• 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!

Seven NC men charged as international "jihad" group

Laila said:
You mistake us for France where there is no such thing as freedom of press

Don't be too sure, before the filth called Labour creeped in and started stealing it slowly after 9/11.

Just imagine we once did have the ability to protest when we wanted and the right to say what we wanted without having the Government monitor your everyword. Its like mourning the death of a family member, you never realise just how special it is until it is taken or curbed.
Click to expand...

Liberalism sucks. Don't it?
 
Arch Enemy said:
Would I personally want these places I grew up in to be hawked by the Government? Yeah sure, but they sure as hell better have a warrant.

Even Google Maps/Globe miss these areas. There is no interest by federal governments (nor State, or local gov'ts) to keep on eye on these places. They are farms, woods, and crack-houses.

I think for the most part there is no need to keep an eye on middle-lower class farmers and descendants thereof. It's hard enough for most of the people to get their children through college, they're not about to go blow up Bank of America.
Click to expand...

I think we should go the opposite way. We should have the government not hawk the areas it already does. The government doesn't need to be keeping tabs on us, they can piss off. What we need is less government, not more. Less intrusion, better adherence to the Constitution, and a resolve to accept the duties and consequences of freedom.
 
Arch Enemy said:
They were living their "Rural Life" in the area I grew up. They look vaguely familiar, but they also blend in the general countenance of the population.

Honestly, out in the Cedar Grove - Rougemont (about where they're from) area if there is no complaints filed against you, you can live in peace doing whatever you do.

That's the price people out here are willing to take for "freedoms"; the possibility that Jimmy next door is an international terrorist.
Click to expand...

True...That is the price we Americans pay for Freedom.:) Imagine the "price" Boyd will pay when he reaches Prison.:lol: The Aryan BrotherHood will show him "Special Attention".:eek:
 
apdst said:
Liberalism sucks. Don't it?
Click to expand...

As does Neo-Conservatism. Big government, big war, big spending, big deficit, big brother platforms. Horrible fascism.
 
Ikari said:
As does Neo-Conservatism. Big government, big war, big spending, big deficit, big brother platforms. Horrible fascism.
Click to expand...

You'll never be able to pin all that on Conservatives, bro. :rofl
 
Laila said:
Sounds pretty good from where i'm sitting.
Click to expand...

You like Liberalism and you complain about Labour? Labour members are the Libbos in the UK.
 
apdst said:
You'll never be able to pin all that on Conservatives, bro. :rofl
Click to expand...

Not the classical ones, but the neo ones. They're no different than the democrats. Looking to steal liberty and freedom at every chance in order to increase their own power. Neo-Cons are a very destructive, fascist force; and all that I listed are their tools to try to gain their way.
 
apdst said:
You like Liberalism and you complain about Labour? Labour members are the Libbos in the UK.
Click to expand...

No darling.
The Liberal Democrats are.

Labour are the secret Conservatives dressed in red.

Get with it, jeez.
Blair moved Labour right when he got control of the party, Cameron has moved the Conservative party left.
 
Ikari said:
Not the classical ones, but the neo ones. They're no different than the democrats. Looking to steal liberty and freedom at every chance in order to increase their own power. Neo-Cons are a very destructive, fascist force; and all that I listed are their tools to try to gain their way.
Click to expand...

Neo-ones being whatever you decide they are at that moment? Actually, Conservatives, neo or otherwise are nowhere close to your description that you posted.
 
Laila said:
No darling.
The Liberal Democrats are.

Labour are the secret Conservatives dressed in red.

Get with it, jeez.
Blair moved Labour right when he got control of the party, Cameron has moved the Conservative party left.
Click to expand...

Labour is the center-left party. Or, are you like American Libbos and anyone that you don't agree with a Neo-Con?
 
apdst said:
Well, to qualify as a terrorist one has to have an agenda, or be a part of a movement that is furthered by a terror campaign. Otherwise, we're just talking about a few lone wolf nut jobs.
Click to expand...

According to the definition given here:

United States Code - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - PART I - CRIMES - CHAPTER 113B - TERRORISM - section 2331

Being a member of a group is notably missing from those definitions.

McVeigh, Rudolph, and Kaczynski all had strong political goals in their actions, buit only one was associated with any known terrorist group (Rudolph and Army of God)

Other groups that have committed act of terrorism on US soil are the Jewish Defense League, ALF, and Weather Underground.
 
apdst said:
Labour is the center-left party. Or, are you like American Libbos and anyone that you don't agree with a Neo-Con?
Click to expand...

Labour is left socially - I'll give you that but right economically.
Blair liked Thatcher for the love of God. He wanted a state funeral for her
Can you GET more right in this country?

Blair even once warned his party against shifting far left
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
According to the definition given here:

United States Code - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - PART I - CRIMES - CHAPTER 113B - TERRORISM - section 2331

Being a member of a group is notably missing from those definitions.

McVeigh, Rudolph, and Kaczynski all had strong political goals in their actions, buit only one was associated with any known terrorist group (Rudolph and Army of God)

Other groups that have committed act of terrorism on US soil are the Jewish Defense League, ALF, and Weather Underground.
Click to expand...


You mean this part?

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Click to expand...

By that definition, those dudes fall more correctly under the, "lonw wolf nut jobs", category.

Right, or wrong, it's Islamic terrorists that pose the greatest threat, at this point in history, therefore that's where the focus is going to placed. That being fact, we can't get anywhere strip searching an 80 y/o maw-maw, when looking for Islamic terrorists. It may not be PC, but profiling persons to determine if they're a threat is one the tools that law enforcement uses to catch terrorists, or any other criminal. If you're looking for Muslim terrorists--that's what I said to begin with--well, you're going to have to look a little harder at, "Mid-Eastern", looking people.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Neo-ones being whatever you decide they are at that moment? Actually, Conservatives, neo or otherwise are nowhere close to your description that you posted.
Click to expand...

Neo-Conservatives are exactly as I posted. It was they who took us into occupational war, ran up a big deficit (though Obama is trying to out do them), increased the size and scope of government, instituted more intrusive spying powers of the government, etc. Sorry that reality doesn't match your delusions, but that already happened. The Neo-con movement is one of fascism and horrible big brother tactics. Trying to pretend it is not is quite dangerous indeed and an assured way to lose the Republic.
 
apdst said:
You mean this part?



By that definition, those dudes fall more correctly under the, "lonw wolf nut jobs", category.
Click to expand...

How? The fit every one of those categories.

Right, or wrong, it's Islamic terrorists that pose the greatest threat, at this point in history, therefore that's where the focus is going to placed. That being fact, we can't get anywhere strip searching an 80 y/o maw-maw, when looking for Islamic terrorists. It may not be PC, but profiling persons to determine if they're a threat is one the tools that law enforcement uses to catch terrorists, or any other criminal.
Click to expand...

And the OP itself shows that this is a terrible idea. I'm sure that Boyd would have been allowed on an airplane with no more than a cursory glance if people took your approach.

Then airplane go boom boom.
 
Ikari said:
Neo-Conservatives are exactly as I posted. It was they who took us into occupational war, ran up a big deficit (though Obama is trying to out do them), increased the size and scope of government, instituted more intrusive spying powers of the government, etc. Sorry that reality doesn't match your delusions, but that already happened. The Neo-con movement is one of fascism and horrible big brother tactics. Trying to pretend it is not is quite dangerous indeed and an assured way to lose the Republic.
Click to expand...

You must really hate Librulz.

You really need to stop using the term Facism until you learn what it really is. Facism's history lies in Socialism. Communism and Facism aren't opponents of each other, they're in competition with each other.
 
Tucker Case said:
How? The fit every one of those categories.



And the OP itself shows that this is a terrible idea. I'm sure that Boyd would have been allowed on an airplane with no more than a cursory glance if people took your approach.

Then airplane go boom boom.
Click to expand...


Boyd might have. The 19 9/11 hi-jackers probably wouldn't have, if folks would have been using profiling to spot Muslim terrorists.


I guess since profiling isn't 100% fullproof, we shouldn't use it? Is that right?
 
apdst said:
You must really hate Librulz.

You really need to stop using the term Facism until you learn what it really is. Facism's history lies in Socialism. Communism and Facism aren't opponents of each other, they're in competition with each other.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of the Republocrats in general

And I know exactly what fascism is, and the Neo-Con movement employees it often.
 
apdst said:
Boyd might have. The 19 9/11 hi-jackers probably wouldn't have, if folks would have been using profiling to spot Muslim terrorists.


I guess since profiling isn't 100% fullproof, we shouldn't use it? Is that right?
Click to expand...

Easier solution that would have prevented 9/11: Don't let people on to airplanes with knives. That would have been 100% foolproof.
 
Tucker Case said:
Easier solution that would have prevented 9/11: Don't let people on to airplanes with knives. That would have been 100% foolproof.
Click to expand...

Profiling muslims wouldn't have prevented 9/11 since knives were still allowed on airplanes, BTW.
 
Tucker Case said:
Profiling muslims wouldn't have prevented 9/11 since knives were still allowed on airplanes, BTW.
Click to expand...

It might have. We'll never know. One thing's for sure, doing nothing isn't going to work.


Tucker Case said:
Easier solution that would have prevented 9/11: Don't let people on to airplanes with knives. That would have been 100% foolproof.
Click to expand...

That might work, until someone orders a beer, then tears the aluminum, making a nice, sharp weapon. So, I guess 100% foolproof wouldn't be as accurate. The only thing that is 100% foolproof, is to stop the terrorists before they get to their target.

We can't ignore common sense tactics, all the while hoping that no one uses his shoe laces to strangle a member of the flight crew, or uses an ink pen, or pencil to stab someone, or wears steel toed boots that can be used as a club, or boards with a female accomplice and she's carrying her knitting with her.
 
apdst said:
It might have. We'll never know. One thing's for sure, doing nothing isn't going to work.
Click to expand...

Nice strawman. Not profiling =/= doing nothing. What YOU ask for is doing nothing, at least if the person is not noticeably a muslim.

What I look for is common sense and foresight.

Common sense = not all terrorists are muslim

Foresight = not taking a stance to treat non-muslim looking people as though they cannot possibly commit an act of terror.



That might work, until someone orders a beer, then tears the aluminum, making a nice, sharp weapon. So, I guess 100% foolproof wouldn't be as accurate. The only thing that is 100% foolproof, is to stop the terrorists before they get to their target.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Good point. We should allow white people to carry knives on planes since they are not a threat and they might use a can as a weapon anyway so **** it.

But we should ban muslims form being able to drink anything form any potential weapon cause they are the only threats to safety in the air. I mean, even if we search them before hand, they can always turn a lima bean into a nuclear bomb or something!!!!111!!!

Trust me, not allowing knives on the planes would have prevented 9/11 far better than profiling ever could have.

We can't ignore common sense tactics, all the while hoping that no one uses his shoe laces to strangle a member of the flight crew, or uses an ink pen, or pencil to stab someone, or wears steel toed boots that can be used as a club, or boards with a female accomplice and she's carrying her knitting with her.
Click to expand...

First, the fact that knitting needles are allowed on airplanes is proof that common sense tactics are not currently being employed.

Also, there is nothing that prevents a lone wolf from doing these things so why are you actively calling for us to do nothing to try and stop THOSE people. They've done far more damage here than muslim terrorists have overall.
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
Nice strawman. Not profiling =/= doing nothing. What YOU ask for is doing nothing, at least if the person is not noticeably a muslim.

What I look for is common sense and foresight.

Common sense = not all terrorists are muslim

Foresight = not taking a stance to treat non-muslim looking people as though they cannot possibly commit an act of terror.
Click to expand...

Other than being politically correct, what is your common sense and forsight going to accomplish?





Yeah, Good point. We should allow white people to carry knives on planes since they are not a threat and they might use a can as a weapon anyway so **** it.
Click to expand...

Please don't put words into my mouth. I'm sure you're smarter than that

Trust me, not allowing knives on the planes would have prevented 9/11 far better than profiling ever could have.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but, again, we'll never know.



Also, there is nothing that prevents a lone wolf from doing these things so why are you actively calling for us to do nothing to try and stop THOSE people. They've done far more damage here than muslim terrorists have overall.
Click to expand...


How many casualties have the nut jobs produce vs. the Islamists?
 
Of course, as usual the Muslims will claim as a defense that Islam is being misunderstood and misinterpreted, and that the people involved are all standup individuals that couldn’t harm a flea much less kafirs.

I urge everyone to study the text, tenants, and history of Islam. While there many different sects of Islam and many divisions within the camp of Islam, the ulema of all 4 major schools of Islamic jurisprudence that governs Islam in totality all unanimously agree in the universality of the obligation to make the world sovereign for Allah via the imposition of Sharia. All 4 major schools of Islamic jurisprudence also agree on the universal obligation for jihad as well.

Now jihad doesn’t just necessarily consist of only terrorism, as there are many different kinds of jihad that Muslims employ and, as a matter of fact, nearly all of them operate below the radar of the public’s scrutiny via stealth, and nearly all of them involve deception in some form. In fact, deception goes hand in hand with Islam as Muhammad famously said, “that war is deceit.”

In any event, it is time for more and more people to open up their eyes and begin realizing what is taking place right under our noses, and not only in the USA but also all over the world. In fact, learning how Muslims deceptively operate in other parts of the world that have entertained Muslim immigration for much longer than we have is an excellent way to learn about Islam and how so very deceptive it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom