Quote:In the case of Syrian refugees, you're wrong. They are vetted.
so was this guys, howd that work for you.
Quote:IF he wins the election, I'll be interested to hear his excuses when this happens again....and it will.
You are right about the excuses part. However, I would change that to his/her excuses. Trump and Hillary are pretty much the same thing.
Quote:In the case of Syrian refugees, you're wrong. They are vetted.
This is why they are secretly flown in without passing through customs? How do we vet them, exactly? We are trying to remove the administration we would need to do that.
Quote:
I didn't edit that quote one bit, and I can't believe anyone can miss Trump's implication. Click the link and read the whole article if you want. What Trump is saying is pretty clear.
Here. Here's the first part of the article:
==============================================================================
Donald Trump stepped up his criticism of President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday, pointedly questioning Obama's lack of willingness to call the act "radical Islamic terrorism" and insinuating that the president's sympathies might lie elsewhere.
"He doesn't get it or he gets it better than anybody understands. It's one or the other," Trump said of Obama on "Fox & Friends," speaking on the phone. "And either one is unacceptable, No. 1, and No. 2, calling on another gun ban, I mean, this man has no clue.”
<div>
<div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
Trump again implied that the president was not a trustworthy leader who failed to prevent Omar Mateen, an apparently radicalized 29-year-old Florida man, from going on a shooting rampage at an Orlando nightclub early Sunday morning, killing 49 and injuring at least 53.
"We're led by a man who is a very — look, we're led by a man that either is, is not tough, not smart, or he's got something else in mind," Trump said. "And the something else in mind, you know, people can't believe it. People cannot — they cannot believe that President Obama is acting the ways he acts and can't even mention the words radical Islamic terrorism. There's something going on. It's inconceivable."
The attacks, delivered in Trump’s signature style that leaves him some deniability, were some of his most inflammatory on Obama since Trump played a central role in stoking the birther conspiracy theories in 2011.
During his effort to force Obama to present his birth certificate to prove his citizenship back then, Trump implied to Fox News that the reason for the president not showing it "because maybe it says he is a Muslim."
==========================================================================
Can you not read this and understand what Trump is saying?
Can you really vote for this guy?
</div>
Just this year, Preside obama was still advancing the narrative that Terrorism is a result of CLIMATE CHANGE! At the fort hood massacre you had a guy walk in and kill over a dozen brave men and women of our armed services screaming islamic slogans and it gets designated as workplace violence. The guy was still getting paid while he was detained while the families of the victims were denied benefits associated with being killed in an act of war. We held off on bombing ISIS targets because of perceived ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. We had a US ambassador killed abroad and our commander and chief blamed YOUTUBE. And Trump's the crazy one.
Give me a break.
Quote:This is why they are secretly flown in without passing through customs? How do we vet them, exactly? We are trying to remove the administration we would need to do that.
Do you have any factual evidence to make such a claim?
The more that comes out, the more this appears to be one of the greater intelligence failures in our countries history.
This has absolutely nothing to do with more Gun control. The most draconian fantasy of the interpretation of the constitution would have still allowed this person to own a weapon. Why you ask? Because he would have been designated a member of a regulated government contracted militia. The guy worked as an armed security guard for a company that last year received just shy of 100 million dollars in federal contracts to secure airports federal buildings etc.
This is a man who was brought to the attention of the FBI not once but twice. This is a man who one of his co-workers describes as constantly agitated and anger even espousing killing people. It got so bad that the co-worker had to resign after being harassed by this person. The threat to do harm to others in and of itself is a crime. There was a police officer in Jacksonville that made a threat against Obama he was fired immediately. That alone should have negated his clearance to work as an armed security guard for a government contractor.
Why didn't the FBI dig into this guy? Why didn't they find his ex-wife who will apparently tell anyone that will listen that this person is a serial domestic abuser who beat her repeatedly (again a crime that would have negated this person from being able to buy a gun?) How can someone, described as walking around telling anyone who would listen that he doesn't like womens rights, doesn't like gays and fantasizes about being a jihadi and killing innocent people, interviewed by authorities and screened by a private contracting firm, and still be allowed to handle a weapon?
Because even when he ADMITTED to claiming allegiance to foreign terror groups, admitted to threatening violence, admitted to making outlandish statements, he said he only did it out of anger because his co-workers were DISCRIMINATING against his heritage... That's the country we live in now folks. That's the change you can believe in.
They have told us, in letters and memorandum that they will use our own addiction to political correctness to destroy us. I wish to God that someone will start listening.
Quote:The more that comes out, the more this appears to be one of the greater intelligence failures in our countries history.
This has absolutely nothing to do with more Gun control. The most draconian fantasy of the interpretation of the constitution would have still allowed this person to own a weapon. Why you ask? Because he would have been designated a member of a regulated government contracted militia. The guy worked as an armed security guard for a company that last year received just shy of 100 million dollars in federal contracts to secure airports federal buildings etc.
This is a man who was brought to the attention of the FBI not once but twice. This is a man who one of his co-workers describes as constantly agitated and anger even espousing killing people. It got so bad that the co-worker had to resign after being harassed by this person. The threat to do harm to others in and of itself is a crime. There was a police officer in Jacksonville that made a threat against Obama he was fired immediately. That alone should have negated his clearance to work as an armed security guard for a government contractor.
Why didn't the FBI dig into this guy? Why didn't they find his ex-wife who will apparently tell anyone that will listen that this person is a serial domestic abuser who beat her repeatedly (again a crime that would have negated this person from being able to buy a gun?) How can someone, described as walking around telling anyone who would listen that he doesn't like womens rights, doesn't like gays and fantasizes about being a jihadi and killing innocent people, interviewed by authorities and screened by a private contracting firm, and still be allowed to handle a weapon?
Because even when he ADMITTED to claiming allegiance to foreign terror groups, admitted to threatening violence, admitted to making outlandish statements, he said he only did it out of anger because his co-workers were DISCRIMINATING against his heritage... That's the country we live in now folks. That's the change you can believe in.
They have told us, in letters and memorandum that they will use our own addiction to political correctness to destroy us. I wish to God that someone will start listening.
+1000 Imagine if a white conservative christian had displayed even 1/2 of those infractions how differently he or she would have been treated. Political correctness is going to be the downfall of this once great nation. We cannot have an open and honest discussion about anything anymore because someone's feelings might get hurt.
Quote:This is why they are secretly flown in without passing through customs? How do we vet them, exactly? We are trying to remove the administration we would need to do that.
Do me a favor and quit reading my posts until your tinfoil hat becomes too uncomfortable to wear.
Quote:so was this guys, howd that work for you.
Vetted? He was an American citizen, purchasing a gun. Why would we worry about that? He was doing the most American thing possible.
The FBI had two cracks at this guy and whiffed. That's with his whole life here domestically.
How can we reasonably expect the vetting process of foreign nationals to be any better?
Does anybody else have an issue with this guys father being interviewed on television the day after? Just seems wrong.
Quote:God doesn't have it out for anyone. It's the overzealous people that do. That's all I'm saying per CoC rules.
I agree completely. My comment was a reference to Falwell in the 80's claiming God laid AIDS on the homosexuals as a curse. More a reference for the folks that want to make this more about religion than behavior.
Edit - double quote
Quote:+1000 Imagine if a white conservative christian had displayed even 1/2 of those infractions how differently he or she would have been treated. Political correctness is going to be the downfall of this once great nation. We cannot have an open and honest discussion about anything anymore because someone's feelings might get hurt.
I honestly believe what you are saying is drivel, and am open to being shown that I am wrong. I hope your feelings don't get hurt by that.
From what I see, the main difference is he might be without a job, but I don't see how his inflammatory comments necessarily revoke his right to purchase a gun. Whether he says he was on jihad, or is a Christian soldier, or worships a vengeful spaghetti monster, if he later claims he was just speaking out and wasn't serious, how in our current regulatory environment does that affect anything? None of that has a thing to do with political correctness.
Quote:
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jj82284" data-cid="761910" data-time="1465858884">
<div>
The more that comes out, the more this appears to be one of the greater intelligence failures in our countries history.
This has absolutely nothing to do with more Gun control. The most draconian fantasy of the interpretation of the constitution would have still allowed this person to own a weapon. Why you ask? Because he would have been designated a member of a regulated government contracted militia. The guy worked as an armed security guard for a company that last year received just shy of 100 million dollars in federal contracts to secure airports federal buildings etc. This is a man who was brought to the attention of the FBI not once but twice. This is a man who one of his co-workers describes as constantly agitated and anger even espousing killing people. It got so bad that the co-worker had to resign after being harassed by this person. The threat to do harm to others in and of itself is a crime. There was a police officer in Jacksonville that made a threat against Obama he was fired immediately. That alone should have negated his clearance to work as an armed security guard for a government contractor.
So lets say they fire him ... and? Your point? How does that change anything?
Why didn't the FBI dig into this guy? Why didn't they find his ex-wife who will apparently tell anyone that will listen that this person is a serial domestic abuser who beat her repeatedly (again a crime that would have negated this person from being able to buy a gun?) How can someone, described as walking around telling anyone who would listen that he doesn't like womens rights, doesn't like gays and fantasizes about being a jihadi and killing innocent people, interviewed by authorities and screened by a private contracting firm, and still be allowed to handle a weapon? Because even when he ADMITTED to claiming allegiance to foreign terror groups, admitted to threatening violence, admitted to making outlandish statements, he said he only did it out of anger because his co-workers were DISCRIMINATING against his heritage... That's the country we live in now folks. That's the change you can believe in.
OK, so he claims his previous inflammatory comments were just venting. Again, what would you advocate we do? Not being snarky, just asking what your policy suggestions are.
They have told us, in letters and memorandum that they will use our own addiction to political correctness to destroy us. I wish to God that someone will start listening.
My questions about what you would do are not only addressed to you, they are addressed to anyone who would like to improve our security and still maintain our freedoms. I have previously said that I wouldn't mind increasing ability to carry concealed and also decrease the availability of assault weapons. Just trying to get clarification on what specific actions others such as yourself recommend we take.
</div>
</blockquote>
Quote:I honestly believe what you are saying is drivel, and am open to being shown that I am wrong. I hope your feelings don't get hurt by that. From what I see, the main difference is he might be without a job, but I don't see how his inflammatory comments necessarily revoke his right to purchase a gun. Whether he says he was on jihad, or is a Christian soldier, or worships a vengeful spaghetti monster, if he later claims he was just speaking out and wasn't serious, how in our current regulatory environment does that affect anything? None of that has a thing to do with political correctness.
The fact that you are angry isn't an excuse for committing a crime. Making terrorist threats is a crime. The idea that "Well i was angry" is a credible defense is preposterous. As i stated above, a similar situation happened with a JSO lieutenant that i know. One, not repeated, but one comment about what he'd like to do to the president and it was understood that wasn't the kind of mentality that we wanted from someone entrusted with carrying firearms and entrusting the law. When you talk about someone with his access, and training with firearms the idea that you would encourage or emotionally subsidize a reckless emotional state defies basic logic.
further, the guy demonstrated a long pattern of abusive behavior. In the case of a terrorist threat the employer should have been contacted and involved in the investigation to determine the veracity of the claims and also to become active in the monitoring and screening of the individual. There is no way that you should have a wife running for her life, a co-worker quitting in protest and the FBI not know about it in general. When you factor in the fact that this is a first generation Citizen who's parents are from a country with a history of extremist views who made two trips to Saudi Arabia this should have been a slam dunk. These are serious red flags.
For someone of his access and responsibility as an armed employee of a federal contractor the minute that he starts ranting and raving about being a member of hezbollah and wanting to kill everyone he should have been charged with terrorist threats, his ability to work for them should have been revoked and he should have been placed on the terrorist watch list. The dig into the guys background should have included interviews of his girlfriend and any relevant complaints of mental instability or radicalization of his co-workers. If we can't catch this guy then God help us!
From what we have learned about the guy, I draw 2 conclusions so far:
1) Systemic failure. Lots of red flags. I agree with all that.
2) His motivations are a whole soup of things. Anger management issues. Religion. And, the fact that he was gay and had a hard time reconciling his gayness with his religious views. Throw in his anger management problems, and you have an explosive mix.
Why I think he was gay.
This guy had some deep inner conflicts, anger management issues, and he just flipped out. He was on some kind of FBI watch list but the fact that the FBI dropped him from the list is what allowed him to buy those guns without setting off some kind of alarm in the system. We need to tighten that up perhaps.
But what this has to do with immigration is almost nothing, because he was not an immigrant.
Yeah very confused character it seems.
It's a shame that there's people that think being gay is something that needs curing and preach this.
Quote:Let's say this is the annual gay cop rave. All are armed and trained. What happens? The same result? You're playing dumb if you say so.
I am thinking logically. Apply the same logic to a group of trained individuals and the results would have not been the same. People would have been able to defend themselves rather than being as sheep led to a slaughter.
To say the results would have been worse is not based on any factual information. There have been countless incidents where an armed civilian was able to stop a crime from occurring.
Now you're changing the parameters. you said 300 gay NRA members at a rave. You didn't say trained special ops green berets that were sober at a nice dining establishment discussing the pros and cons of the chicken or the fish for dinner.
Same with the stupid argument that a person in a dark movie theatre with a gun is gonna be able to save lives. Cuz, you know, shooting in the dark in a room that, acoustically speaking, makes it hard to know who has a gun and who's just freakin' out is a recipe for disaster.
Look, I'm sure that there are situations where a person with a gun can help a situation. I just don't believe that EVERY situation is better when everyone is armed. Specifically this one.
Quote:I honestly believe what you are saying is drivel, and am open to being shown that I am wrong. I hope your feelings don't get hurt by that. From what I see, the main difference is he might be without a job, but I don't see how his inflammatory comments necessarily revoke his right to purchase a gun. Whether he says he was on jihad, or is a Christian soldier, or worships a vengeful spaghetti monster, if he later claims he was just speaking out and wasn't serious, how in our current regulatory environment does that affect anything? None of that has a thing to do with political correctness.
I am speaking in a broader sense of what JJ posted, not necessarily directly to this case. For example:
If you make the statement that we need to profile muslims at airports due to possible security threats you will be labeled a racist. You don't want to be labeled a racist so you keep your mouth shut.
If you make the statement that you do not believe additional laws need to be passed concerning LGBT rights that you believe the current anti-discrimination laws would encompass their rights if they were being enforced you will be labeled a homophobe. So you keep your mouth shut.
The left tosses out these labels to quell things they do not want to hear nor discuss all in the name of political correctness. Unfortunately the media piles right on with the labels and open honest discussions are silenced.
Quote:The FBI had two cracks at this guy and whiffed. That's with his whole life here domestically.
How can we reasonably expect the vetting process of foreign nationals to be any better?
What are you the thought police? Dude, get real. You and badger look at reality and see Stallone movies.