 6:29 PM
The president has a pattern of downplaying Islamist motivations and dismissing Americans’ fears.
Whole doctoral dissertations could be devoted to the question of what makes President Obama angry and what does not. His Tuesday broadside against Donald Trump stood in marked contrast to Sunday’s somewhat cold response to the Orlando massacre. This is a pattern.
Mr. Obama did not name Trump, referring to him only as a “politician who tweets and appears on cable-news shows.” I’m not inclined to defend Trump, and will not do so now - his notion that we bar all Muslims from traveling to the United States is laden with unintended consequences. But President Obama’s studied refusal to acknowledge the reality of Islamic-inspired violence has helped to create the Trump phenomenon. In fact, it may well be the greatest contribution to Trump’s success. Some say that presidential elections are often referenda on the last guy: Carter was the anti-Nixon, Reagan was the anti-Carter, Clinton was the anti-Bush, and Obama was the anti-Bush. Thus, Trump is the anti-Obama.
Mr. Obama fumed at those who criticize his administration for refusing to use the words “radical Islam.” He mocked the idea that language matters: “Not once has an adviser of mine said, ‘Man, if we use that phrase, we are going to turn this whole thing around,’ not once.” He never tires of slaying straw men. It’s not a matter of intoning magic words. The critique of Obama is that he has so often projected the image of Islam’s defense counsel instead of America’s commander-in-chief.
In fairness (though Obama is rarely fair to those he differs with), it should be noted that George W. Bush was also at pains to shun the impression that the U.S. was at war with Islam. But here’s the difference: Bush never gave the impression that he wasn’t on America’s side, and Obama consistently does. Moreover, when Obama or members of his administration stubbornly refuse to acknowledge what everyone knows to be true, it makes people feel unsafe.
In 2009, Colonel Nidal Hasan, marinated in the writings of Islamic extremists, jumped on a table shouting “allahu akbar” and opened fire on 45 soldiers, killing 13. Mr. Obama was unsure of his motive and warned Americans not to “jump to conclusions.” Until late 2015, the administration declined to call Fort Hood a terrorist attack, preferring the Newspeakish “workplace violence.”
When ISIS-linked terrorists decapitated their American captive James Foley, and released the video on the Internet, Obama went golfing. He later said he regretted this, but that couldn’t erase the signal of indifference.
Bush never gave the impression that he wasn’t on America’s side, and Obama consistently does.
After Islamic extremists in Paris attacked the Charlie Hebdo offices and a Jewish supermarket in January 2015, Mr. Obama spoke of vicious killers who “randomly shoot a bunch of folks at a deli in Paris.” But the attacks could not have been more pointed — a satirical magazine that had caricatured Mohammed and a Jewish store. Did Obama misspeak, or was he downplaying the Islamic-extremist element? When 50 world leaders, including those of Great Britain, France, Germany, Israel, and Russia marched in Paris to show solidarity against terrorism, Mr. Obama skipped the event and failed to send a high-ranking surrogate.
After Muslim terrorists turned the Brussels airport into an abattoir in March, Mr. Obama attended a baseball game in Cuba. Before the bodies had all been buried, he danced the tango in Argentina.
It’s not that Mr. Obama is soft on religiously inspired violence. At the National Prayer Breakfast, he cautioned Americans against “getting on our high horse,” because during the Crusades and the Inquisition, terrible deeds were committed “in the name of Christ.” While Obama played historical tit for tat, terrorists were plotting their next strike.
The pattern has recurred throughout his presidency - from the Boston marathon bombing, to the Paris attacks, to “clock boy,” to the San Bernardino shootings and now the Orlando attack, Obama has downplayed Islamist motivations and dismissed American fears. He reminded The Atlantic magazine that you were more likely to die in your bathtub than in a terror attack.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch expressed the administration’s view succinctly when, after San Bernardino, she confided that her “greatest fear” was of an anti-Muslim violent backlash in the United States. That has ever been the president’s chief worry as well, though there has been precious little justification for it. Ironically, Obama has helped to make such a backlash more likely in the future. By steadfastly refusing to make distinctions among Muslims based upon ideology and conduct - by insisting that Muslims are no more plagued by violent extremism than, say, Presbyterians - he has opened the door to Trump, who also makes no distinctions.
- Mona Charen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 530
Just a quick thanks to all who posted links to the muslim communities reactions - greatly appreciated. 
Similar threads
- jollyjacktar
- International Defence and Security
