FBI stages fake terror attack on the Federal Reserve in NYC

[Blackhawk2001]

Weak argument...

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...errorism_against_civilians-2.html#post2339198

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/1878250-post31.html

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/922718-post44.html

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/924000-post48.html

I could go on, but I think I made your point invalid.

NOT a weak argument. We always get into trouble with the Mods when we start trying to differentiate between Christianity and Islam. About the only way we can discuss Islam is because Sharia is a theocratic political system, and even that can get us in trouble.

 

[Classic Liberal]

NOT a weak argument. We always get into trouble with the Mods when we start trying to differentiate between Christianity and Islam.

Regardless, I proved lucky4034's point and you did not counter.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Regardless, I proved lucky4034's point and you did not counter.

I didn't bother to look at the references because they don't matter. Christianity doesn't - at its base - preach violence to spread itself. Islam does. Christianity preaches we are all sinful and fall short. Islam doesn't. And I've probably said too much.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

When in the hell have Christians ever been peaceful? I guess its easy to stand on one side of a fence and see the wrong in others while ignoring your own wrong doings.

I could see if you were Ghandi... but come on... Historically Christians beat the war drum as hard as Muslims. If the role was reversed and Saudi Arabia was the world super power and Israel was occupied by Islam and backed by Saudi Arabia... its not hard for me to envision Christians bombing Saudi Arabia and committing acts of terror in the name of Christianity.

You aren't any better than anyone else... and tick just like they tick.... To even suggest that Christians are above the rest of the world seems almost un-Christian.

Have a look at the war propaganda this country has turned out in the last decade.... The entire country is angry at Muslims... The entire country equates Muslim with Terrorist.... The entire country supports regulating the rights of Muslim Americans because of the FEAR the media has instilled.

Dude.

Where do you find that many brushes, that wide?

 

[lucky4034]

Perhaps that's why none of us who claim to be Christians have made such a claim. I don't believe we can profitably argue for or against your position due to the rules of the Forum, so perhaps you should come up with another argument that has some more recent historical precedent.

Look... I don't plan to argue anything. I'm stating common fact. This is not to insight a religious debate on which is the culprit, but most of this thread contains posts basically accusing Islam of being violent. I'm simply pointing out that Christianity, historically is not above the same.

This comes from someone standing on the outside of religion looking in unbiased.

Look... most of my family is Christian. Most of the people I know and love are Christian. I know VERY few Muslims. Most from my time in the military.... I just think its irresponsible the way the media and the brainwashed keep perpetuating the idea that Islam = evil terrorist.

Its funny... this whole thread is littered with suggestions on Islam... as soon as ONE POST... points a finger at Christianity, the words...

"Mods will lock this thread for talking about religion" come into play... if that isn't a double standard I don't know what is? It proves my point wholeheartedly!!!!

 

[lucky4034]

I didn't bother to look at the references because they don't matter. Christianity doesn't - at its base - preach violence to spread itself. Islam does. Christianity preaches we are all sinful and fall short. Islam doesn't. And I've probably said too much.

I find it weird you believe this... (not to be an ass... I'm being serious).

What do you know about Islam really? What the media tells you... what your friends regurgitate? Do they preach this in church?

 

[Classic Liberal]

I didn't bother to look at the references because they don't matter. Christianity doesn't - at its base - preach violence to spread itself. Islam does. Christianity preaches we are all sinful and fall short. Islam doesn't. And I've probably said too much.

Some that hold Christianity as their faith use it as a tool to pursue destruction to their opposition.

 

[lucky4034]

Dude.

Where do you find that many brushes, that wide?

huh? I don't get it....

 

[drillsgt]

Back on topic

There are people who wish to harm us. We must stop these people.

Again I ask:

1. Name a successful entrapment defense by a defendant at a terrorism trial.

2. How is this a "false flag" operation by the FBI?

1. I don't know
2. It's not

I don't know how this false flag stuff got started, it's certainly not that. I think what irritates people is the FBI sets these operations up from start to finish and then proclaims they prevented a terrorist attack. It's pure fantasy. It's like the fireman who sneaks out and sets fires so he can swoop in and be the hero by saving someone. There was a fire and there could have been a lot of property damage or lives endangered but the whole thing wouldn't have happened without some action by the fireman.
All the FBI did was stumble upon some hapless 21 year old dolt that had some kind of intent they could seize upon. I'm not sure why they take the fantasy to such a conclusion, how much does this cost taxpayers for an operation like this? Perhaps they need to do it to catalog all the overt actions for a conspiracy case, I don't know. I'm not impressed, like I said before catch a real terrorist with a real plan and real weapons beyond just having visions of grandeur by posting on a website and i'll be impressed.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Back on topic



1. I don't know
2. It's not

I don't know how this false flag stuff got started, it's certainly not that. I think what irritates people is the FBI sets these operations up from start to finish and then proclaims they prevented a terrorist attack. It's pure fantasy. It's like the fireman who sneaks out and sets fires so he can swoop in and be the hero by saving someone. There was a fire and there could have been a lot of property damage or lives endangered but the whole thing wouldn't have happened without some action by the fireman.
All the FBI did was stumble upon some hapless 21 year old dolt that had some kind of intent they could seize upon. I'm not sure why they take the fantasy to such a conclusion, how much does this cost taxpayers for an operation like this? Perhaps they need to do it to catalog all the overt actions for a conspiracy case, I don't know. I'm not impressed, like I said before catch a real terrorist with a real plan and real weapons beyond just having visions of grandeur by posting on a website and i'll be impressed.

I'm curious. Since a charge of terrorism or conspiracy to commit a terrorist act must be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" in court. How do you propose that law enforcement agencies compile enough evidence to obtain a conviction absent attempting to thwart a planned attack at the last minute?

And what would be your response if you discovered that a law enforcement agency KNEW of a terrorist act being planned, yet failed to stop it (think the hooha over what the FBI "knew" about the Twin Towers attack)?

I see there was an incident at a mall on the East Coast yesterday where a man threw a molotov cocktail into a crowd and supposedly had three more ready to throw. Definitely a terrorist act, although the "who-and-why" of it has yet to be determined. Suppose the police knew about this guy but just didn't quite get there in time; what would be your response?

 

[rambone]

I think what irritates people is the FBI sets these operations up from start to finish and then proclaims they prevented a terrorist attack. It's pure fantasy. It's like the fireman who sneaks out and sets fires so he can swoop in and be the hero by saving someone. There was a fire and there could have been a lot of property damage or lives endangered but the whole thing wouldn't have happened without some action by the fireman.

Perfect analogy. That has happened in my county.

I see there was an incident at a mall on the East Coast yesterday where a man threw a molotov cocktail into a crowd and supposedly had three more ready to throw. Definitely a terrorist act,

"Attempted Murder" is soo 1990s. Now everything needs to be terrorism to justify all the cool toys and unconstitutional laws. There's a terrorist in every town according to some people.

 

[Compatriot G]

When I look at this situation, I see a different analogy. I saw an episode of "Cops" or one of the other cop shows and a woman made contact with a "hitman" to kill her husband. The "hitman" was actually an undercover police officer. She told the "hitman" what she wanted done and gave him all of the important details he needed to do the job.

On the day the "hit" was supposed to occur, she left the house to go to the gym. The police had already contacted her husband and explained what was going on. The police played it up like a crime had occurred. They crime scene tape up, several officers were on scene, EMS was there, the coroner, etc. When she came home, she pretended to be grief stricken and was crying hysterically, wanting to see her husband's body, etc.

They took her to the police station to try and find out "who" might have wanted her husband dead. After asking some questions, they finally explained the whole situation to her. If I remember correctly, she was convicted and sentenced to 20 or 25 years in prison.

This seems to be the same kind of case. Instead of killing a spouse, he wanted to kill multiple people. When he reached out to try to find some assistance, he made the same mistake the woman made, he contacted the cops instead of the real thing.

 

[lucky4034]

I'm curious. Since a charge of terrorism or conspiracy to commit a terrorist act must be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" in court. How do you propose that law enforcement agencies compile enough evidence to obtain a conviction absent attempting to thwart a planned attack at the last minute?

Oh really? Tell that to the guys in Guantanamo Bay

 

[Expat]

So when prospective Jihadis get on an internet chat server and starts asking how to make bombs, asks where to get the material and questions like that, what would you have the FBI do? Just tell him, we are the FBI, don't ask questions like that here because we monitor this server? Then he goes elsewhere that is perhaps not monitored.

 

[Expat]

Oh really? Tell that to the guys in Guantanamo Bay

I assume you will give us a list of the inmates at Gitmo that were in the US legally and taken there without any legal process?

 

[lucky4034]

I assume you will give us a list of the inmates at Gitmo that were in the US legally and taken there without any legal process?

Here... feel free to sift through them all

List of Guantanamo Bay detainees - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[88GT]

Weak argument...

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...errorism_against_civilians-2.html#post2339198

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/1878250-post31.html

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/922718-post44.html

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/924000-post48.html

I could go on, but I think I made your point invalid.

FIrst link: Kirk never advocated glass parking lot.

Second link: Not familiar with author's religious beliefs, but his wasn't outright advocacy for glass parking lot either.

Third an fourth link authors are NOT CHRISTIANS (or weren't when they posted those comments).

So fully half of your examples attempting to prove that Christians advocate genocide are authored by people who aren't Christians. The other half don't even say that's what they want. They both just use the well-known phrase to make a point.

Additionally, BH's comment was that it is impossible for Christians to defend themselves on this forum without violating the forum rules.

Either way, you haven't invalidated anything. Not the claim that Christians hypocritically advocate for genocide and not the claim that Christians are impeded in defense of themselves due to forum rules.

 

[Expat]

Here... feel free to sift through them all

List of Guantanamo Bay detainees - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I didn't make the allegation, you did. That list doesn't address the subject.

 

[lucky4034]

FIrst link: Kirk never advocated glass parking lot.

Second link: Not familiar with author's religious beliefs, but his wasn't outright advocacy for glass parking lot either.

Third an fourth link authors are NOT CHRISTIANS (or weren't when they posted those comments).

So fully half of your examples attempting to prove that Christians advocate genocide are authored by people who aren't Christians. The other half don't even say that's what they want. They both just use the well-known phrase to make a point.

Additionally, BH's comment was that it is impossible for Christians to defend themselves on this forum without violating the forum rules.

Either way, you haven't invalidated anything. Not the claim that Christians hypocritically advocate for genocide and not the claim that Christians are impeded in defense of themselves due to forum rules.

Actually the point of my post isn't so much that Christians are hypocrites as it is that American's in general are being brainwashed in a way....

After writing and reading this thread I wanted to test my theory a bit to see if I am way off basis. I decided to make up a word association game to see what types of responses I would get. So far I have tried it on 3 people... My Boss, my Co-worker and my mom. (all three happen to be very different both socially, economically and ethnicity... this wasn't planned by the way, but I think its worth noting)

Rules... I say a word and you respond with the first word that comes to mind with no hesitation.

5 Words:

1. Pizza
2. Stoplight
3. Dog
4. Star Wars
5. Muslim​

Responses to the word Muslim:

Boss - "Terrorist"
Co-Worker - "Crazy"
Mom - "Scary"​

What does this prove? Nothing... but I plan to continue to do this test with people just to see.... I obviously selected the words... but I think I would have responded "terrorist" if someone had done this test with me and I am neither Christian or believe that Muslims are terrorist.

 

[88GT]

Actually the point of my post isn't so much that Christians are hypocrites as it is that American's in general are being brainwashed in a way....

After writing and reading this thread I wanted to test my theory a bit to see if I am way off basis. I decided to make up a word association game to see what types of responses I would get. So far I have tried it on 3 people... My Boss, my Co-worker and my mom. (all three happen to be very different both socially, economically and ethnicity... this wasn't planned by the way, but I think its worth noting)

Rules... I say a word and you respond with the first word that comes to mind with no hesitation.

5 Words:

1. Pizza
2. Stoplight
3. Dog
4. Star Wars
5. Muslim​

Responses to the word Muslim:

Boss - "Terrorist"
Co-Worker - "Crazy"
Mom - "Scary"​

What does this prove? Nothing... but I plan to continue to do this test with people just to see.... I obviously selected the words... but I think I would have responded "terrorist" if someone had done this test with me and I am neither Christian or believe that Muslims are terrorist.

Let me add to your raw data.

My first thought was "Middle East." My second was hajib.