San Bernardino Shooting

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Hate to be a pisser, but there are reports of all sorts of “middle eastern men” furtively coming and going from the house at night for some time. The neighbor didn’t want to be called racist, so he didn’t say anything.

The rifles were modified, with some expertise, to bypass CA mag rules.

The bombs were well made with classic bathtub explosives favored by ISIS.

He was a a devout Muslim and often contacted known radicals.

In short, this was terrorism.

What is the pisser is this: they almost certainly had help and instruction.

This leads me to believe there is a larger network out there, and Seyyid just happened to get pissed, pull a Leeroy Jenkens*, and went off too early.

More is undoubtedly planned at shopping centers and places of work throughout the USA.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeroy_Jenkins[/quote]

While it’s entirely possible (and arguably, likely), the FBI hasn’t determined whether the attack was an act of terrorism. “[A senior law enforcement official] said the FBI has yet to find definitive evidence that the couple had been radicalized or were looking at jihadist websites or reading terrorist literature such as Inspire magazine.” To assume ISIL is directly or tangentially responsible (outside of inspiration) is also a step at the current stage of the investigation. It wouldn’t be surprising, however, to learn that the couple was inspired by ISIL.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/...omepage%2Fstory

If we assume the attack is terrorism, it appears to not have been directed or networked, but rather inspired.[/quote]
WRONG.[/quote]

I’m wrong? And in capital letters no less? The FBI has yet to state that the event was terrorism, though it’s entirely possible that it was. It isn’t unreasonable to believe that terrorism was the likely motive, but it’s too soon to say definitively. Regardless, if it is terrorism, the attack doesn’t appear to have been directed or networked, but inspired. [/quote]
Sorry man, but I don’t need the director of the fbi to make a statement to draw my own correct conclusions.
So yeah- capital letters.[/quote]

Bingo. I have eyes and can see just fine without an unelected federal bureaucrat telling what I saw. I don’t think anyone has to be exposed to FBI classified information to figure this one out.

42

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Hate to be a pisser, but there are reports of all sorts of “middle eastern men” furtively coming and going from the house at night for some time. The neighbor didn’t want to be called racist, so he didn’t say anything.

The rifles were modified, with some expertise, to bypass CA mag rules.

The bombs were well made with classic bathtub explosives favored by ISIS.

He was a a devout Muslim and often contacted known radicals.

In short, this was terrorism.

What is the pisser is this: they almost certainly had help and instruction.

This leads me to believe there is a larger network out there, and Seyyid just happened to get pissed, pull a Leeroy Jenkens*, and went off too early.

More is undoubtedly planned at shopping centers and places of work throughout the USA.

*Leeroy Jenkins - Wikipedia

[/quote]
All morbidity aside~ Kudos for making an awesome Leroy Jenkins analogy. That is still cracking me up.

43

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

It’s funny, Obummer does not jump to conclusions on motive, but he sure does on enacting legislation! Lol[/quote]

Nor does he jump to conclusions that it is radical Islamic terrorism. But, when a white cop showed up at a black University Professor’s house because of a call of someone snooping around Obama immediately said “looks like the police officer acted stupidly.” Then a few weeks later in order to save face they had a beer summit on the White House lawn. That is when Obama was still trying to cover his obvious race bias. He’s not even trying now.

I’m sure you remember the many times that Obama showed great sympathy for black victims (which I have no problem with) “Trayvon could have been my son.” Yet, one can hear crickets chirp when the victim is white, or when the attacker is of Muslim heritage, or a sympathizer (note fort hood for one).

He is also not very hot to rid the world of Isis for some reason. Hmm…one would think that the American President would be leading a strong coalition of other countries against this band of evil scum. But, not Obama he’s quite happy to show them he’s a tough guy by having a climate change summit in Paris.

Seems to be that Obama is not only a Muslim sympathizer but also a racist.

Harsh? I don’t think so as I. I’ve watched this guy for 7 years now. I knew he was going to be a bad President but I never knew he’d be this bad.
[/quote]

Mr. Obummer is a strange bird. A strange bird indeed. True to his Sunni roots, Obummer’s exposure to Islam in his youth was positive. This experience, coupled with his distaste for traditional America (read, Judeo-Christian values), fosters a combination of sympathy and denial for the problems with Islam. I think he believes that America is responsible for creating an environment for radical Islam, not the Koran itself.

He’s a social justice warrior. He feels White Males have disproportionally prospered on the backs of others. So those that have been oppressed, deserve equity. He distrusts imbalance. Imbalance leads to exploitation. Therefore power, wealth and resources must be shared- both as individuals and as a country.

This comes off as a denier of radical Islam, and someone who favors certain classes of people.

44

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Hate to be a pisser, but there are reports of all sorts of “middle eastern men” furtively coming and going from the house at night for some time. The neighbor didn’t want to be called racist, so he didn’t say anything.

The rifles were modified, with some expertise, to bypass CA mag rules.

The bombs were well made with classic bathtub explosives favored by ISIS.

He was a a devout Muslim and often contacted known radicals.

In short, this was terrorism.

What is the pisser is this: they almost certainly had help and instruction.

This leads me to believe there is a larger network out there, and Seyyid just happened to get pissed, pull a Leeroy Jenkens*, and went off too early.

More is undoubtedly planned at shopping centers and places of work throughout the USA.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeroy_Jenkins[/quote]

While it’s entirely possible (and arguably, likely), the FBI hasn’t determined whether the attack was an act of terrorism. “[A senior law enforcement official] said the FBI has yet to find definitive evidence that the couple had been radicalized or were looking at jihadist websites or reading terrorist literature such as Inspire magazine.” To assume ISIL is directly or tangentially responsible (outside of inspiration) is also a step at the current stage of the investigation. It wouldn’t be surprising, however, to learn that the couple was inspired by ISIL.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/...omepage%2Fstory

If we assume the attack is terrorism, it appears to not have been directed or networked, but rather inspired.[/quote]
WRONG.[/quote]

I’m wrong? And in capital letters no less? The FBI has yet to state that the event was terrorism, though it’s entirely possible that it was. It isn’t unreasonable to believe that terrorism was the likely motive, but it’s too soon to say definitively. Regardless, if it is terrorism, the attack doesn’t appear to have been directed or networked, but inspired. [/quote]
Sorry man, but I don’t need the director of the fbi to make a statement to draw my own correct conclusions.
So yeah- capital letters.[/quote]

Bingo. I have eyes and can see just fine without an unelected federal bureaucrat telling what I saw. I don’t think anyone has to be exposed to FBI classified information to figure this one out.
[/quote]

There’s that uncanny gut impulse again. I’m sure y’all instantly divined that al-Qaida carried out the 9/11 attacks, and that you felt it in your gut that Iraq had WMDs. Why would San Bernardito be any different? Law enforcement and intelligence analysis be damned, it was an Islamic State directed terrorist attack! How do I know that, you might you ask? I feel it I my gut.

45

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Hate to be a pisser, but there are reports of all sorts of “middle eastern men” furtively coming and going from the house at night for some time. The neighbor didn’t want to be called racist, so he didn’t say anything.

The rifles were modified, with some expertise, to bypass CA mag rules.

The bombs were well made with classic bathtub explosives favored by ISIS.

He was a a devout Muslim and often contacted known radicals.

In short, this was terrorism.

What is the pisser is this: they almost certainly had help and instruction.

This leads me to believe there is a larger network out there, and Seyyid just happened to get pissed, pull a Leeroy Jenkens*, and went off too early.

More is undoubtedly planned at shopping centers and places of work throughout the USA.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeroy_Jenkins[/quote]

While it’s entirely possible (and arguably, likely), the FBI hasn’t determined whether the attack was an act of terrorism. “[A senior law enforcement official] said the FBI has yet to find definitive evidence that the couple had been radicalized or were looking at jihadist websites or reading terrorist literature such as Inspire magazine.” To assume ISIL is directly or tangentially responsible (outside of inspiration) is also a step at the current stage of the investigation. It wouldn’t be surprising, however, to learn that the couple was inspired by ISIL.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/...omepage%2Fstory

If we assume the attack is terrorism, it appears to not have been directed or networked, but rather inspired.[/quote]
WRONG.[/quote]

I’m wrong? And in capital letters no less? The FBI has yet to state that the event was terrorism, though it’s entirely possible that it was. It isn’t unreasonable to believe that terrorism was the likely motive, but it’s too soon to say definitively. Regardless, if it is terrorism, the attack doesn’t appear to have been directed or networked, but inspired. [/quote]
Sorry man, but I don’t need the director of the fbi to make a statement to draw my own correct conclusions.
So yeah- capital letters.[/quote]

Bingo. I have eyes and can see just fine without an unelected federal bureaucrat telling what I saw. I don’t think anyone has to be exposed to FBI classified information to figure this one out.
[/quote]

There’s that uncanny gut impulse again. I’m sure y’all instantly divined that al-Qaida carried out the 9/11 attacks, and that you felt it in your gut that Iraq had WMDs. Why would San Bernardito be any different? Law enforcement and intelligence analysis be damned, it was an Islamic State directed terrorist attack! How do I know that, you might you ask? I feel it I my gut. [/quote]
No. I knew it was al-qaida because of their previous attacks and of wmd from people who were hit by them.
Go hide in your books chump. You have nothing when it comes to real world analysis and conclusions.
Fwiw~ when I enlisted in the Navy, my contract was to go to naval intel and buds/divefare, so maybe there is something to that gut thing. Or the ole noggin. That didn’t end up working out though, so oh well.

47

I was in the gym when the shooting came on the news. The thing that struck me as odd, what yesterday was an AR15 or assault rifle is now called merely a “long gun”. What the hell is the thinking behind that?

48

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

It’s funny, Obummer does not jump to conclusions on motive, but he sure does on enacting legislation! Lol[/quote]

Nor does he jump to conclusions that it is radical Islamic terrorism. But, when a white cop showed up at a black University Professor’s house because of a call of someone snooping around Obama immediately said “looks like the police officer acted stupidly.” Then a few weeks later in order to save face they had a beer summit on the White House lawn. That is when Obama was still trying to cover his obvious race bias. He’s not even trying now.

I’m sure you remember the many times that Obama showed great sympathy for black victims (which I have no problem with) “Trayvon could have been my son.” Yet, one can hear crickets chirp when the victim is white, or when the attacker is of Muslim heritage, or a sympathizer (note fort hood for one).

He is also not very hot to rid the world of Isis for some reason. Hmm…one would think that the American President would be leading a strong coalition of other countries against this band of evil scum. But, not Obama he’s quite happy to show them he’s a tough guy by having a climate change summit in Paris.

Seems to be that Obama is not only a Muslim sympathizer but also a racist.

Harsh? I don’t think so as I. I’ve watched this guy for 7 years now. I knew he was going to be a bad President but I never knew he’d be this bad.
[/quote]

Mr. Obummer is a strange bird. A strange bird indeed. True to his Sunni roots, Obummer’s exposure to Islam in his youth was positive. This experience, coupled with his distaste for traditional America (read, Judeo-Christian values), fosters a combination of sympathy and denial for the problems with Islam. I think he believes that America is responsible for creating an environment for radical Islam, not the Koran itself.

He’s a social justice warrior. He feels White Males have disproportionally prospered on the backs of others. So those that have been oppressed, deserve equity. He distrusts imbalance. Imbalance leads to exploitation. Therefore power, wealth and resources must be shared- both as individuals and as a country.

This comes off as a denier of radical Islam, and someone who favors certain classes of people.
[/quote]

Well said my friend.

49

Bismark my young friend…

What were the names of the attackers?

And where again did they travel too?

And what argument did the male have with a Christian at his workplace?

And what religion were these two scum bags?

I sure cannot say who directed them to do it for certain…

But…2+2 is still 4 in my world.

Someday when you get a little older you might be able to put these things together (maybe that’s why the US does not hire twenty something’s to run the CIA or the FBI or for that matter do anything of importance. As I said I don’t know for certain know who directed them to attack. But they most certainly (according to reports) were in touch with one nefarious Muslim terrorist organization or another. And even if they did act alone (highly doubtful) they did it in the name of Allah! What more needs to be said? If we allowed suspicious Japanese who lived in America to kill innocent Americans we may not have won WWII. I am not saying jail all Muslims who live in America that would be wrong minded.

But here’s an idea…

Obama needs to smarten up (which will not happen) and allow the FBI to round up the various suspects that have been under surveillance for highly suspicious activities and deport them back to their own lands. How many more innocent Americans need to die because of this politically correct, Muslim sympathizing, racist left wing a-hole who is our President?

My heart aches for those who lost loved ones. Fortunately, most of this will be easily preventable once Obama serves out his term and we have a new President.

50

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Radical Muslims, as they have repeatedly promised, again kill Americans in America and practically the first thing liberal Democrats do is pant like crazed – was going to say “dogs” but why don’t we go with…“Muslims” – about restricting, i.e., infringing on, gun possession by Americans.[/quote]

I’m glad you didn’t insult dogs.

51

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Radical Muslims, as they have repeatedly promised, again kill Americans in America and practically the first thing liberal Democrats do is pant like crazed – was going to say “dogs” but why don’t we go with…“Muslims” – about restricting, i.e., infringing on, gun possession by Americans.[/quote]

Good choice, after all, we like dogs.

52

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Radical Muslims, as they have repeatedly promised, again kill Americans in America and practically the first thing liberal Democrats do is pant like crazed – was going to say “dogs” but why don’t we go with…“Muslims” – about restricting, i.e., infringing on, gun possession by Americans.[/quote]

I’m glad you didn’t insult dogs.[/quote]

Dang, 14 minutes behind the times.

53

I am most amused by the argument that all 160,000,000 + gun owners in America are collectively responsible for this (making violent crime by legal gun owners per capita statistically a null at 8 digits — being the group LEAST likely to commit crime), but Muslims – where support of radicalism hits the high plurality or majority depending on the poll and question – cannot get a second look or it is racism.

I also am amused at the logical twists people are doing to call this anything but what it is – just another case of Islamic terror.

Today, NBC opined that Farook went off the deep end because a Jewish guy at work (his first target, of course) dared to disagree with him and opine that Islam had a violence problem.

Farook sure proved that Jew wrong!

54

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I am most amused by the argument that all 160,000,000 + gun owners in America are collectively responsible for this (making violent crime by legal gun owners per capita statistically a null at 8 digits — being the group LEAST likely to commit crime), but Muslims – where support of radicalism hits the high plurality or majority depending on the poll and question – cannot get a second look or it is racism.

I also am amused at the logical twists people are doing to call this anything but what it is – just another case of Islamic terror.
[/quote]

Looking at this thread and those from forums frequented by a decidedly more liberal crowd, I think you can replace “muslims” with “guns/gun owners” for any of the posts and have a coherent post.

Fun.

Oh, I think I saw a “breaking news” on CNN stating that the shooters had connections to ISIS as I walked out of the gym today.

Also fun.

55

WashPo just reported that the attacker had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State leader on Facebook, so there ya have it.

56

[quote]HeyWaj10 wrote:
WashPo just reported that the attacker had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State leader on Facebook, so there ya have it.[/quote]

It will still be labeled workplace violence because it happened at work.

57

[quote]HeyWaj10 wrote:
WashPo just reported that the attacker had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State leader on Facebook, so there ya have it.[/quote]

Remember tho, obamummer says the ISLAMIC state is not islam…

58

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]HeyWaj10 wrote:
WashPo just reported that the attacker had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State leader on Facebook, so there ya have it.[/quote]

Remember tho, obamummer says the ISLAMIC state is not islam… [/quote]

If he had any integrity, he would resign. He is unfit to be Commander in Chief. He has a certain sensitivity to Islam that prevents him from protecting Americans the way we need to be protected.

Trump recently made a comment about Obama and there being something we don’t know about him. I’m starting to lean towards agreeing with him to some extent. I keep seeing a resentment that Obama has with America. He is scolding Americans about guns when we have terrorists in America, either home grown or imported.

59

[quote]Darnell Becker wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I am most amused by the argument that all 160,000,000 + gun owners in America are collectively responsible for this (making violent crime by legal gun owners per capita statistically a null at 8 digits — being the group LEAST likely to commit crime), but Muslims – where support of radicalism hits the high plurality or majority depending on the poll and question – cannot get a second look or it is racism.

I also am amused at the logical twists people are doing to call this anything but what it is – just another case of Islamic terror.
[/quote]

Looking at this thread and those from forums frequented by a decidedly more liberal crowd, I think you can replace “muslims” with “guns/gun owners” for any of the posts and have a coherent post.

[/quote]This is one democratic tragedy.Every side can take advantage and push their agenda, dont matter if you’re a pinko or a gun nut hick.
[/quote]

In the case of San Bernardino, the issue of guns is a bit trickier.

The city attorney of San Bernardino is under scrutiny for telling residents to â??lock their doors and load their gunsâ?? during a city council meeting. The official explained that because the city is bankrupt and slashing public safety budgets people will need to start protecting themselves.

The truth is, San Berna-ghetto became a shithole a few years back when they went under economically. They were hit very hard from the housing crash. Too many promises to city worker$ in an area with little to offer.

60

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]HeyWaj10 wrote:
WashPo just reported that the attacker had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State leader on Facebook, so there ya have it.[/quote]

Remember tho, obamummer says the ISLAMIC state is not islam… [/quote]

If he had any integrity, he would resign. He is unfit to be Commander in Chief. He has a certain sensitivity to Islam that prevents him from protecting Americans the way we need to be protected.

Trump recently made a comment about Obama and there being something we don’t know about him. I’m starting to lean towards agreeing with him to some extent. I keep seeing a resentment that Obama has with America. He is scolding Americans about guns when we have terrorists in America, either home grown or imported. [/quote]

Something we don’t know, like he was raise Muslim?