Army recruiting station attacked in Arkansas

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Hacp
Turns out an Islamic Terrorist killed the soldier. After 9/11, bush protected us from terrorism. It just so happens that once Obama takes office, terrorists start repopping up.

However, Bush was in office when 9/11 happened, so by your logic he caused it.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: NeoV
I love how 'sensible gun laws' equates to 'the left wants to take your guns'

Both sides are so paranoid it's hard to have a normal discussion about anything these days

Define Sensible.

 

[Deleted member 4644]

NOTHING in the article suggests that the gunman was left/democratic or ANYTHING similar.

GOOD GAME. Thx for playing!

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
NOTHING in the article suggests that the gunman was left/democratic or ANYTHING similar.

GOOD GAME. Thx for playing!

Don't forget, everyone here seems to think you are a Right Wing Extremist Terrorist, or Left Wing Social Liberal Pussy. There is no middle ground.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
A 19 year old kid lie dead and we argue over whether it was a left wing or right wing wacko that killed him.

How sad we have become that every thing gets turned into left vs. right instead of right vs. wrong.

Millions dead in Iraq and we argue about left vs right all the time.

The decision to go to war is very different than walking into an office and killing someone in cold blood.

If you were an adult you might understand that.

PJ, it's pointless trying to debate with most people here, they sit behind their monitors and type crazy ass shit because they don't have to worry about the repurcussions of acting like a fool. I'd put money on it that 99% of the posters here would never say the shit they type in public because they'd be pissing down their leg fearful of getting a beat down.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: alchemize


God damn you work hard to defend another partisan douchebag.

/golf clap

:laugh: pot kettle black :laugh:

oh yah, you got me. I'm as partisan as they get.

Kudos, you're really doing a top notch job as the dumbest motherfucker troll on the board, you're still no Dave, but keep it up we all gotta have dreams.

But I prefer to raise the stakes in the internets dramas. Let's have a wager. If you can find 10 posts from me in the last 6 months that would be considered "partisan" - i.e. towing the republican party line, I'll take 6 months off from this board. If I can find 20 from doing the same for the democrat line in the past 6 months, you'll take 3 months off. Deal?

Why should i have to prove myself? I take the 'reality' partisan line, which often intersects with the democrat line... you're the one making the argument that you're not a partisan after my pot-kettle-black comment See you in 6 months! (i expect you to do a self imposed ban) :lips:

P.S. Nice touch on saying Obama approves the killing of innocents and 'murders' them, it captures the essence of Republican douchebaggery oh so well.

Also, sorry for going way over the 10 posts you wanted me to find, there was just so much stupidity from you, i lost count. And you don't even post that much in P&N compared to the rest of us :laugh:

Republicans.txt:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=31105439

Originally posted by: alchemize
Al Gore was too busy climbing onto the war bandwagon...along with all the other pussy dems...there was no controversy to comment on.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...y=y&keyword1=alchemize

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: Red Irish
After Bush? The US certainly appears better after his departure.

Of course it is, we're a kinder & gentler spying, astronomical debt generating war machine.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...y=y&keyword1=alchemize

Originally posted by: alchemize
How is this possible? I thought we stopped making terrorists when Obama was sworn in? You mean they still don't like it when Obama murders civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...y=y&keyword1=alchemize

Originally posted by: alchemize
Curse you US justice system with your antiquated "jury of your peers" approach *shakes fist*.

IMO, we should convict people based on polls run on huffington post.

I like how the journalist felt like "from one of miami's poorest neighborhoods" needed to be in the first sentence.

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: palehorse
WTF does being poor have to do with it!?

They were found guilty, by a jury, in a court of law. Period.

Hang 'em all.

You have to remember that the leftie reasoning behind 9/11 and all previous terror attacks was that the middle east is terribly poor and repressed, and that if we would just send them more money (but stop interfering in their islamofacist agenda) then the won't hate us. Problem solved!

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30369033

Originally posted by: alchemize
Jhhnn: Obama is responsible for deaths of innocents in Pakistan. What say you to that?

Originally posted by: alchemize
100 civilians killed in afghanistan? Looney left strangely quiet...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8041768.stm

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30894924

Originally posted by: alchemize

Nice to know that you judge your parties actions on what the opposition will do if they don't like it though Search and seizure and minimum mandatory sentences got much worse under Clinton's watch, but it's the republicans fault LOL!

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30790393

Originally posted by: alchemize
Thank the LORD we have Fox News, defenders of our liberty, to expose the corrupt jackbooted practices of Obama's TSA...thank you jpeyton for opening our eyes to this

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30707986

Originally posted by: alchemize
Obama personally approves the murder of civilians on Pakistani soil, what's the difference, other than one is an issue of domestic control and the other could be construed as an international act of war on a sovereign country?

Oh, I'm not expecting any (honest) response from the OP.

Originally posted by: alchemize

Obama is making the choice to kill civilians. He knows with the air strikes, civilians will be killed, period.

What's this - lefties are now arguing that collateral damage is OK when a democrat does it?

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30716342

Originally posted by: alchemize


No hh has no poiint! HGis point that Obama approves of innocent being killed is fallacious and quite frankly assinine!!

Of course he approves of their deaths. He knows full well that those strikes in Pakistan will kill innocent women and children. Are you saying otherwise?

[/quote]

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...AR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
To be percise...Alchemize did not have a point.....the point was he thought he would be cool and insinuate that Obama approves of the women and children being killed. Whan I am 100% if asked he would say I do not approve.
Nowhere did he give his approval. Supporting Israel cannot be translated into Obama giving his approval....sheese...

I didn't say anything about Israel, I said he personally approves women and children being killed in Pakistan. Is this not factually correct?

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30749877

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Nebor
The only way to solve the "Palestine Problem" is to erradicate the Palestinians. Seems like the Israelis are accelerating towards end-game. The world community will tolerate this, just as they have tolerated everything else Israel has done. It's a gradual escalation of force and tactics. Add to that the fact that the Palestinians have been crying wolf for 20 years, using ridiculous propaganda campaigns and such, and the world just doesn't care that much.

I've had the good fortune to befriend several IDF officers at the Ft. Benning Infantry School, and they are very professional, hard-core soldiers. They are VERY passionate about defending their country.

Yes, that would represent the Final Solution.

I'm generally aligned with the Israelis for the reason that they do try to be somewhat humane and limit civilian casualties, but that's just :roll:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30736892

Originally posted by: alchemize
I love when the Subway-working morons like Jackdruid come to a thread about business.

AIG has numerous lines of business. Life, P&C, etc. They were extremely successful and a very well run company that had an out-of-control arm. Other insurance companies will be snapping up the good employees and leaving the shit ones to run it into the ground and leave the bill with the taxpayers. Congrats, government you've manage to fuck up again, pandering to your idiot constituents.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30727296

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: alchemize
Sure, let them marry, let them sign contracts, let them drink too.

Why?

Slipperly slope fallacy is all you got you stupid POS.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...te=y&parentid=30718143

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
BUSH LIED!!!!!!! TRILLIONS DIED!!!!!!!!

Trillions of dollars? or people?

I thought Harvey chimed in for a moment LOL.

Obama lied, Trillions more in debt? Just doesn't have the same ring to it.

Oh well, all those lefties concerned with Bush's modest (in comparison) war spending have all conveniently forgotten that now that we have the new breed of democrat, tax, borrow and spend like there's no tomorrow.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

The decision to go to war is very different than walking into an office and killing someone in cold blood.

If you were an adult you might understand that.

Iraq did nothing to us, but we still went over there and bombed them and killed the innocent.

Pardon me, but your ignorance is showing. I know USAF pilots who had their aircraft shot at by Iraqi forces between 1992-2003.

You're absolutely right - the US planes were shot at while enforcing an illegal no-fly zone the US unilaterally created that was not part of the peace deal.

Iraq also invaded Kuwait prior to that

For a decade+, the US had told Saddam that if he'd defeat 'our enemy' Iran, his prize would be getting to take back Kuwait. After he did attack Iran with our encouragement, causing Iran a million casualties for no good reason, Saddam expected his prize. Washington Republicans had never expected Saddam to do this, and did not intend to let him have the promised prize, but they neglected to inform our Ambassador in Iraq, so when Saddam asked for confirmation he was allowed to take Kuwait, the Ambassador repeated what had been the position for years, and said the US would have no objection to his doing so. He launched the plans; Washington got wind and did try to cancel the message, but Saddam assumed it was for some political cover and proceeded.

conducted genocidal operations against the Kurds (and to an extent, later against the Shia as well)

Ya, our whole tellig the Kurds to fight Saddam with out support and then getting cold feet and deciding we were better off with the devil we knew instead of upsetting Turkey, and allowing Saddam to slaughter the Kurds who believed our President, not our brightest time either.

funded terrorist operations, harbored known terrorists, and previously conducted nuclear and chemical weapons programs plus had a proven record of using WMD against both foreign and domestic people.

All of which we have done far more.

Note that I don't address the sufficiency of these actions as justification for going to war, which is a different topic which has been argued many times before, but to imply that Iraq was pure as the driven snow is well beyond ludicrous.

They weren't, by any means - Saddam was a corrupt, evil leader. I don't know anyone who says what you quote about his not being so.

 

[AreaCode707]

I'm a little amused, and not sure whether to be inspired or despair, by the American public as it exists on P&N.

Inspired: We've gotten past jumping to the conclusion without evidence that a random act of violence was done by a Muslim
Despairing: We've abandoned that in favor of jumping to the conclusion without evidence that the evil wacko other party must have done it.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: alchemize


God damn you work hard to defend another partisan douchebag.

/golf clap

:laugh: pot kettle black :laugh:

oh yah, you got me. I'm as partisan as they get.

Kudos, you're really doing a top notch job as the dumbest motherfucker troll on the board, you're still no Dave, but keep it up we all gotta have dreams.

But I prefer to raise the stakes in the internets dramas. Let's have a wager. If you can find 10 posts from me in the last 6 months that would be considered "partisan" - i.e. towing the republican party line, I'll take 6 months off from this board. If I can find 20 from doing the same for the democrat line in the past 6 months, you'll take 3 months off. Deal?

Why should i have to prove myself? I take the 'reality' partisan line, which often intersects with the democrat line... you're the one making the argument that you're not a partisan after my pot-kettle-black comment See you in 6 months! (i expect you to do a self imposed ban) :lips:

P.S. Nice touch on saying Obama approves the killing of innocents and 'murders' them, it captures the essence of Republican douchebaggery oh so well.

Also, sorry for going way over the 10 posts you wanted me to find, there was just so much stupidity from you, i lost count. And you don't even post that much in P&N compared to the rest of us :laugh:

Republicans.txt:

You don't understand the difference between mocking the left and being a partisan do you? Do you see one post where I "towed the republican line" - in other words said I concur with the republican position?

Oh well we can play it your way too. I'll classify those as "trolling against the left", and accept them as valid, and find 20 of you "trolling against the right". Your 20 will be up tonight, I work for a living. P&N will thank me for taking six months off for you to take 3. Right?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

lol, love to see how the rabid leftists went after the OP instead of seeing how reactions are different from a specific other recent event. Some of these same rabid leftists went ape and tried to blame a whole segment due to a rogue element. Yet in this case... they turn their ire on the person who(albeit got his direction off a few degrees) mockingly generalized a segment.

Where are the rabid leftists and the MSM in trying to paint with the same broad brush they tried to use the other day? Oh wait.... it's because we shouldn't offend fringe/rogue Muslims - they should be talked with so we understand them...or some such crap.

But more importantly is the lack of any outpouring of emotion for the murdered soldier - pretty sickening how some people will look right over that issue.

Anyway -

to the soldier(recent recruit) and family and a :beer: for the recruiter to speed recovery.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: alchemize


God damn you work hard to defend another partisan douchebag.

/golf clap

:laugh: pot kettle black :laugh:

oh yah, you got me. I'm as partisan as they get.

Kudos, you're really doing a top notch job as the dumbest motherfucker troll on the board, you're still no Dave, but keep it up we all gotta have dreams.

But I prefer to raise the stakes in the internets dramas. Let's have a wager. If you can find 10 posts from me in the last 6 months that would be considered "partisan" - i.e. towing the republican party line, I'll take 6 months off from this board. If I can find 20 from doing the same for the democrat line in the past 6 months, you'll take 3 months off. Deal?

Why should i have to prove myself? I take the 'reality' partisan line, which often intersects with the democrat line... you're the one making the argument that you're not a partisan after my pot-kettle-black comment See you in 6 months! (i expect you to do a self imposed ban) :lips:

P.S. Nice touch on saying Obama approves the killing of innocents and 'murders' them, it captures the essence of Republican douchebaggery oh so well.

Also, sorry for going way over the 10 posts you wanted me to find, there was just so much stupidity from you, i lost count. And you don't even post that much in P&N compared to the rest of us :laugh:

Republicans.txt:

You don't understand the difference between mocking the left and being a partisan do you? Do you see one post where I "towed the republican line" - in other words said I concur with the republican position?

Oh well we can play it your way too. I'll classify those as "trolling against the left", and accept them as valid, and find 20 of you "trolling against the right". Your 20 will be up tonight, I work for a living. P&N will thank me for taking six months off for you to take 3. Right?

Why are you still posting? Shouldn't you come back in 6 months?

If you can find 10 posts from me in the last 6 months that would be considered "partisan" - i.e. towing the republican party line

Oh yes, mocking democrats isn't partisan at all! :laugh: You're fucking retarded. Hmm, yes, saying Obama approves of murder of civillians isn't partisan either.

You're a caricature of the right

The sad thing is, you probably thought you sneaky enough that you didn't realize what a douchebag partisan you yourself were.

BTW, i didn't agree to this challenge, the issue was never my partisanship (did i ever deny being partisan?) It was ***YOUR*** partisanship after i the pot-kettle-black comment.

If you had any integrity, you'd stop posting for 6 months.

See you back on Wednesday, December 2, 2009! :lips:

http://www.timeanddate.com/dat...e=add&ay=&am=6&ad=&aw=

:laugh:
:laugh:
:laugh:
:laugh:
:laugh:
:laugh:

 

[Phokus]

Guys, did you know Obama personally approves of the murder of civilians?

*NOT PARTISAN!*

alchemizestupidity.txt

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Phokus...you either accept the wager or reject it. Please do us all a favor and accept it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

n/m - this thread should get back on topic by addressing the slain, injured, and murderer.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Phokus...you either accept the wager or reject it. Please do us all a favor and accept it.

Why should i? Of course Alchemize will find partisan posts from me, i never said i wasn't

But ***HE*** was the one who said he wasn't partisan when in fact he is a hyperpartisan as i just demonstrated.

Alchemize is a liar and and idiot and because of his hubris, he should do a self imposed ban because he's a disgrace to himself.

 

[alchemize]

Here we go, I didn't even need posts, I just pulled up 20 Phokus thread titles:

GOP losing party identification in almost every single major demographic subgroup
Question for Economic Conservatives: Does New Hampshire disprove your theory about low taxes/flow of capital/business?
More proof that the right is in trouble: complete idoctrination and idol worship when it comes to Rush Limbaugh
GOP, RNC to rebrand Democrats as 'Socialists'
Common ancestor of Apes/Human found (GOP troll in commentary)
Wait, why are we even debating with conservatives over torture anyway? We could end the debate easily.
The Obama Dijon-Gate scandal (aka reason #765414 why the conservatives are screwed)
If the social conservative base has such a low opinion of New York - why do they get so riled up about 9/11?
Sarah Palin under attack for nominating a true conservative for Alaska's AG
It's like Christmas for Liberals and anyone with common sense: Dobson admits defeat in culture wars
Why are conservative evangelicals allowed to lie so much?
Is the modern conservative movement defensible when it comes to civil liberties? National Review answers that question
Roger Ebert calls out Bill O'Reilly
Joe the Plumber? More like Joe the Scammer
stephen colbert pwns glenn beck
How do Republicans reconcile the fact that their strategy on winning elections is based on racism anyway?
Republicans are against spending $650K in order to save $5 million
Try to hold back your tears on this: Nearly 75% of ex-Bush officials looking for jobs are unemployed
RNC chairman unveils new plan to bring the GOP's message to the (sub) urban minorities/hip hop afficionadoes
The Republicans might have overplayed their hand here

I'm ready for my 6 months off, accept your 3 months Phokus. Or it sounds like you just admitted you were a partisan douchebag and want to void the wager.

Oh, and for a little education:

par-ti-san
1.an adherent or supporter of a person, group, party, or cause, esp. a person who shows a biased, emotional allegiance.

Just because I'm critical of the democrats doesn't mean I support the republicans, you can't find any quotes where I do, can you. Which I've elaborated on many, many times. You can find many posts throughout 2008 where I evaluated Obama on many positions, and was supportive of many of them (leaving Iraq, focusing on Pakistan, right to privacy, ending war on drugs, healthcare reform, etc.). I disagree vehemently with his spending policies.

edit:
Came back to edit this and say I wasn't going to post in the thread anymore and CC was ahead of me on it. So Phokus, if you want to roll...see who's the bigger partisan, I'd love to start another thread on "who is the bigger partisan d-bag".

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
This thread should get back on topic by addressing the slain, injured, and murderer.

Anymore trolling or hijacking within this thread will cause a sever reaction.

This thread should be considered as sacred as the one stickied by Perknose. The exception is that people are allowed to post as long as it is DIRECTLY on topic.

w/ regard to the bet offer. If it will be taken up - a seperate thread should be started (and will be acceptable to do so).

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

The decision to go to war is very different than walking into an office and killing someone in cold blood.

If you were an adult you might understand that.

Iraq did nothing to us, but we still went over there and bombed them and killed the innocent.

Pardon me, but your ignorance is showing. I know USAF pilots who had their aircraft shot at by Iraqi forces between 1992-2003. Iraq also invaded Kuwait prior to that, conducted genocidal operations against the Kurds (and to an extent, later against the Shia as well), funded terrorist operations, harbored known terrorists, and previously conducted nuclear and chemical weapons programs plus had a proven record of using WMD against both foreign and domestic people.

Note that I don't address the sufficiency of these actions as justification for going to war, which is a different topic which has been argued many times before, but to imply that Iraq was pure as the driven snow is well beyond ludicrous.

He never said Iraq was as pure as the driven snow, he was talking about the justification of going to war with Iraq which you conveniently sidestepped.

Actually, no. Reread his post:

Iraq did nothing to us, but we still went over there and bombed them and killed the innocent.

Those in the recruiting center did nothing to the shooter, yet he went in and killed the innocent.

There is no difference here.

He specifically says, "Iraq did nothing to us," which to me implies that they were innocent with regard to US interests. My post listed several instances proving that's not the case. Perhaps my choice of words was hyperbole, but he does, in fact, imply that Iraq was wholly innocent of any culpable actions toward the US, which you conveniently sidestepped.

ProfJohn was entirely correct in stating that the decision to go to war is different from shooting someone in cold blood because the calculus is not simple.

 

[jpeyton]

I thought attacking our soldiers is an act of war, not an act of terrorism?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
A 19 year old kid lie dead and we argue over whether it was a left wing or right wing wacko that killed him.

How sad we have become that every thing gets turned into left vs. right instead of right vs. wrong.

Millions dead in Iraq and we argue about left vs right all the time.

The decision to go to war is very different than walking into an office and killing someone in cold blood.

If you were an adult you might understand that.

Yep. At least when you go into the office you have the balls to do it yourself, instead of sending other peoples kids to kill and die for an agenda that's still 100% your own.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol, love to see how the rabid leftists went after the OP instead of seeing how reactions are different from a specific other recent event. Some of these same rabid leftists went ape and tried to blame a whole segment due to a rogue element. Yet in this case... they turn their ire on the person who(albeit got his direction off a few degrees) mockingly generalized a segment.

Where are the rabid leftists and the MSM in trying to paint with the same broad brush they tried to use the other day? Oh wait.... it's because we shouldn't offend fringe/rogue Muslims - they should be talked with so we understand them...or some such crap.

But more importantly is the lack of any outpouring of emotion for the murdered soldier - pretty sickening how some people will look right over that issue.

Anyway -

to the soldier(recent recruit) and family and a :beer: for the recruiter to speed recovery.

What exactly is your point you rabid righty?

RIP to the soldier.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: Hacp
Turns out an Islamic Terrorist killed the soldier. After 9/11, bush protected us from terrorism. It just so happens that once Obama takes office, terrorists start repopping up.

An interesting correlation. Under the Bush administration the terrorists knew that we would do what was necessary to stop them. Now, it seems that we have shown our weakness publicly, and are now inviting attack.

Troll troll troll your boat, gently down the stream, ...........

edit: sorry, posted this before seeing Common courtesy mod comment.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: bbdub333

My comment is in reply to such statements as:

Originally posted by: Phokus
Most leftwing 'terrorists' will target a housing development or a hummer dealership (for example) when no people are around. The rightwing terrorists (whether here or abroad) will always resort to violence.

As ignorant a comment as that was, mine is made somewhat in jest.

Considering the serious nature of the topic, so much for the idea that you have any sense of humor. :roll:

There is nothing funny about Phokus as proven here.

I just read your link to see what you're talking about, and it looks like your comment is nonsensical.

Phokus posted a series of quotes from people who hold views friendly to this shooting to show they exist, and referenced the DHS report on homegrown right-wing terrorists.

Nothing he said was intended to be funny, and none of it appears to fit your insinuation that his posts were some sort of indication he's such a menace it's not funny.

It appears to me that you irrationally strongly overreacted to his posts. You can disagree with him about how widespread that faction is, but your personal attacks are irrational.

I object to what he stands for. He could be anyone. I don't care. He went from the specific to the general, using it to attack a group. That thinking is what causes a great deal of the harm in the world. It causes people to attack gays, jews, liberals, conservatives, blacks. Just about anything. Do you want me to list the statistics on crime to attack blacks? If I thought like some here I certainly could. I won't because it's nonsense. Blacks aren't bad, but there are bad blacks. Same with Christians, Gays, whoever. Note that earlier in this thread I said that even if the shooter turned out to be liberal it would be wrong to extend that to many liberals. Certainly there are supporters for many people who are vilified, but one of the last groups you can call names are the religious.

Can you imagine posts here like this?
"Blacks are criminals" Look at the statistics.

"How about those gays. They support NAMBLA"

In a heartbeat that person would be shown the door, and you'd be all over them for being a bigot.

There is one group that you can call ignorant, stupid, killers just about anything you want and that's those of faith. Here they have virtually no voice, so I'm standing up for them. I went to Jamaica with a group from a church and they rebuilt part of a hurricane wrecked village. It was entirely funded by themselves. Some of them spent months worth of income to do this. They didn't beat anyone over the head, they didn't damn them. These fools worked their asses off to help others. Have you ever given 3 months worth of income and weeks of time in another land? While people were complaining about GWB and government, many of the same kind of people did the same thing again. They went door to door fixing what needed to be fixed at their expense.

They didn't care who was black, white, gay or a bloody Martian, they worked while others cried how sympathetic they were and laughed at people like them for being stupid, or bigots or whatever. They went about feeding the poor, tending needs. So what have you and Phokus done? If you've done the same as myself and the others you look down upon hat's off. If not, you have a good deal to learn about what is good and what is not.

Here's good:

A man takes an enemy to a place to get comfort and help.

Someone takes time off at his or her expense and helps rebuild a village.

Someone gives a Christmas gift to someone at work, the only gift the man receives. He happens to be gay, and the other people who always boast of their sympathy for "the cause" ignored him. The one who gave did so because it was the right thing to do. BTW, he doesn't approve of gay marriage, but he befriended him when others pointed and made fun of his effeminate ways.

A grandfather in Arkansas tells his grandson back in the early 60's to "go play with the ***** kids down the street and take these bags with you". Bags of food that the family living in a tin shack desperately needed. Years later the grandson asked why he didn't take them himself. The response? He didn't want to mix with *****? No, "He's a man and a man has pride. He'd take it from a small boy but never from me". That's inconsequential though because that man was a bigot. He used the word *****. He's incapable of doing a good thing, while those who at the time went around holding their noses up in the air at the word, walked by and did nothing.

A person who IS a bigot, someone who doesn't like dealing with blacks is driving through a black neighborhood and there's an accident in Little Rock. A black man is pinned in a car and he's several cars back in a line. No one does a thing. He gets out and comforts the man, makes sure he's as well cared for as could be. He stays in an area where no sane white man would be. After a while an ambulance comes and he leaves. That man who helped was my redneck conservative black hating uncle. So I asked him "Hey Jr, why did you stop and help that guy. I thought you didn't like blacks?" His response? After thinking a moment he said "There was a man hurt and no one helped. It would have been wrong not too." Yeah, that bigot helped a man he wouldn't have talked to because when the moment came, he rose above what he was to do something better than himself, while countless no doubt more correct people didn't want to get involved.

Some of these people were Christians, some not, but they all had one thing in common. When it came time to do the right thing, they did it. That's what makes a person worthwhile. What do they do when the rubber hits the road? Those foolish Christians, those Commie Libs, those fascist Conservatives. The boy raping gays. The criminal blacks.

All names people put on them because the ones doing the name calling don't understand that the only good done by people is the work they do. Not how they identify themselves, or how the ignorant define them, but who they are when the moment arrives.

Sure some people will do evil and good. People are human. Certainly some nuts will use religion to murder a physician. So go ahead with your statistics that you apply when the mood strikes you and disregard the good things that millions do. Be what you say you object to. Call people names, feel superior in your smug safe corner and attack the good that people do.

I'll be here to stand up for them, whether they are Conservative or Liberal, gay or straight. If it's someone trying to frame liberals for something they don't actually profess, or liberals or whomever who decide that it doesn't matter. Statistics don't lie, but oh don't call up anything on their groups. That's bigotry.

Yes, those same people who now cry against Bush and Iraq, but were themselves glad to be part of a party who backed the whole thing. Oh, you were misled. You were lied to. Well they didn't use the brains they had and the balls they ought to have say "NO!"

Who here stood and consistently against the war before it happened? Not many. A handful. The two loudest were Moonbeam and myself. Harvey and a few others as well, but we two voiced our opinions. Moonbeam and me. Yeah, the progressive, and whatever you've decided I am. Why? Because Moonbeam and myself went beyond our personal philosophies and said "No, people will die that need not". In the meantime others liberal and conservative were boasting of our superiority. Both sides. Oh now the lament goes out, but where were they then? Not caring. Now both sides at ways to blame each other. It's always the other side at fault. They need to be brought down and realize how superior they are.

The fool Jesus once told a story about a man who was a priest. He went to the Temple and said "Thank you God that I am not like this tax collector". The tax collector said "Forgive me Lord. I am a sinner"

So who was justified? The first or the second? Who is justified in this day, the Progressive Pharisee who preach how good they are, and look down on the others, the religious who do good in this case.

That same fool Jesus said "Love thy neighbor as yourself". That doesn't mean accept their actions. It doesn't be promote them. Love is a CHOICE, an action and it means that when a fellow human needs, you give. It's done by all kinds of people, not just those you approve of.

The world is full of the wise who rant off wrongs done by history, and fools who help make a difference. The fools continue to sacrifice for others. The fools are called name and viewed as quaint or ignorant or downright dangerous.

The fools know that good doesn't come from words, but from being the face of hope. The hands that build. The person who cures.

May I always be a fool.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: bbdub333
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,523860,00.html

DEVELOPING: A gunman opened fire Monday at an army recruitment center in Little Rock, Ark., killing one army recruiter and seriously wounding another, FOX16.com reported.

A man in a black SUV drove to the recruitment office and began shooting at around 10:19 a.m., a spokesman with the Little Rock police department told FOX News.

The suspect, who immediately fled the scene, was later apprehended approximately four miles from the center with an assault rifle in his vehicle.

Little Rock authorities detected a "suspicious device" inside the vehicle and called a bomb squad to the scene, according to FOX16.com.

Ironic how this comes after so many comments in the abortion doctor thread stating that right-wing activists use violence against people and left-wing activists use non-violent protest.

They apprehended the suspect, so hopefully we'll soon know what his motives were.

Kneejerk much? Grow up. Oh and look up the definition of irony.

 

[sandorski]

So, any new details on this? Motivations?

He may have been going for a Terrorist act, but I could imagine that other motivations could be involved. Personal Beef with one of the victims, perhaps he was rejected or discriminated against by that Recruitment Office, yadda yadda ya.