The Official Hate The Muslim Thread (Orlando Gone Gay Edition!)

[Lt_Anders]

Nope it's the definition of terrorism.
'the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.'

Gotta be careful. How much of the "definition" overlaps with others?

I'd say xant is more correct...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assassinate
:  to murder (a usually prominent person) by sudden or secret attack often for political reasons

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism
the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal

[Yeldur]

So today a white Britain First supporter shot, stabbed and killed a Labour MP up North.

Bet he was secretly Muslim. It has to be so to support some of the crack pots on here.

Wrong, he had no affiliation to Britain First, even though they are a bunch of dickheads, he also has no party affiliation that anyone could find, the whole Britain First thing was a myth that was taken down by an eye witness of the murder who posted online, the guy is suspected of having mental illness though.

[Yeldur]

You're assuming people who own guns just buy them and don't practice with them. Which is true for some, but most people get training or practice a little bit. Also, I think a lot less people would've died if they all had guns. One, the guy would be suppressed at least instead of having free roam to execute everyone. Two, nobody would, hopefully, be standing near the guy so there wouldn't be much collateral damage. Yes, a few people could get hit with "friendly fire", but let's face it, one gun vs fifty, no one is going to shoot up a place against those odds. I mean it doesn't even need to be fifty guns, just five decently trained people would've been great. The shooter probably wasn't even a trained professional either, so yeah. (I didn't read many details about the news story though)

I love your reasoning though. You would prefer people to try to bum rush a guy with a rifle, but you bash people having guns to fight the guy on equal grounds. So you prefer a half assed suicide charge over a half assed shoot out? You know the shooter was probably shaking with adrenaline and fear also, right?

Yes, not everyone in the world wants a gun. That's fine. However, I prefer to take my life in my own hands and protect my loved ones and myself with every means available to me. The people who live in a fantasy world can keep living in it.

I wasn't bashing people having guns, but saying "WELL IF THEY ALL HAD MACHINE GUNS THEN THIS WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED" is just stupid, because face the reality, not everyone wants guns, the people in that club didn't have any, so they didn't have any. That is that. I'm saying that they could have taken this guy on EVEN without guns. Please don't misrepresent the points I made, because you have completely misinterpreted everything I've said.

The only point in your entire statement that was actually valid was that people with guns are more than likely using them regularly and that they'd probably be able to stop him easier if they did have guns. That was the only points that were valid, the rest of them were just complete misrepresentations of what I said.

[Xant]

Nope it's the definition of terrorism.
'the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.'

... No, it's not. Common sense is allowed, you know. Some nutter killing a politician is not "terrorism." There is no grand goal, no organization. And what do you think an assassination is then? Was Kennedy "terrorismed"? Lincoln too? Damn terr'ist got him? Come on. You're trying to argue semantics when there's no point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism

[Son Of Odin]

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Paul]

No "Brexit Wounds" pun yet?

[Overdriven]

Wrong, he had no affiliation to Britain First, even though they are a bunch of dickheads, he also has no party affiliation that anyone could find, the whole Britain First thing was a myth that was taken down by an eye witness of the murder who posted online, the guy is suspected of having mental illness though.

The latest reports, as of this morning, put him at shouting 'put Britain first' before doing it, that's from multiple news sources.

Now if that had been a Muslim shouting the usual it would be called terrorism not an assassination.

[Oberyn]

Love how the two sides have been flipped. What, no more curiousity about the variety of other factors that are surely responsable, Overdriven? Maybe you'd like to pontificate on the UK's obviously inadequate gun control laws? Whine about how the political left of the UK is ultimately to blame in a variety of ways? I am shocked and surprised at how easily you managed to get to the crux of the issue, seeing how hard of a time you have with every other terror attack. What a mystery. 
Political assasinations are absolutely terrorism. Pretending this is completely unrelated as multiple witnesses saw him shout a political slogan is some Overdriven level of wilful ignorance. Remains to be seen if he acted alone or had help/support from other radicals. Eyewitnesses aren't always reliable but multiple ones reporting the same thing is significant. I'd be as surprised to learn this guy's ideology and worldview had as little to do with his attack as the Orlando shooter's had with his. i.e they obviously are the main reason they did it.

[Overdriven]

Well it came out that he used a 1 shot gun. Possibly even a musket. So gun control has naught to do with it. You clearly haven't read back very far as I've already stated if he had access to more high powered weaponry it would probably have been worse for those trying to help her.

He had a political ideology, and that's likely the reason behind the attack. The MP had already been receiving alarming messages in relation to her stance on the EU ect and as a result they were already considering giving her extra security.

He was also supposedly mentally unstable as the Orlando shooter likely was as well. Anyone who can carry out these attacks has something wrong with them. Although there was only 1 victim with this one the attack was pretty damn brutal. He shot her in the head then grabbed her by the hair and repeatedly stabbed her.

As usual your trying to pull arguments out of thin air based on zilch.

[Oberyn]

I don't remember the killers of Rigby being mentally unstable in any way. Or any of the thousand other "holy warriors" that are perpetrating attacks all over the globe for purpotedly rational reasons in their eyes. I suppose the problem of islamic terrorism is really one of mental health, hmmm. I guess "arabs", afghans and pakistanis are just likelier than any other culture or people on the entire planet to be unstable loons. Wow, that's much less worrying than to think it may have something to do with the clearly stated tenets of their faith, thanks Overdriven.

[LordBerenger]

Everyone in the world should own a gun. The stupid will kill the stupid and vice versa.

[Butan]

not everyone wants guns, the people in that club didn't have any, so they didn't have any. That is that.

People are free to not have guns, sure, but if the club itself had firearms for security reasons...

I'm saying that they could have taken this guy on EVEN without guns.

Very low chance.

[Angantyr]

Just because this was yet an American mass shooting with an automatic rifle doesn't mean it's just a category in itself and that we shouldn't care or dwell on the shooter's ideology. Same as we did with Breivik or with Dylan Roof or any other domestic terrorist, both of whom were at least Omar's equals in insanity. Of course such weapons are much easier to get a hold of in the US (and that can be argued to be a problem in itself) but that didn't stop the islamists getting assault rifles for the Paris attack.

As for the ideology, even Heskey and Overdriven have to admit that this actually has some basis in Islamic scripture and teachings and that anti-gay sentiment is wide-spread all around the Muslim world, illegal under Sharia law usually under the threat of prison or extreme violence, worst of course in places like ISIS or Taleban (with whom the shooter's father was affiliated) controlled territory where homosexuality carries with it the death penalty. ISIS using an example derived from the great prophet Muhammed (Peace be upon Him) to throw gays off rooftops to the cheer and laughter of the crowds, a Medieval spectacle not uncommon in these parts of the world.

I hope we can agree that there is an ideological basis for the attack, not only the whim of some sexually confused madman. Even if his acting violently on this compulsion may appear like insanity, it can be argued that not all members of say ISIS or Taleban are insane, but they are religious fanatics, and there is a straight line from the teachings of the faith to this animosity against homosexuals across the globe. A straight line straight from scripture to an Orlando mosque where a Shia preacher from Manchester taught that homosexuals not only can be killed but must be killed, before the attack: "Death is the sentence. There’s nothing to be embarrassed about this. Death is the sentence". "We have to have that compassion for people. With homosexuals, it’s the same. Out of compassion, let’s get rid of them now".

When this is the sort of teachings we have in mosques not only in the Muslim world but also in Europe and America, surely we can all acknowledge the Orlando shooting has ties to a much more imposing and much more sinister problem than simply US gun violence. A recent poll showed that 52% of British Muslims want homosexuality to be illegal in Britain, not gay marriage or any such Christian sensibilities, but making it illegal to be gay. There is a straight line from this mindset to violence such as what we saw in Orlando and if you can't see it and try to make excuses for it frankly you're exacerbating the problem.

[Admerius]

Lets ban the weapon used most frequently in mass shootings and crimes!
That's not assault rifles, it's handguns.

The terrorism label is wrong, it is an "act of war"

"An act of war is an action by one country against another with an intention to provoke a war or an action that occurs during a declared war or armed conflict between military forces of any origin. The loss or damage caused due to such conflicts are excluded from insurance coverage except for life assurances."
source: http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/act-of-war/

The problems with defining it as an "act of war" from our(western) perspective:
-ISIS is an unrecognized state.
-Anyone that claims to act on ISIS behalf needs to be verified with their top leader before they can be categorized as "foreign military force"
-They target mostly civilians, not military targets, this sounds more like terrorism.

The non-problem if we respect their views of themselves:
-Non-muslims are all part of "The house of war"
-Infidels should be killed, with some exceptions(Jizya taxes for people of the book)
-Conquer "the house of war" and by so doing make it part of "the house of islam"

I believe that they believe this, IMO we must start by accepting the fact that they act and believe in accordance what they claim to be.
And the definition is: Rational Muslim
Their actions are a very rational(aka. taken at face value with minimal theological mumbo-jumbo hermeneutics) if you look at the scriptures(aka. axioms used as the foundation of the rationale).

With a non-rational unquestioned starting point you can justify some very strange things:
Let's say I'm convinced I'm Napoleon, with that conviction it is a rationally justifiable me to act as I believe Napoleon would.

Judging by this youtube clip: insanity is not completely incompatible with having a consistent understanding of their scriptures

[Yeldur]

The latest reports, as of this morning, put him at shouting 'put Britain first' before doing it, that's from multiple news sources.

Now if that had been a Muslim shouting the usual it would be called terrorism not an assassination.

The funny part is where you trusted the media, nice joke man, gave me a nice chuckle!