[vector]

Will Donald repeat today the 3 magic words that we have all heard from the right the last 8 years ?

"radical Islamic terrorism"

[Hoot Gibson]

Hopefully he will. Most Muslims are not terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims. After eight years of a cowardly president who refused to allow the truth pass his lips, liberals are sure having trouble handling the truth from Trump.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Hopefully he will. Most Muslims are not terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims. After eight years of a cowardly president who refused to allow the truth pass his lips, liberals are sure having trouble handling the truth from Trump.

Is a member of a white nationalist group a "radical Christian hate monger"? Or, would it be possible to reasonably argue that a white nationalist hate monger given the "Christian" moniker is misleading, insensitive, and offensive? Would it be cowardly to refuse the white nationalist hate monger any association witj the word "Christian"? White nationalism in this country has quite a history of terrorism.

[Hoot Gibson]

Is a member of a white nationalist group a "radical Christian hate monger"? Or, would it be possible to reasonably argue that a white nationalist hate monger given the "Christian" moniker is misleading, insensitive, and offensive? Would it be cowardly to refuse the white nationalist hate monger any association witj the word "Christian"? White nationalism in this country has quite a history of terrorism.

If that white nationalist hate monger is committing acts of terror while yelling, "Jesus is great!" and praying to his the God of Christians and Jews, then I would say that it would be fair to label him (or her) a radical Christian terrorist. Do you think that white, radical Christian terrorists are a serious issue facing this country?

I don't live in the past and neither do most intelligent people. We must learn from history to avoid repeating it. The overwhelming majority of Christians seem to have learned their collective lesson. An alarmingly large minority of Muslims would like to return to the 6th century and to take the rest of us with them.

[The Urban Sombrero]

If that white nationalist hate monger is committing acts of terror while yelling, "Jesus is great!" and praying to his the God of Christians and Jews, then I would say that it would be fair to label him (or her) a radical Christian terrorist. Do you think that white, radical Christian terrorists are a serious issue facing this country?

I don't live in the past and neither do most intelligent people. We must learn from history to avoid repeating it. The overwhelming majority of Christians seem to have learned their collective lesson. An alarmingly large minority of Muslims would like to return to the 6th century and to take the rest of us with them.

You missed the point, while commenting on intelligence: white nationalist hate mongers once populated the south. A lot of so-called Christians sympathized with their "cause." If a pastor at that time refused to use the term "Christian" to describe these white nationalists (or sympathizers) would that, of a necessity, have been a cowardly act? In my view, the issue is debateable.

[vector]

By judging from all the silence from Donald's followers he has let them down once again

He is in the birth place of terrorism and didn't have the balls to say the 3 magic words that he and his followers have been saying the last 8 years

radical Islamic terrorism

[Bob Seger]

By judging from all the silence from Donald's followers he has let them down once again

He is in the birth place of terrorism and didn't have the balls to say the 3 magic words that he and his followers have been saying the last 8 years

radical Islamic terrorism

I don't think it's possible for someone else on the website to be anywhere close to being as purely stupid as what you are..

And just as I say that , NEWARK pops into my mind.

[Hoot Gibson]

You missed the point, while commenting on intelligence: white nationalist hate mongers once populated the south. A lot of so-called Christians sympathized with their "cause." If a pastor at that time refused to use the term "Christian" to describe these white nationalists (or sympathizers) would that, of a necessity, have been a cowardly act? In my view, the issue is debateable.

No, I never missed the point. It is cowardly not to call a terrorist act what it is.

Following Major Nidal Malik Hasan's terrorist attack at Fort Hood, during which he yelled, "“Allah akbar!”, as he killed 13 people, the Obama administration classified the action as an act of "workplace violence." That was pure cowardice on display. Obama finally acknowledged that Hasan had committed a terrorist attack six years after the incident.

[Hoot Gibson]

By judging from all the silence from Donald's followers he has let them down once again

He is in the birth place of terrorism and didn't have the balls to say the 3 magic words that he and his followers have been saying the last 8 years

radical Islamic terrorism

Being in the birthplace of terrorism and not bashing the United States of America is a big improvement over the many ventures of Barack Obama onto foreign soil.

[The Urban Sombrero]

No, I never missed the point. It is cowardly not to call a terrorist act what it is.

Following Major Nidal Malik Hasan's terrorist attack at Fort Hood, during which he yelled, "“Allah akbar!”, as he killed 13 people, the Obama administration classified the action as an act of "workplace violence." That was pure cowardice on display. Obama finally acknowledged that Hasan had committed a terrorist attack six years after the incident.

I am going to state this plainly: terrorism is terrorism is terrorism, whether enacted by a white guy in a sheet, a jihadi in a black head rag, or an African war lord with a Russian rifle seeking to intimidate villagers. Is it "radical Islamic" terrorism? Is it "white supremacist Christian" terrorism? Is it "voodoo pagan" terrorism? President Obama may have been overly cautious. I don't dispute that. It is calling it "cowardice" that is at issue in my view.

[NEWARKCATHOLICFAN]

Everyone knew he was not going to say there
what he says here.

#nonuts

[Bob Seger]

Everyone knew he was not going to say there
what he says here.

#nonuts

Hmmm,

I've heard you called that before, but not Trump.

How 'bout that.

[Bob Seger]

I am going to state this plainly: terrorism is terrorism is terrorism, whether enacted by a white guy in a sheet, a jihadi in a black head rag, or an African war lord with a Russian rifle seeking to intimidate villagers. Is it "radical Islamic" terrorism? Is it "white supremacist Christian" terrorism? Is it "voodoo pagan" terrorism? President Obama may have been overly cautious. I don't dispute that. It is calling it "cowardice" that is at issue in my view.

Kinda like Cassius Clay, aint it?

[vector]

Kinda like Cassius Clay, aint it?

Kinda like Donald's 5 Difrements
Another stupid answer

[The Urban Sombrero]

Kinda like Cassius Clay, aint it?

Kinda like trollin'..."ain't" it?

[Granny Bear]

No, I never missed the point. It is cowardly not to call a terrorist act what it is.

Following Major Nidal Malik Hasan's terrorist attack at Fort Hood, during which he yelled, "“Allah akbar!”, as he killed 13 people, the Obama administration classified the action as an act of "workplace violence." That was pure cowardice on display. Obama finally acknowledged that Hasan had committed a terrorist attack six years after the incident.

Perhaps Obama didn't want to generate an atmosphere where the snowflakes would need counseling and sleeping pods on the job.
:Shaking:

[Stardust]

You missed the point, while commenting on intelligence: white nationalist hate mongers once populated the south. A lot of so-called Christians sympathized with their "cause." If a pastor at that time refused to use the term "Christian" to describe these white nationalists (or sympathizers) would that, of a necessity, have been a cowardly act? In my view, the issue is debateable.

Didn't we eradicate that? You never eliminate, but you do extract unwanted. So, is that different than what is underway with radical islamists? You eliminate and you start by calling them out and telling them you are coming? If I see someone in a white hood, I pretty much know what is in front of me.

[Bob Seger]

Kinda like Donald's 5 Difrements
Another stupid answer

I don't think I would say anybody or anything else was stupid until I at least learned how to spell the word.

Like I said, it's easy to tell when you copy and paste and when you try to wing it on your own..

[Bob Seger]

Kinda like trollin'..."ain't" it?

More like tellin the facts.

[Bob Seger]

You missed the point, while commenting on intelligence: white nationalist hate mongers once populated the south. A lot of so-called Christians sympathized with their "cause." If a pastor at that time refused to use the term "Christian" to describe these white nationalists (or sympathizers) would that, of a necessity, have been a cowardly act? In my view, the issue is debateable.

And they were called DEMOCRATS, btw.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Didn't we eradicate that? You never eliminate, but you do extract unwanted. So, is that different than what is underway with radical islamists? You eliminate and you start by calling them out and telling them you are coming? If I see someone in a white hood, I pretty much know what is in front of me.

My point is that President Obama's mindset had to do with being sensitive to the Islamic world non-radical. Now, it's fine, of course, to disagree with that mindset, and call it dead wrong. I disagree that the word "cowardice" applies.

[Bob Seger]

And they were called DEMOCRATS, btw.

I figured you would ignore that part of it.

[The Urban Sombrero]

And they were called DEMOCRATS, btw.

White supremacist movements, such as the KKK, in the south were equal opportunity clubs. These ol' boys had a common enemy that united beyond party loyalty. So, Bob, you're correct, but they were also Republicans.

[Bob Seger]

White supremacist movements, such as the KKK, in the south were equal opportunity clubs. These ol' boys had a common enemy that united beyond party loyalty. So, Bob, you're correct, but they were also Republicans.

Nope, it was republicans who fought and died to set the black men (who btw, were rounded up by their own race and sold) free.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Nope, it was republicans who fought and died to set the black men (who btw, were rounded up by their own race and sold) free.

Ah, I see: you are taking us way back, back to a time when designations and delineations were, shall we say, a bit different. I'll let you play in that sandbox alone. I won't justify the "them darkies sold they own out" spew with a retort.

Now, to the white supremacists in the south of a later time, a place where men like George Wallace gained ascendency and support from both sides, a time and place to which I referred.

[Bob Seger]

Ah, I see: you are taking us way back, back to a time when designations and delineations were, shall we say, a bit different. I'll let you play in that sandbox alone. I won't justify the "them darkies sold they own out" spew with a retort.

Now, to the white supremacists in the south of a later time, a place where men like George Wallace gained ascendency and support from both sides, a time and place to which I referred.

You wont because you know it is historical fact and that would surely destroy your racist narrative.

[The Urban Sombrero]

You wont because you know it is historical fact and that would surely destroy your racist narrative.

A long, long batch of posts ago, I stated that prejudice is a part of the human condition, not of party or of color of skin. The Hutus and Tutsis all had black skin. The black folks of Rodney King riot days hated the Vietnamese and Koreans. It is, however, not racist to cite demographics in battleground states. I have a near 90 year old neighbor, adamant Democrat, never as an adult voted for a Republican. He did not cast a presidential ballot, he said, in either Obama election. His reason? "I ain't votin' Republican, and I ain't votin' for a 'N' word." I doubt he was a lone Democrat in that sentiment.

[Bob Seger]

A long, long batch of posts ago, I stated that prejudice is a part of the human condition, not of party or of color of skin. The Hutus and Tutsis all had black skin. The black folks of Rodney King riot days hated the Vietnamese and Koreans. It is, however, not racist to cite demographics in battleground states. I have a near 90 year old neighbor, adamant Democrat, never as an adult voted for a Republican. He did not cast a presidential ballot, he said, in either Obama election. His reason? "I ain't votin' Republican, and I ain't votin' for a 'N' word." I doubt he was a lone Democrat in that sentiment.

Kinda gives you the heartset of a hard core democrat then, doesn't it?...It's not yester year that we see democrats demand free speech, yet riot at Berkley over a different thought process. If you were paying attention, you would realize that's what I was saying....But as afore mentioned, that would destroy the narrative on which you operate to acknowledge such fact....He who cries racist the loudest, is the racist, epitome.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Kinda gives you the mindset of a hard core democrat then, doesn't it?...If you were paying attention, you would realize, that's what I was saying....But as afore mentioned, that would destroy the narrative on which you operate to acknowledge such fact.

What? The fact that prejudice is a human trait? It is, but in this nation's history, the oppressors have had white skin, and across the globe, the colonizers and imperialists have often had white skin. The alt right is angry about race in this country, Bob. Are you denying that? Affirmative Action? Black Lives Matter? Racial quotas on campuses? That's not "a narrative." It's a political reality.

[Bob Seger]

It all boils down to do we want treated equally? Naw, special!!