Jump to content

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and six others shot in Arizona

R68 Subway Car

By R68 Subway Car,
in Off Topic Lounge

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply
lilbluefoxie

lilbluefoxie

Posted
Posted
That's like saying if Rush Limbaugh shoots a random guy it's a political killing. Those riots were not political, or at least, they weren't intended to be. They were between the Black and Jewish communities -- not between left and right.

 

 

 

ill admit you might have a point there, since a lot of jewish people are very liberal, im one of the few that arent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R68 Subway Car

R68 Subway Car

Posted
  • Author
Posted
it could be anything, theres a lot of really out there people on both sides, i dont think its tea party related at all, Ive been to the tea party rally 2 years in a row at the MAssapequa LIRR station, theres nothing there thats dangerous at all, just average long islanders waving american flags and holding up signs protesting the liberals.

 

This isnt like britian with radical college students burning cars and breaking windows because the govt isnt giving em enough freebies. Or the Crown Heights riots.

 

 

And lets not forget the radical leftist in the late 60s and early 70s who bombed buildings to protest the Vietnam War.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
R68 Subway Car

R68 Subway Car

Posted
  • Author
Posted
"...says debts should only be paid in currency that is backed by gold and silver. [...] In one extended Internet posting, Mr. Loughner suggested that the government was trying to trick him, or take advantage of him..."

 

We will see.

Did you read the part where a former classmate of his stated he was liberal and left-wing? He was not a member of the tea party. In fact some of his favorite books included the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Mein Kampf by Adolph Hitler, who lead the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nova RTS 9147

Nova RTS 9147

Posted
Posted
Did you read the part where a former classmate of his stated he was liberal and left-wing? He was not a member of the tea party. In fact some of his favorite books included the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Mein Kampf by Adolph Hitler, who lead the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

 

Adolph Hitler wasn't left wing though. Despite the name, the Nazi's were actually vehemently anti socialist and anti marxists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Citaro

Citaro

Posted
Posted
Did you read the part where a former classmate of his stated he was liberal and left-wing? He was not a member of the tea party.

 

"One of his videos also suggests that he may have applied to join the Army at a recruiting station in Phoenix."

 

Yeah, a leftist, who wants to join the army, where they always protesting against and who is against big government and who shots a democrat who has supported the healthcare bill, that makes sense. lol

 

n fact some of his favorite books included the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Mein Kampf by Adolph Hitler, who lead the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

 

"His YouTube page also listed a series of favorite books. Some were novels about political dystopias — including “Animal Farm” by George Orwell and “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley. Others were about falling into fantasy worlds — like “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” and “Through the Looking-Glass” by Lewis Carroll."

 

Is "Alice Adventures in Wonderland" a nazi book? lol

 

And if you are trying to claim that Nazis are leftists, it's easily wrong, just they called themself National Socialists doesn't mean automatically that they are left socialists. Left and right socialists are completely different. Trust me, my family has lived in all three systems, national socialism, radical socialism (GDR) and in capitalism. My grandfather was a socialist, killed by the Nazis in a concentration camp. Nobody know better than my family where the differences are and it makes me angry, that people like Gleen Beck are using the Nazi word to describe a peaceful and lovely person like Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R68 Subway Car

R68 Subway Car

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Good for Massapequa. One isolated incident doesn't tarnish a group. If this was a one time thing, he'd be dismissed as a loon and sent off to Bellevue. But this isn't an isolated incident, and this isn't just the Tea Party movement, but more the right-wing movement of our country. This goes back to Oklahoma City, the Atlanta Olympic bombing, all of those militia movements that haunted the 1990s, the bombing of abortion clinics and the murder of doctors, the damaging of legislature offices after the healthcare vote, the guy who flew a plane into the IRS building in Texas, other incidents that I can't remember right now. There is a problem with the right wing movement and violence that this country refuses to talk about.

 

I'm not saying that all conservatives or all tea baggers are gun toting terrorists. But there is a element of the right wing that is more knee-jerk and more threatening than people would like to talk about. If this was the left wing of our country, I would say the exact same thing (like how Bill Ayers was a left-wing terrorist who did damage to his cause).

 

And to your future counter arguments: Yes, we have left-wing eco terrorist in this country. Yes, we had the Crown Heights riot (though that really wasn't political, let alone a liberal problem). Yes, Britan had the isolated incident where kids rioted because they were going to start charging tuition. But you notice I didn't defend that.....

Ok, I can agree with you on that. There are crazies on both sides of the aisle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubwayGuy

SubwayGuy

Posted
Posted

What all of you fail to understand about gun control is why the Tea Party started. The Tea Party started as a grassroots opposition to the moneyed powers that be that robbed this country blind in support of banks that cost Americans over a trillion dollars in lost savings, banks that paid themselves bonuses during the worst Recession since the Depression, and continued to do so and which robbed the taxpayers for hundreds of billions. The Tea Party started to punish those banksters and their corrupt backroom deals as well as the politicians and lawmakers that empowered them.

 

Instead, the Tea Party became about gays, religion, and later guns.

 

Why? Because those issues are extremely divisive and get people upset. Even though religion is meaningless and gay rights is not a priority item as far as the overall health of this country is concerned (but it upsets people, again, because of their RELIGION, which is again meaningless).

 

Guns got dragged into it because when you look at traditional conservative vs. liberal forces the conservatives believe in guns. Therefore if the Tea Party was directed to appeal more to conservative sensibilities (as it came to shortly after its creation), it would reduce the appeal to liberals. Add in the gun rights issue to appeal to conservative sensibilities and you have therefore divided the one movement that could threaten to overpower the traditional and now corrupt two party system of Grabass in the United States today.

 

Gun control is people control. Liberals already believe in gun control, so they represent a segment of the population that is increasingly less likely to be armed. Less likely to be able to live up to the Declaration of Independence clause which states citizens have a "duty" to "overthrow" corrupt government. Government "by" the people "for" the people, as it was meant to be, not government "by" the rich "for" the rich like we have today. So by aligning with conservatives who are more likely to own guns and drawing them back into the more mainstream Republican position, they neutralize them and the threat them owning guns poses to the inept politicians in control.

 

And I say that because guns are one of the few equalizers out there between the rich and the poor. No matter how much money you have, you fear death. Everyone does. The rich do not fear jail time when their jail time is "better" than anyone else's. There's a difference between the working class, which gets to go to federal "pound me in the ass" prison, while the rich go to country clubs with conjugal visits. What is to fear? But guns do that by serving as a more effective DETERRENT to crime. That's why we have the 2nd Amendment. I've heard hood rats joking about jail time the same way the class clowns in 3rd grade joke about detentions and even school suspensions. Clearly jail is not a serious enough deterrent for many. But guns are. If every citizen had a gun, people would think twice before committing crimes. There's no advantage, just how "lucky" the criminal feels that day. They may win this one, but someone will eventually get the drop on them and their little spree is all over. That possibility alone is enough to keep them honest. But when you disarm the population, all it does is empower the person who gets a gun illegally.

 

Likewise the rich have nothing to fear if not death. They can buy their way out of serious consequences for illegal acts and they can use their money to influence policy against everyone else without the fear that someone says I've had it and blows their head off (like that smiling piece of shit Lloyd Blankfein). Guns keep everyone honest. Not because they're going to be used, because people's heads are going to blow off. But because, maybe, just maybe that could happen. There's a risk that makes people think twice before doing something stupid or unfair to someone else.

 

So by taking that right away, government reduces the likelihood people will stand up to it with any meaningful show of force. By taking that right away the powers that be ensure they can act with impunity to screw everyone else over.

 

The Tea Party was a legitimate threat to the traditional Two Party Grabass system for the rich we have in our country now. We are run by New World Order CORPORATISTS who would sell out the American people for MONEY, for POSSESSIONS, and for greed, and they do so every day. And no one can call them out for it because they disagree about RELIGION and GAY PEOPLE.

 

The Tea Party today has become a joke because it had the ability to be so much more, and now it's just one more bible thumping group. Aligned with the traditional moneyed powers because they say they support guns while subverting every other right by people today.

 

You want to know who America needs as president in 2012? Read up on Theodore Roosevelt. Someone like that. Another corporatist could well mean a new recession, worst than the last one with 4 more years of "shell economy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shortline Bus

Shortline Bus

Posted
Posted

Here are some more updated info on Jared Loughner according to combined sources telling CNN, MSNBC/NBC News and Fox News. Not sure how true these rumors are but if confirmed this is scary stuff.

 

-"had plotted this massacre for several months.

 

-According to media reports he was a member of an Anti-Government Group called The American Renaissance group. memo states that there is "no direct connection" between Loughner and the group, "but strong suspicion is being directed at AmRen / American Renaissance. Suspect is possibly linked to this group. (through videos posted on his MySpace and YouTube account.). The group's ideology is anti-government, anti-immigration, anti-ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti-Semitic."

 

-Had Targeted Giffords because she was Jewish and had voted for the Health Care Bill."

 

Sources

 

Fox News

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/09/arizona-suspected-gunman-no-stranger-to-trouble/

 

 

CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/09/arizona.shooting.investigation/index.html?hpt=T1

 

 

 

 

 

 

No matter what if this suspect is proven to done this I hope this bastrad Loughner gets fried and ruts in hell.:mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubwayGuy

SubwayGuy

Posted
Posted
Replies in navy. Prepare for a lot of text.

 

The Tea Party is a group rooted in anger following the passing of TARP. Grass-roots in that, yes, but not so much today. It quickly developed as a play thing of the rich, elite Conservatives like the Koch brothers, who set out to move the group ahead to sabotage Obama. The group wasn't put in motion by American ingenuity, but by cold hard money from the health industry, oil industry, and other places. In a sense, the Tea Partiers are being played without even knowing it, as they are being used by the Republicans with real money to go after Obama.

 

Agreed on all points there. However the group was ORIGINALLY (before it became a media term) formed by Americans who were pissed off at having their tax dollars wasted to bail out people who did nothing except hoard their own money, lose the money of others, take the money of others, and evade paying taxes wherever possible.

 

Those issues are indeed divisive, and more than that are held as core to each party. That said, I wouldn't say the Tea Party is as much about religion. [Nor would I insult religion so broadly, but we'll leave that out.] Gay and minority rights, immigration, and government regulation are the names of the game for the Tea Party, who manage to spew atrocious lies about all three topics.

 

Again, they are held as core to each party because they are divisive and they split the American people down the middle. Without the divisive issues, the American people would be near unanimous in their hatred and rejection of all things related to the privileged elite in this country. So it behooves the privileged elite, who control the political parties, to split the American people down the middle...with religion. Because gay rights is a religious belief too. Most people that argue against gay rights use religious arguments like "God does not condone this" or "it's in the Bible" or "Sodom and Gomorrah were burned, that should tell you something" or "the Church says homosexuality is not acceptible". So that's a religious belief also. Immigration is a far less divisive issue. That issue is divided more along racial lines than anything else. An overwhelming amount of Latin-Americans support a forgiving immigration reform. An overwhelming amount of everyone else does not. The Tea Party's stance is against it, but you'll also find a lot of other people (including myself, and including my mother, herself the daughter of immigrants) who are against it.

 

Yep, but the fact that the Tea Party is funded from high up on the food chain is a crucial point. Before it became a plaything of numerous politicians as a way to release their inner racism and anger, the Tea Party had immediately become a place for the rich to throw money into, regardless of issues at hand.

 

Because in so doing they were able to hijack a movement that threatened their privileged status and stolen property (stolen from the American people). Once they hijacked the movement they were free to misdirect it anywhere they chose, and they chose the usual gay issue because in so doing it they cost the Tea Party many of its would be followers. Classic divide and conquer.

 

What are you getting at? That the population should be allowed to carry concealed weapons? Unconcealed weapons?

 

Generally speaking, yes. Law abiding citizens should be allowed to carry weapons if it is their choice to do so. Citizens who do not follow the law would be prohibited from carrying them, same as prisoners in jail are prohibited from enjoying freedom, and same as prisoners who commit crimes so atrocious they receive the death penalty are prohibited from enjoying life.

 

The topic of gun control is one that never ceases to astound me. There is absolutely no reason that Joe Shmo off the street needs to have a gun, or should be allowed to have a gun. Regulation is pathetic, because it allows loonies to get guns.

 

The loonies are going to get guns anyway. All gun control does is disarm everyone else, empowering those criminals. And that's exactly what goes on now. For all the strictness of the gun laws in New York county, why are there still so many shootings here? Because the people who commit those crimes are gun grabbers who do not obtain them legally, is why.

 

Guns are not rooted in defense, they are rooted in fear. Your "every citizen with a gun" argument is precisely the problem with out country.

 

Fear is a very powerful motivator. Have you ever driven your car in a blizzard? If so, did you drive the same way you did on a dry, clear day where you could see everything, and your tires had a perfect grip on the road? I'm going to guess probably not. The fear of sliding out of control lends one to drive more cautiously in bad weather. Fear works. If you're a punk kid walking down the street thinking about mugging someone, you are going to think twice if that person might have a gun. You are going to think twice if someone else with a gun (not a cop!) might be nearby to come to that person's defense or make a citizen's arrest after they shoot you. Guns serve as a deterrent to crime. Here just read this, it's simpler and it basically says a lot of what I have to say: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

 

People get afraid. You know what happens when everybody has a gun? EVERYBODY DIES. Because people get fearful and irresponsible. Perfect example? The mother who was killed last week after her family had so many guns in the house her 10 year old son shot her over doing chores. Family wanted guns for protection. [if that's not a load of garbage, I don't know what is.]

 

While that is a tragedy, that is an example of irresponsible gun ownership. When not needed, the gun should be stored away in a locked container with the safety on, the magazine detached, and the ammunition in either a separate compartment or container. The kid could have just as reasonably reached for a kitchen knife and did the same thing. It's not the gun that's to blame for that. When everybody has a gun, everybody does not die. Everybody thinks twice before using it, and as a consequence a lot fewer people draw their weapons, whether to commit a crime or otherwise.

 

Moreover, there is no reasonable explanation for why a gun is necessary, besides outright fear. And fear, like anger, is impulsive. Guess what happens when impulsive people have deadly weapons... again, EVERYBODY DIES.

 

When our society decides the possession of a deadly weapon by a member of the general public is acceptable, we have a nation of fear. Why? Because, again, guns are the product of fear. Hey, hey, which party is rooted in fear? I'll give everybody a hint: there's a big red elephant. Which party does the Tea Party and its racist members identify with?

 

And hence, guns are an issue in the party of fear.

 

It's not about the parties. Again, the parties are one and the same. They serve their corporate masters and the rich and act with impunity in doing so. The parties exist only to divide the public into such meaningless blocks that they will never be able to force REAL "change" on the country by sending the moneyed powers out on their asses where they belong.

 

You're arguing that we need guns so that we can defend ourselves against the government? Let's remind ourselves that our government is proportionally TINY over our daily life. It's the mindset of "big government" amongst the loonies in which that argument comes into play.

 

The influence is not tiny. Look at how much of your money goes to taxes every year. And I'm not saying "oh, all taxes should be lower", I'm saying look at where that money goes once it leaves you and goes to them. I would have no complaints if it went to improving police, fire, transportation, education, federally maintained infrastructure, and services for people who really, actually needed them but instead it goes to corporate subsidies, foreign nations, foreign aid, services given to illegal immigrants that are not even given to our own citizens, bank bailouts, and military campaigns in nations most people don't even care about which are only run to protect the corporatists in this country that we all despise. It is not a tiny influence in our lives. Every time they print more money, what we have in US dollars is made more worthless. Every time they offer incentives for corporations to outsource or invest overseas, thousands of Americans lose their jobs, their income, and their livelihood.

 

I'm not arguing we need guns against government to actually use them. I'm just arguing that law abiding citizens should be able to have them if they want them. And I'm suggesting that maybe the presence of that alone might keep some of the more crooked in government honest, again because of their own fear that something wrong or illegal they may do "may" make them a target.

 

Not to mention the utter catastrophe if we default on the debt ceiling...

 

And it would be government and big business that would be most guilty of causing that to happen, no? Guns can keep them honest because nothing else can. What do you propose keep them honest, "due process of law?" They buy the judges, just like they bought the reversal of campaign spending laws that have been in place for over 100 years last year in the Supreme Court.

 

Democrats take your rights away, and Republicans give those same rights to Corporations. Corporations now have more rights than the American people. And they like taking guns away because then when they shit all over you, your protests have to be "nonviolent" and they can turn you into cannon fodder like the British did at the Boston massacre, or like the students at Kent State.

 

So that lets them do whatever they want, because there are no consequences to fear. That lets criminals do whatever they want, because the only thing they will face is jail time when they committed a violent crime with a stolen weapon, and if they were on drugs, jail time and rehab. But no threat of bullet in the face for them, no threat of curtains. They get to live their life as the baddest motherf***er in prison, and that's something they can brag about to the other hood rats back home! So you better believe they're gonna commit that crime.

 

And when the rich and politicians act with impunity, the law abiding citizens get screwed. They pay, not evade, their ever increasing taxes. They lose their rights, and they get to be the victims of the violent crime that happens when things get bad because the rich are in their ivory towers with their security guards (who are allowed to carry guns) while you're not. So that's why I take the position I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubwayGuy

SubwayGuy

Posted
Posted

When will you people see past the dog and pony show? The media does this stuff on purpose because it is inciteful and divisive.

 

Then the rich, which control BOTH political parties, get whatever they want.

 

Jesus Christ, welcome to the 21st Century. It's not about Democrats vs. Republicans anymore. They both work together to take your rights away and you don't even notice it because you're all too busy playing partisan politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R68 Subway Car

R68 Subway Car

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'm going to get around to replying to everything soon, but...

 

 

 

That is the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard of. It's YOUR PARTY that wins on smear campaigns. It's YOUR PARTY that fear-mongers. It's YOUR PARTY that turns lies into news.

 

It is absolutely preposterous to claim that the Democrats are the ones with the double standard. Give me a BREAK! You have news networks of complete and utter garbage, radio shows, rallies -- and yet we have the double standard. And you know what?

 

Your team is divisive. Your team does spew hateful rhetoric. Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck -- heroes of the party who make a living off of the garbage. And you point fingers at the Democrats when we occasionally call out the liars? Madness.

 

Lord, give me strength.

Please provide a rational excuse for all the vitriolic, hateful, and threatening posters, signs, t-shirts, and movies that personally attacked Republicans and Conservatives for the last 10+ years and advocated for violence against them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lilbluefoxie

lilbluefoxie

Posted
Posted
And yet, are Democrats the ones shooting people? Are Democrats the ones who bash peoples' heads in at rallies? Would you EVER hear of a Democrat doing that to a Republican? Didn't think so.

 

 

There was a report of SEIU thugs reportedly beating up an old guy at a health care town hall meeting a few years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R68 Subway Car

R68 Subway Car

Posted
  • Author
Posted
And yet, are Democrats the ones shooting people? Are Democrats the ones who bash peoples' heads in at rallies? Would you EVER hear of a Democrat doing that to a Republican? Didn't think so.

 

You expect to generate a thesis against an entire party based off of some juvenile posters made by a small portion of the party... The truth is, the Democrats aren't the ones committing the acts of violence. Generally speaking, they simply aren't. The people who symbolize your party promote anger and spread ignorance... and frankly, it shows.

 

P.S. That's not a good argument for a Conservative to make. You guys blow us out of the water in the way of juvenile and angry signs... No competition.

Please tell me what is conservative or tea party like about him? All I have read about him (from those who knew with him) is that he was liberal, left wing, and a pot smoker. Also, he was a registered independent, as this Washington Post article proves.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept