Thread: To you 2nd Amendment freaks out there ...

If that stupid Rush limbaugh parrot is making sence maybe your not drunk enough

"Stop feeding prescription drugs to every child who acts up a little in school. Since some friggin doctor conceived of Attention Deficit Disorder (to name just one of the "new" maladies) students have been drugged to settle them down, or to wake them up, or just to get them through the day."


I couldn't agree more, citizen.

Originally Posted by 36shadow

The division in there society goes back over a 1000 years study your history. The shiites were direct decendants of mohamad and believed that one from such should lead but the sunni believed that any man of considerable character could lead hence the war for the right to lead and the shiites were defeated and have been supressed and abused in muslim society ruled by sunni. This war and divide existed long before we ever existed as a country. Our problem is we think we can resolve the problem between them and that is not going to happen. What ever side we aid the other will certainly hate us . As far as shiites and sunni together living and marrying that is not true I fail to believe that they have distinct different beliefs about the muslim religion although they both recognize the other as muslims there interpretaion and some ways in wich they worship are distinctivly different. If they were together then they were not practicing or devoued ones. Like those who call themselves christians here but have never or will go to church they are not realy christians.

Christians killing Jews and Muslims goes back more than a thousand years, so study your history. And it was the Christians that provided the moral justification for killing six million Jews. That is a division that has a long history.

That Christians aren't killing Jews in the US is due to the secularization of government, the removal of religion from government.

Saddam and the Baathist had removed religion from government, and Sunni and Shia worked together either as Baathist or in opposing the Baathists. Iraqis were nationalists first, and many Shia died fighting Iran, and many Iranian Sunni died defending Iran, so the differences between Shia and Sunni in Iraq, and in Iran for that matter, are much like the differences between the Christians and Jews and Muslims, and between The Christian Church and the Protestants.

Iraq was no more divided along religious lines than the US is divided along religious lines.

The Bush administrations have strongly supported the House of Saud which has done much to promote a religious zealotry and bigotry and sense that what is needed is a good old Islamic Inquisition, following the lead of the Christians. And some may believe that Hitler was almost right in seeking to purify the world, but he was wrong in thinking that the non-Christians should be purged, but the non-Sunni Wahabist need to be purged. Hey, Hitler hated the atheistic commies as much as the Wahabists do.

And your claim that if a Shia married a Sunni than they weren't devote means that you don't believe that a devote Christian can marry a devout Jew, or a devote Catholic can marry a devote Protestant.

This gets into another liberty, of course, the liberty of belief and faith.

By allowing liberty of belief and faith you run the risk of people doing things you believe are wrong. And here is a case where the "conservatives" and "Republicans" are very much against liberty. They seek to deny liberty to gays. They seek to deny liberty to those who reject the statement "life begins at conception."

In order to preserve my liberty when it comes to faith and belief, I must preserve the liberty of those who want to have guns, but I expect those who want the liberty to have guns to preserve my liberty of faith and belief.

And I believe that gays are natural and that life does not begin at conception, and the only thing that can have liberty are individuals and until one is born, one is not an individual. Now if you disagree with me, then that is the price of liberty, but my faith and belief and my liberty in exercising it has not affect on the liberty of any other individual, so the cost of my liberty is merely the possible violation of your faith and belief that my acts or the acts of those I defend are wrong, immoral, illegal.

The extremist views that the US is faced with in Iraq and in other places arise more than anywhere else out of Saudi Arabia, and have long been nurtured by the House of Saud for the same reason that Hitler nurtured hatred of commies and gays and Jews - it created a focus for blaming all ills experienced by the majority, even the ills that Hitler himself created. The easiest way to unite a lot of people is to make them hate a common enemy, and the Wahabists working out of Saudi Arabia have been encouraged by the House of Saud to focus their hatred and to rally people to hate because it is politically expedient to the House of Saud.

The Bush friendship with the House of Saud provides a sort of validity to the idea that Bush is intent on promoting hatred based on religion. The House of Saud has taken offense at those who criticise them, and then been defensive about their activities promoting religious extremism. Add in the simplistic Jew vs Muslim spin on the other divide in the region, and you deny the secular history of the Palestinian and Arab nationalism that was opposed to both European and Soviet influence, and what might be seen as their Zionist proxies. The Palestinian and Arab nationalist movements were led by Christians, socialists, communists (but not Stalinist), and it was the socialist/communist leaning of these nationalists that led the US to support the Muslim Brotherhood who opposed them.

But I get the feeling that you think that liberty is something that only a few in the world can understand, want, and give. That somehow "they" aren't able to understand liberty, even tho the very foundations of liberty came from that part of the world. The problem with that view is that you must believe then that Europeans can't accept liberty, because the Zionists were Europeans and they were the one that established the modern religous state in the region. With the exception of Saudi Arabia, all the governments in the region at the time of creating a religious state, Israel, were secular.

Originally Posted by noneof yourbusiness

If that stupid Rush limbaugh parrot is making sence maybe your not drunk enough

You ignorant kraut, if it were not for you folks, here, I would not even recognize the name of any talk radio hosts. I stopped listening to the radio when most of the stations went Mexican, talk, or rap. Radio has gotten just as bad as TV. Every now and then I'll listen to a baseball game, but thats about it.

Originally Posted by mulp

Christians killing Jews and Muslims goes back more than a thousand years, so study your history. And it was the Christians that provided the moral justification for killing six million Jews. That is a division that has a long history.

That Christians aren't killing Jews in the US is due to the secularization of government, the removal of religion from government.

Saddam and the Baathist had removed religion from government, and Sunni and Shia worked together either as Baathist or in opposing the Baathists. Iraqis were nationalists first, and many Shia died fighting Iran, and many Iranian Sunni died defending Iran, so the differences between Shia and Sunni in Iraq, and in Iran for that matter, are much like the differences between the Christians and Jews and Muslims, and between The Christian Church and the Protestants.

Iraq was no more divided along religious lines than the US is divided along religious lines.

The Bush administrations have strongly supported the House of Saud which has done much to promote a religious zealotry and bigotry and sense that what is needed is a good old Islamic Inquisition, following the lead of the Christians. And some may believe that Hitler was almost right in seeking to purify the world, but he was wrong in thinking that the non-Christians should be purged, but the non-Sunni Wahabist need to be purged. Hey, Hitler hated the atheistic commies as much as the Wahabists do.

And your claim that if a Shia married a Sunni than they weren't devote means that you don't believe that a devote Christian can marry a devout Jew, or a devote Catholic can marry a devote Protestant.

This gets into another liberty, of course, the liberty of belief and faith.

By allowing liberty of belief and faith you run the risk of people doing things you believe are wrong. And here is a case where the "conservatives" and "Republicans" are very much against liberty. They seek to deny liberty to gays. They seek to deny liberty to those who reject the statement "life begins at conception."

In order to preserve my liberty when it comes to faith and belief, I must preserve the liberty of those who want to have guns, but I expect those who want the liberty to have guns to preserve my liberty of faith and belief.

And I believe that gays are natural and that life does not begin at conception, and the only thing that can have liberty are individuals and until one is born, one is not an individual. Now if you disagree with me, then that is the price of liberty, but my faith and belief and my liberty in exercising it has not affect on the liberty of any other individual, so the cost of my liberty is merely the possible violation of your faith and belief that my acts or the acts of those I defend are wrong, immoral, illegal.

The extremist views that the US is faced with in Iraq and in other places arise more than anywhere else out of Saudi Arabia, and have long been nurtured by the House of Saud for the same reason that Hitler nurtured hatred of commies and gays and Jews - it created a focus for blaming all ills experienced by the majority, even the ills that Hitler himself created. The easiest way to unite a lot of people is to make them hate a common enemy, and the Wahabists working out of Saudi Arabia have been encouraged by the House of Saud to focus their hatred and to rally people to hate because it is politically expedient to the House of Saud.

The Bush friendship with the House of Saud provides a sort of validity to the idea that Bush is intent on promoting hatred based on religion. The House of Saud has taken offense at those who criticise them, and then been defensive about their activities promoting religious extremism. Add in the simplistic Jew vs Muslim spin on the other divide in the region, and you deny the secular history of the Palestinian and Arab nationalism that was opposed to both European and Soviet influence, and what might be seen as their Zionist proxies. The Palestinian and Arab nationalist movements were led by Christians, socialists, communists (but not Stalinist), and it was the socialist/communist leaning of these nationalists that led the US to support the Muslim Brotherhood who opposed them.

But I get the feeling that you think that liberty is something that only a few in the world can understand, want, and give. That somehow "they" aren't able to understand liberty, even tho the very foundations of liberty came from that part of the world. The problem with that view is that you must believe then that Europeans can't accept liberty, because the Zionists were Europeans and they were the one that established the modern religous state in the region. With the exception of Saudi Arabia, all the governments in the region at the time of creating a religious state, Israel, were secular.

...Talk about going off on a tangent...

Just as well...

wrong fucking thread apparently.

Originally Posted by pipes

It's about PRESCRIBED drugs and the go-to diagnosis of ADD , ADHD , depression , etc.

These drugs, so liberally dispensed, create a chemical dependancy easily set off balance when stopped.

...Another situation where that magic wand would come in handy.

The gunman in Illinois was off his meds. As I believe the guy in Virginia was.

Originally Posted by mulp

Christians killing Jews and Muslims goes back more than a thousand years, so study your history. And it was the Christians that provided the moral justification for killing six million Jews. That is a division that has a long history.

That Christians aren't killing Jews in the US is due to the secularization of government, the removal of religion from government.

Saddam and the Baathist had removed religion from government, and Sunni and Shia worked together either as Baathist or in opposing the Baathists. Iraqis were nationalists first, and many Shia died fighting Iran, and many Iranian Sunni died defending Iran, so the differences between Shia and Sunni in Iraq, and in Iran for that matter, are much like the differences between the Christians and Jews and Muslims, and between The Christian Church and the Protestants.

Iraq was no more divided along religious lines than the US is divided along religious lines.

The Bush administrations have strongly supported the House of Saud which has done much to promote a religious zealotry and bigotry and sense that what is needed is a good old Islamic Inquisition, following the lead of the Christians. And some may believe that Hitler was almost right in seeking to purify the world, but he was wrong in thinking that the non-Christians should be purged, but the non-Sunni Wahabist need to be purged. Hey, Hitler hated the atheistic commies as much as the Wahabists do.

And your claim that if a Shia married a Sunni than they weren't devote means that you don't believe that a devote Christian can marry a devout Jew, or a devote Catholic can marry a devote Protestant.

This gets into another liberty, of course, the liberty of belief and faith.

By allowing liberty of belief and faith you run the risk of people doing things you believe are wrong. And here is a case where the "conservatives" and "Republicans" are very much against liberty. They seek to deny liberty to gays. They seek to deny liberty to those who reject the statement "life begins at conception."

In order to preserve my liberty when it comes to faith and belief, I must preserve the liberty of those who want to have guns, but I expect those who want the liberty to have guns to preserve my liberty of faith and belief.

And I believe that gays are natural and that life does not begin at conception, and the only thing that can have liberty are individuals and until one is born, one is not an individual. Now if you disagree with me, then that is the price of liberty, but my faith and belief and my liberty in exercising it has not affect on the liberty of any other individual, so the cost of my liberty is merely the possible violation of your faith and belief that my acts or the acts of those I defend are wrong, immoral, illegal.

The extremist views that the US is faced with in Iraq and in other places arise more than anywhere else out of Saudi Arabia, and have long been nurtured by the House of Saud for the same reason that Hitler nurtured hatred of commies and gays and Jews - it created a focus for blaming all ills experienced by the majority, even the ills that Hitler himself created. The easiest way to unite a lot of people is to make them hate a common enemy, and the Wahabists working out of Saudi Arabia have been encouraged by the House of Saud to focus their hatred and to rally people to hate because it is politically expedient to the House of Saud.

The Bush friendship with the House of Saud provides a sort of validity to the idea that Bush is intent on promoting hatred based on religion. The House of Saud has taken offense at those who criticise them, and then been defensive about their activities promoting religious extremism. Add in the simplistic Jew vs Muslim spin on the other divide in the region, and you deny the secular history of the Palestinian and Arab nationalism that was opposed to both European and Soviet influence, and what might be seen as their Zionist proxies. The Palestinian and Arab nationalist movements were led by Christians, socialists, communists (but not Stalinist), and it was the socialist/communist leaning of these nationalists that led the US to support the Muslim Brotherhood who opposed them.

But I get the feeling that you think that liberty is something that only a few in the world can understand, want, and give. That somehow "they" aren't able to understand liberty, even tho the very foundations of liberty came from that part of the world. The problem with that view is that you must believe then that Europeans can't accept liberty, because the Zionists were Europeans and they were the one that established the modern religous state in the region. With the exception of Saudi Arabia, all the governments in the region at the time of creating a religious state, Israel, were secular.

And where did you come up with that? Just because someone kills in the name of god does not mean they are christian in fact many things have been done under the guise of religion it is not the religion at fault rather those that twist it to there own means. Cristianity could have never existed and hitler would have done the same thing under some other banner of what he wanted the people to see as truth . Religious killing and in the name of religion has been going on long before christianity bud. The difference these days is you don't see christians in this country blowing up buildings, cafe's , buses etc. in the name of christianity. You sure as hell see it all over the middle east now don't you.

Originally Posted by pipes

...Talk about going off on a tangent...

Just as well...

He may have been going off on a tangent but it was a good read & well thought out on the subject of Liberty & where real alliances reside when it comes to hate & the ME.

I have not been following a long on every post but I have to say that was pretty damn good. Maybe for something else, another thread, I don't know...but still pretty damn good.

Originally Posted by noneof yourbusiness

Secruity AKA rent a cops. not whome I want helping me out. Hckabee said it that day. There police no matter how well funded or not can not respond in time to prevent this stuff. I will not be helpless victom. There is plenty of eveidence to indicate that when I guy walks in shooting it will be WAAAAAY to mcuh time before the police arrive.

And still anybdoy can get any gu they want regardless of any law on the books.

From Michelle Malkin » Sunday horror: Church shootings in Colorado; gunman killed by armed female church security staffer; Update: Church volunteer rushed toward the gunman; victims ID’d; Who is the shooter?; Gunman reportedly ID’d; Update: Gu

Jeanne Assam appeared before the news media for the first time Monday and said she “did not think for a minute to run away” when a gunman entered the New Life Church in Colorado Springs and started shooting.

Assam appeared before the media with applause and said “God guided me and protected me.”

She described how the gunman, Matthew Murray, entered the east entrance of the church firing his gun. “There was chaos,” Assam said, as parishioners ran away. “I saw him coming through the doors” and took cover, Assam said. “I came out of cover and identified myself and engaged him and took him down.”

Assam had several years of experience in law enforcement and is licensed to carry a weapon. She attends one of the morning services and then volunteers as a guard during another service.

“I give credit to God,” Assam said. “God was with me. I didn’t think for a minute to run away.”

Larry Bourbonnais, a combat-tested Vietnam veteran, said it was the bravest thing he’s ever seen.

Bourbonnais, who was among those shot by a gunman Sunday at New Life Church, watched as a security guard, a woman later identified as Jeanne Assam, calmly returned fire and killed the shooter.

“She just started walking toward the gunman firing the whole way,” said Bourbonnais, who was shot in the arm. “She was just yelling ‘Surrender,’ walking and shooting the whole time.”

So, what were you saying about "rent a cops" and such....

And the presence of a person with a gun who was apparently quite skilled with a gun did nothing to prevent a number of people being killed. Are you suggesting that you would respond better and quicker and more skillfully and more calmly than Jeanne Assam, and why should we believe you if you claim you would?

My point is that liberty has a price, and your death might be part of that price.

But the most likely cause of your death from our shared liberty is a car running you down, even if you are in a car, and not a gun, and most certainly not from a terrorist as Bush would define them.

If Bush were to define these shootings as terrorism, and then seek to prevent similar terrorist acts, then I would at least respect him for being consistent in his belief that the government must prevent bad things from happening even if our liberty is denied. I would disagree with him, but so would everyone in his party.