|
|
Post by MrEMonkey on May 6, 2015 14:16:41 GMT
It's like they expect it to be a one way street. Islam and their political nonsense are sacred cows above all ridicule, but they have blinders on when it comes to ridiculing both Christians and Christianity. They don't even see it.That's just how moral and intellectual cowards are.  |
|
|
|
Post by MrEMonkey on May 6, 2015 14:18:32 GMT
Oh, and according to ISIS (if there really is a link between the two) throwing their lives away while only inflicting a superficial wound to the ankle of the unarmed security guard was all part of their big plan.  I'm okay with that plan. They want to show us how easily they give their lives for their cause, and Texans showed them how easily we can take their lives. Seems like a win-win to me.  |
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on May 6, 2015 15:08:48 GMT
That's just how moral and intellectual cowards are. True enough, just wish it wasn't like that. Liberal statists and radical Muslims really make strange bedfellows though. For instance...Liberals love them some gay people, meanwhile radical Muslims are tossing them from multistory roof-tops. Liberals supposedly want to empower women (while usually doing the exact opposite, but still....they give it lip service), in contrast strict Muslims force women to wear a burka, want them to stay at home or if they go out they must accompany a male family member and fight to keep them uneducated. The list goes on and on. Doesn't really make sense. Not really sure how that whole thought process plays out in their minds other than the fact that the majority of Muslims aren't Western and so fall into the ' Oppressed People' category. I'm okay with that plan. They want to show us how easily they give their lives for their cause, and Texans showed them how easily we can take their lives. Seems like a win-win to me. Yeah, I'm totally okay with it too. Just wondering if another local attack is just around the corner since those two guys did a really, really, really poor job of striking fear and terror into anyone. Must be somewhat embarrassing for them. Past couple days I've noticed an increased police presence in both Garland and the surrounding cities. Seen more cops in the last few days then I've seen all year. In Garland, North Dallas, Mesquite, Richardson and Rowlett besides the local PD for those cities I've seen several Sherriffs and Constables patrolling and normally they stay more down in the county. |
|
|
|
Post by rickoshea on May 6, 2015 15:59:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by rickoshea on May 6, 2015 16:28:18 GMT
Even after all that pissing and moaning, no one got a warning in their profiles. NOW! If it'd have been me or Nameless, we'd have been banned. Uh-Oh, Nameless is throwing down the gauntlet.... ETA: Thread locked Just for posterity: kilo 147 wrote: It'd be like me going to an open carry tea party rally and shitting on an American flag. It's just done to instigate violence, nothing else.
Nameless replied: Sure the tea party people won't be happy and would probably throw you out, but they wouldn't draw weapons and try to kill you. That's the difference.
Sure, I think it was a poor choice of events. But they broke NO laws of the USA.
The "no drawing" law is a religious law, and not a law of the USA. There are countries who enforce this law since they are ruled by a religious group (see theocracy) and follow the laws of the religion as the national law. So, do I need to comply to all religious laws even if I am not a member of that religion? Do I have to eat kosher and halal qualified food products in order not to offend someone? If so, just get rid of pigs and bacon right now. Oh wait, you like bacon? Too bad, it offends other religions so it has to go. What if offended religions killed over eating bacon? Where does it all stop?!
There are laws on manufacturers on how to become kosher qualified and the processes needed to comply, but they don't force every manufacturer to be kosher qualified nor force everyone to only eat kosher products. So why am I forced by a religion to comply with their own laws which are not laws within the nation which I reside?
On the flip side of the coin, we as a nation do not enforce our laws on other nations. A great example, we do not enforce our drug laws on the Netherlands. Sometimes there is cooperation among nations in certain situations where it is beneficial to both nations. But US laws do NOT apply to any other nation.
Hell, we as a nation do not agree with other states on laws, lol.
Warning, INC!
Shrap: Godfuckingdamnit. Congratulations on being literally the reason why we can't have nice things. I'm putting you in Timeout for the next week. |
|
|
|
Post by LowKey on May 6, 2015 18:16:55 GMT
Even after all that pissing and moaning, no one got a warning in their profiles. NOW! If it'd have been me or Nameless, we'd have been banned. Uh-Oh, Nameless is throwing down the gauntlet.... ETA: Thread locked Just for posterity:
Shrap: Godfuckingdamnit. Congratulations on being literally the reason why we can't have nice things. I'm putting you in Timeout for the next week.Interesting. Just a post or two previous to this one she threatened a warning to any and all who violated the "Religion" rule over there. Last I checked, "God-fucking-dammit", would meet the criteria for breaking that very same "Religion" rule. I wonder if she gave herself a warning. |
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on May 6, 2015 18:45:26 GMT
/takes a Victory Lap
|
|
|
|
Post by scbrian on May 6, 2015 21:52:53 GMT
Off to poke the bear...
|
|
|
|
Post by scbrian on May 6, 2015 21:57:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by rickoshea on May 6, 2015 22:21:37 GMT
Ole whisk.e.limp locked that up pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by scbrian on May 6, 2015 22:58:26 GMT
the bear needs more poking... Off to do it...
|
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on May 6, 2015 23:48:58 GMT
Translation : Points out uncomfortable truths for which I and my associates have few answers. So it's easier to pretend that he violated some rule and whip up some half-hearted, self righteous outrage over that.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrEMonkey on May 7, 2015 0:33:48 GMT
Yeah, he didn't violate the letter of the rule, but that doesn't matter, apparently.
|
|
|
|
Post by scbrian on May 7, 2015 0:48:54 GMT
Like I said in my post, either the rules apply to everyone or they apply to no one. If there is a special protected class of poster on the board, be honest about it and say it. I dont play subtle...
|
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on May 7, 2015 3:47:24 GMT
Well, now we know the officer was armed with a Glock. It's no wonder he was able to defeat any two guys carrying rifles. Odds wouldn't have really been stacked against him until it was at least 5:1...
Any chance that the 'soft body armor' worn by these asshats was just the carrier, or maybe a stab vest, and not an actual Level III or higher rated vest? I could totally see an uninformed person not knowing (for example) that you actually needed the armor insert that is meant to go with the carrier, or that not all protective vests are rated for gunfire.
|
|
