• 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!

Palin's Church Severely Damaged by Arson

Status
Not open for further replies.
Middleground said:
Amazing to me how facts get so twisted and turned. :doh

Hopefully, the culprit(s) will be caught and brought to justice. Glad to hear no one was hurt.
Click to expand...

Amazing to me, too. And it only ends up distracting from the true awfulness of the crime.

I have the same hopes concerning the culprits.

However, the Church could end up wanting the investigation kept quiet, though, in the end. It might have been some person who once attended there, and it could bring attention to whatever grievance that person feels they may have.
 
Dezaad said:
Amazing to me, too. And it only ends up distracting from the true awfulness of the crime.

I have the same hopes concerning the culprits.

However, the Church could end up wanting the investigation kept quiet, though, in the end. It might have been some person who once attended there, and it could bring attention to whatever grievance that person feels they may have.
Click to expand...

Historically speaking, that is the most likely scenario.
That's what it usually is.
Remember the shootings at Haggard's former church compound in Colorado?
Everyone was so quick to point fingers at the rabid atheists (as if atheists care enough about Christians to throw their lives away over them :roll:).

The shooter turned out to be, of course, a disgruntled and mentally ill former member of that church.
 
1069 said:
I don't know about that.
I think arson, a felony defined as "maliciously, voluntarily, and willfully setting fire to the building, buildings, or other property", should suffice.
I don't think they'll be able to prove "attempted murder", as I doubt the arsonist/s will admit intentionally trying to murder anyone. They probably believed the building to be unoccupied, and even if they didn't, it would be hard to prove that they were deliberately trying to murder anyone.
Click to expand...

I think you are right. However, there are laws that could be used to charge the person/them for crimes in addition to the arson:
A person commits the crime of reckless endangerment if the person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of serious physical injury to another person.

Alaska Statutes: AS 11.41.250. Reckless Endangerment.

​
I think at least this would be appropriate.
 
Dezaad said:
I think you are right. However, there are laws that could be used to charge the person/them for crimes in addition to the arson:
A person commits the crime of reckless endangerment if the person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of serious physical injury to another person.

Alaska Statutes: AS 11.41.250. Reckless Endangerment.

​
I think at least this would be appropriate.
Click to expand...

I agree. That would probably be appropriate.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Then we get into conspiracy sites like WND. I really don't care to be invested in some loser's party affiliation, if he even has one.
Click to expand...




nah ap level story sometime in the future, you see it or i see it bring it up and winner gets a silver from the other. :mrgreen:
 
Family Guy said:
I believe in facts not made up ****. You made a serious claim that the church was firebombed and as far as we know that is inaccurate and a gross distortion of the truth. You're the one who made the claim. I'm the one calling you on it and asking that you prove it or retract it. Simple, really.
Click to expand...




your puerile semantics game is simply to find something to argue about because you hate palin so much. :2wave:
 
Family Guy said:
Ya think? If we're talking semantics then to me there's a wide gap between arson and firebombed IMHO.
Click to expand...

Right. so a deliberate fire set is less burny than a firebomb thrown in a window? please. you are looking silly.


The real truth is that we have no idea who did it or for that matter how it was done. The photo that he provided does seem to prove that it was not a bomb, only a fire. Perhaps I misunderstood his intention when he tried to over dramatize the facts and perhaps when he wrote about "elitist savages" he was talking about the Bush Administration? :roll:
Click to expand...


why? please indicate your education in the matter and how you arrived at this conclusion.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
those are different elitist savages.
Click to expand...

Isn't "elitist savage" a contradiction in terms?
Kind of like "modern primitive"?

Maybe they're, you know, tribalist savages or something.
Or maybe they're just elitist assholes.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
And what exactly is the bet?
Click to expand...




I bet that the perpetrators will be left wing types, liberals, democrats.

You bet that they are anyone else.


proof if either of us comes across it shall be a msm article not huffington or wnd types...


winner gets a silver donation from the other. ;)
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I bet that the perpetrators will be left wing types, liberals, democrats.

You bet that they are anyone else.


proof if either of us comes across it shall be a msm article not huffington or wnd types...


winner gets a silver donation from the other. ;)
Click to expand...

How about a pair of panties(or T-shirt or something)? Does the Forum make a profit off of the merchandise? It would make for good advertisement.
 
I bet that the perpetrators will be left wing types, liberals, democrats.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt it.
Left-wing types, liberals and democrats don't care enough about chumpy old Sarah Palin and her chumpy old church to fly to Alaska, set it on fire, and spend the next decade in prison. Trust me.
Both Palin and her dorky fundy church are a joke to most liberals, not something we hate enough to throw our lives away over.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
fine then panties, and the loser must take a pic of em and use em as an avatar for a month. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I edited my post. We could make it a T-shirt or something that way we could advertise the site.
 
American said:
Link

ANCHORAGE, Dec. 13 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's home church was badly damaged by arson, leading the governor to apologize Saturday if the fire was connected to "undeserved negative attention" from her campaign as the Republican vice presidential nominee.
Click to expand...

She shouldn't apologize for anything. She is not responsible for the actions of scum.
 
1069 said:
I seriously doubt it.
Left-wing types, liberals and democrats don't care enough about chumpy old Sarah Palin and her chumpy old church to fly to Alaska, set it on fire, and spend the next decade in prison. Trust me.
Both Palin and her dorky fundy church are a joke to most liberals, not something we hate enough to throw our lives away over.
Click to expand...




Right, it is only a coincidence. :roll:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Right, it is only a coincidence. :roll:
Click to expand...

What's only a coincidence?
It's going to turn out to be someone closely associated with the Wasilla Bible Church; more than likely, this person will turn out to be psychologically unstable.
Hey, maybe it was erstwhile "First Dude" Todd Palin. :2razz:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I bet that the perpetrators will be left wing types, liberals, democrats.

You bet that they are anyone else.


proof if either of us comes across it shall be a msm article not huffington or wnd types...


winner gets a silver donation from the other. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but how does it matter what the political affiliation of the perpetrator(s) is? It's obvious that no political ideology would advocate such behavior. I don't know why people continue to try to pin the actions of extremists to religions, ideologies, etc. that they don't agree with in a pathetic attempt of one-upmanship over them. Why not use legitimate issues to attack your opponent? Why do you have to scrape the bottom of the barrel? If there was indeed some sort of correlation between liberals and this type of behavior, don't you think that liberals on this board would be cheering whomever did it on? Do you see one person doing that?
 
Or perhaps it will turn out to be a fraudulent attempt to collect insurance.
That's what a lot of arson turns out to be.
I'm not counting on it in this case, however, because I don't think they would've done it while parishioners were actually in the building. At least I hope not.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I'm sorry, but how does it matter what the political affiliation of the perpetrator(s) is? It's obvious that no political ideology would advocate such behavior. I don't know why people continue to try to pin the actions of extremists to religions, ideologies, etc. that they don't agree with in a pathetic attempt of one-upmanship over them. Why not use legitimate issues to attack your opponent? Why do you have to scrape the bottom of the barrel? If there was indeed some sort of correlation between liberals and this type of behavior, don't you think that liberals on this board would be cheering whomever did it on? Do you see one person doing that?
Click to expand...





What are you on about? you make such nonsensical assumptions and flat out lies. i never inferred any "whole group, or ideology"......you lied.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom