PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: nddons on December 03, 2015, 08:43:44 PM
-
Within hours French police were conducting raids on possible accomplices of the Paris attacks.
Within 36 hours Obama can't call this a terrorist attack.
We are totally fucked when the French have bigger balls than the U.S.A.
And then there's this story:
http://www.scpr.org/news/2015/12/03/56020/san-bernardino-shooting-update-heated-exchange-on/
-
I agree that the French response has been more visible and stronger. I also agree that we should have a better response. However, let's also not forget that when France passed their state of emergency they eroded a lot of citizen's rights. Part of the state of emergency powers allows the government to forbid mass gatherings, limit movements of people and increase the monitoring of people. We don't want to go down that road here. That's allowing the terrorists to win in my book.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/16/france-nationwide-state-of-emergency
-
I think the White House is just now considering the possiblitity that the San Bernandino attack is terrorism, which is actually a big step for them as they have done everything in their power to make this domestic workplace violence. Unless we are willing to face terrorism honestly, and violently we will continue to be victimized, and put at undue risk.
Arm yourselves if you are able. Get training, and practice.
-
I think the White House is just now considering the possiblitity that the San Bernandino attack is terrorism, which is actually a big step for them as they have done everything in their power to make this domestic workplace violence. Unless we are willing to face terrorism honestly, and violently we will continue to be victimized, and put at undue risk.
Arm yourselves if you are able. Get training, and practice.
I guess their team couldn't find a YouTube video to blame it on.
-
I agree that the French response has been more visible and stronger. I also agree that we should have a better response. However, let's also not forget that when France passed their state of emergency they eroded a lot of citizen's rights. Part of the state of emergency powers allows the government to forbid mass gatherings, limit movements of people and increase the monitoring of people. We don't want to go down that road here. That's allowing the terrorists to win in my book.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/16/france-nationwide-state-of-emergency
I don't disagree, and that's a good point. We've seen that anarchy as recently as Hurricane Katrina, with gun confiscations in New Orleans.
But I think our unwillingness to fight radical Islam right here may be our existential downfall.
-
I think the White House is just now considering the possiblitity that the San Bernandino attack is terrorism, which is actually a big step for them as they have done everything in their power to make this domestic workplace violence. Unless we are willing to face terrorism honestly, and violently we will continue to be victimized, and put at undue risk.
Arm yourselves if you are able. Get training, and practice.
And when they finally begrudgingly come to the conclusion that this was terrorism and not just work place violence, they still will not call them Islamic Terrorists, but rather domestic terrorists.
-
I agree that the French response has been more visible and stronger. I also agree that we should have a better response. However, let's also not forget that when France passed their state of emergency they eroded a lot of citizen's rights. Part of the state of emergency powers allows the government to forbid mass gatherings, limit movements of people and increase the monitoring of people. We don't want to go down that road here. That's allowing the terrorists to win in my book.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/16/france-nationwide-state-of-emergency
I don't disagree, and that's a good point. We've seen that anarchy as recently as Hurricane Katrina, with gun confiscations in New Orleans.
But I think our unwillingness to fight radical Islam right here may be our existential downfall.
The President wants to be friends with everyone around the world, which clearly isn't working. I think the other part of it is that he wants to be able to end his term and say that he didn't have any terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during his time. That's why he would rather classify it as work place violence or under some other cause.
As a whole, I don't think it's the American people's unwillingness to fight radical Islam, I think it's that of a select few, those who are in or close to the current administration.
-
I agree that the French response has been more visible and stronger. I also agree that we should have a better response. However, let's also not forget that when France passed their state of emergency they eroded a lot of citizen's rights. Part of the state of emergency powers allows the government to forbid mass gatherings, limit movements of people and increase the monitoring of people. We don't want to go down that road here. That's allowing the terrorists to win in my book.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/16/france-nationwide-state-of-emergency
I don't disagree, and that's a good point. We've seen that anarchy as recently as Hurricane Katrina, with gun confiscations in New Orleans.
But I think our unwillingness to fight radical Islam right here may be our existential downfall.
The President wants to be friends with everyone around the world, which clearly isn't working. I think the other part of it is that he wants to be able to end his term and say that he didn't have any terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during his time. That's why he would rather classify it as work place violence or under some other cause.
As a whole, I don't think it's the American people's unwillingness to fight radical Islam, I think it's that of a select few, those who are in or close to the current administration.
Then the response would be to select an administration next year that would support the people's desires and willingness to fight radical Islam.
-
Then the response would be to select an administration next year that would support the people's desires and willingness to fight radical Islam.
Absolutely. I think the debate is about the best way to fight radical Islam.
-
Then the response would be to select an administration next year that would support the people's desires and willingness to fight radical Islam.
Absolutely. I think the debate is about the best way to fight radical Islam.
I think the debate should be about the best way to fight radical liberalism.
-
I think the debate should be about the best way to fight radical liberalism.
That's a separate debate. Being liberal isn't good enough anymore as evidenced by the disappearance of the "blue dog Democrats". I think the current administration has a lot to do with that. If you're a Democrat and you weren't 100% loyal to the President there were political consequences.