• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Paris Attack Suspect Arrested: I am from ISIS [W:71]

ttwtt78640 said:
Her views are that laws good, bad or indifferent should be obeyed - you apparently find that behavior to be odd. The perp had specific intent on violating much more than a stupid gun law that day while she did not intend to violate any law, stupid or not, that day. Anyone can easily violate the traffic laws yet many (most?) choose to obey them. Passing laws will only affect the behavior of the law abiding. That basic fact somehow eludes those that think banning things/actions, by passing laws, will make them go away.
Click to expand...

No is suggesting that gun control laws are good--they aren't.

However, the notion that gun control laws were to blame for the Luby's attack makes no sense, since if if the attacker could circumvent gun control measures, so could anyone else who wanted to defend from the attacker.

If someone chooses to obey the law in an instance where doing so would be detrimental to his/her safety, then that's his/her problem. A law, by itself, does not force anyone to obey it.
 
stonewall50 said:
Anything new on suspect? I'm sure the French are using enhanced interrogation techniques on him now.
Click to expand...

If the French govt. were smart, it should've publicly lied about the details of the investigation.

That way, in case some organization/individual comes up claiming responsibility by trying to corroborate the FALSE statements, the govt. would know that group isn't responsible.

It seems to elude everyone that anyone w/an Internet connection can claim to be ISIS and claim responsibility.
 
solletica said:
No is suggesting that gun control laws are good--they aren't.

However, the notion that gun control laws were to blame for the Luby's attack makes no sense, since if if the attacker could circumvent gun control measures, so could anyone else who wanted to defend from the attacker.

If someone chooses to obey the law in an instance where doing so would be detrimental to his/her safety, then that's his/her problem. A law, by itself, does not force anyone to obey it.
Click to expand...

I never said that gun control laws were responsible for the attack. Gun control laws were respnsible for leaving a gun in the car which could have been used to defend against the attack. The difference was that one person obeyed the gun control law while the other did not.
 
imyoda said:
Please......Try to contain your self..........your feelings/bias is showing............What NBC does or does not do has no bearing on the subject at had ......but I thank you for sharing this valuable information
Click to expand...

Oh...but it does. You are jumping up and down on the liberal bandwagon using the liberal favorite "faux news." It is like you don't realize that EVERY news source is slanted. And they resort to partisan news reporting DAILY. You just don't see it because you only listen to one side of the partisan hack story. I wonder why? My guess? Because you have one concern in political issues, "**** conservatives.

Have you bothered to investigate the issue? Or are you just telling us how you believe it to be............
Click to expand...

I was repeating something I saw. I don't have time to investigate EVERY story that comes out in a 24 hour news cycle. It is rather intellectually dishonest to expect someone to do that. Are you expecting me to investigate every story I hear reported ever? I wonder if you have the same expectations for your self? Probably not.

And you saw someone being arrested? If so, why has it not been reported by any respected and reliable news source/news service/outlet..........

And just where did you see this occur.........French TV.......some Internet live feed...........or possibly be it Faux Noise........
Click to expand...

Telegraph news actually. I dont watch the news. I can't afford the cable bill so I rely a lot on what I see here and then read about later.

Please remember we are talking about an arrest sometime last night.............Not today when almost all enforcement agencies are making mass arrests of folks under suspicion .......)

(And I have no problem with that.......)
Click to expand...

And you have no problem with what? French cutting people's heads off? Or the fact that there is plenty of evidence to link French to their own use of "enhanced interrogation techniques."

Why do liberals always believe that only the American flag is stained by dark side secrets. It is like they don't read history and realize that international espionage is a VERY dark business.
 
solletica said:
The likely perpetrator of this attack was some organization/govt/group that either

1) Wanted to permanently lower Middle Eastern immigration to France

2) Wanted the French military to increase its role in fighting ISIS

If #1, then the attack was likely planned by some right-wing anti-immigrant group in France. If #2, then either the Syrian or Iranian regime was behind it.

There is, however, no logical reason for ISIS to have planned the attack, since it wouldn't ultimately help its cause.
Click to expand...

Since when are they logical?
 
solletica said:
I did--please explain how the aforementioned GOP-bimbo's views change the fact that if a perp could easily bring a gun into a TX Luby's in violation of the law, then anyone else could've done so as well.

Take all the space you need.
Click to expand...

I really need to explain that most folks follow the law so they don't find themselves in jail?...seriously?
 
reinoe said:
No. Just like with Charlie Hebdo, the usual suspects will make excuses for the terrorists and allow even more "refugees" into Europe.
Click to expand...

I just heard an "expert" of something being interviewed in a news channel for his opinion, and he's already saying that the Muslim youth in France are getting radicalized because they live in small homes, and feeling isolated.

I suppose making sure all Muslims have big homes will be next on the agenda.
 
tosca1 said:
I just heard an "expert" of something being interviewed in a news channel for his opinion, and he's already saying that the Muslim youth in France are getting radicalized because they live in small homes, and feeling isolated.

I suppose making sure all Muslims have big homes will be next on the agenda.
Click to expand...

I read that the ones we are bringing here will get special funding for school and living. So...yeah, that seems to be the plan.
 
calamity said:
I read that the ones we are bringing here will get special funding for school and living. So...yeah, that seems to be the plan.
Click to expand...

This guy was talking about "big homes." I guess we'll have to make sure that with the funding they get, they can keep up with the Jones'.
 
tosca1 said:
This guy was talking about "big homes." I guess we'll have to make sure that with the funding they get, they can keep up with the Jones'.
Click to expand...

One reason older brother Tsarnaev went off the deep end is because he couldn't keep up. So he blew up the marathon.
 
Soho gator said:
And it wouldn't matter. They're all hat no cowboy.
Click to expand...

You mean "Coca Cola" cowboys? (One that has never rode a horse, worked on a farm, or experienced the cowboy way. A poser so to speak.)
 
So much speculation, so few facts.
Was the attack carried out by ISIS? Probably, but we don't know for sure. Why? No one, probably not even the suicide bombers, really knows the answer to that one. What do they want? The west out of the Middle East? Just to kill as many non Muslims as they can? Why France? Maybe because it's there, who knows?

One thing for sure: The Muslim radicals aren't rational, don't have any rational, achievable goals, and don't value human life, not even their own.

Oh, and of course it's Obama's fault. He is the Muslim terrorist president, after all, right?
 
Thrilla said:
I really need to explain that most folks follow the law so they don't find themselves in jail?...seriously?
Click to expand...

If the shooter was able to carry a weapon into a TX Luby's without going to jail, how would anyone else not be able to?

Explain.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So much speculation, so few facts.
Was the attack carried out by ISIS? Probably, but we don't know for sure. Why? No one, probably not even the suicide bombers, really knows the answer to that one. What do they want? The west out of the Middle East? Just to kill as many non Muslims as they can? Why France? Maybe because it's there, who knows?

One thing for sure: The Muslim radicals aren't rational, don't have any rational, achievable goals, and don't value human life, not even their own.

Oh, and of course it's Obama's fault. He is the Muslim terrorist president, after all, right?
Click to expand...

The most likely suspects are the one who would most likely benefit from the actual outcome of the attack.

And the actual outcome is that France increases its military presence in Iraq and Syria. So ask yourself, who benefits most from that ?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I never said that gun control laws were responsible for the attack. Gun control laws were respnsible for leaving a gun in the car which could have been used to defend against the attack. The difference was that one person obeyed the gun control law while the other did not.
Click to expand...

Right, but the law did not cause anyone to leave his/her gun in the car, but rather that person's tendency to obey laws, including ones that cannot credibly be enforced (i. e. gun control laws).

The fact is that anyone could have brought his gun w/him into Luby's illegally and gotten away w/it, because after all, that's exactly what the shooter did.

It's inherently contradictory to argue that gun control laws are easy to circumvent, and then say that they prevent others from carrying guns.
 
solletica said:
If the shooter was able to carry a weapon into a TX Luby's without going to jail, how would anyone else not be able to?

Explain.
Click to expand...

this isn't the right thread to explain to you how the whole rule of law thing works in a society...

go make a new thread on the matter if you require the education.
 
solletica said:
The most likely suspects are the one who would most likely benefit from the actual outcome of the attack.

And the actual outcome is that France increases its military presence in Iraq and Syria. So ask yourself, who benefits most from that ?
Click to expand...

Certainly not ISIS, but then, no one is accusing them of acting in their own best interests. Acts of savagery certainly aren't going to gain them any support.
 
I think it would help if he were to speak out a little stronger against Islamic Terrorism. Kind of like he does when a criminal (only African American though) happens to get shot by a police officer.

le bouffon said:
He's the commander in chief. Also, will you admit this action counts as something in the fight against ISIS?
Click to expand...
 
Thrilla said:
this isn't the right thread to explain to you how the whole rule of law thing works in a society...
Click to expand...

It doesn't work--and even NRA lovers back that up--claiming that gun laws are easily circumvented. So we're still waiting for your point.
 
solletica said:
It doesn't work--and even NRA lovers back that up--claiming that gun laws are easily circumvented. So we're still waiting for your point.
Click to expand...

you might be waiting for my point... I think everyone else is adult enough to understand that most folks tend to follow the law, even if they aren't physically restrained from breaking it.

the point NRA supporters ( more accurately, gun control opponents) make is that most folks will follow the laws set forth, laws that will result in creating more victims while not effecting criminal predators.
but you'd have to understand how the rule of law works in a society before you were capable of understanding that.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Certainly not ISIS, but then, no one is accusing them of acting in their own best interests. Acts of savagery certainly aren't going to gain them any support.
Click to expand...

ISIS does benefit from an increased military presence being arrayed against them..... their brand of Islam depends on it happening.... their legitimacy depends on it.

realists understand it doesn't actually benefit them, and would lead to their destruction... but realists and ISIS are not even on the same planet, let alone the same page in the book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom