tvc184

How many months did it take the premier law enforcement agency in our country (FBI) to determine that there were no criminal charges to be brought when it took the local police about one week? I know, the same reason the DA had to wait a few months to announce the verdict. Politics.

Most people every so often have to pull their heads out of the sand to breath and on occasion they get to look around and see what is happening around them.   Of course there are those that will continue to hold their breath and keep their heads buried...............

Looking at other political assassinations of that time period, I think that he was aware of his own fate yet it did not deter him. Some think it may have been prophetic when in his last speech (the day before he was killed) he stated, "I may not get there with you" and followed it up with "I'm not fearing any man!".    His idea of civil disobedience was the correct way to protest and he and others of his ilk fought for civil rights in the courts and in the court of public opinion.    I have read a few of his speeches and sermons from a book a few years ago and there is a lot more there than the often recited I Have A Dream speech. In one such sermon he stated, "Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."     Such perception could be used today. 

It usually takes so long because of defense challenges. The state will get a court date but then the defense will find a reason to postpone it and have to get another date. It is not because the state is not ready to go forward.

Biden should have just gotten his double barrel shotgun and fired it in the air like he suggested that everyone else do. No need for more powerful weapons or the Secret Service.      ......... or maybe that is what he was doing. 

Going to protest an opinion?   Ooookay............ 

  I know that you probably missed it but the mid-terms were back in November. I can post the results if you need.    Wow! The Republicans are against illegal immigration. I am sure that most people are as shocked as I am.    The Republicans will gain no support if they sit back and do nothing. I don't see any significant percentage of Hispanic voters swinging over to the Republicans if they simply allow the (illegal) executive order to stand. I can envision much more grass roots supports for candidates that back the conservative Republicans or in other words, the ones that have stayed away from the polls under such statements as, "They are all the same anyway".    Winning the majority in a big way in the last election will mean nothing if the party simply takes that huge lead and then acts by doing nothing, which is coincidentally what we got from the Democrats for the last 6 years. 

Is this any easier?     Sir Winston Churchill has been recognized as one of the greatest men of the late nineteenth and of the twentieth century. He was an extraordinary war leader to whom the Western World must be forever in debt. He was a prophet in his own time as this quotation, written well over 100 years ago, demonstrates.   How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men   Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”   Sir Winston, as an officer of the British Army, served in the Sudan and in the Crimean War; in both instances against the Muslims. These experiences gave him ample opportunity to observe the structure of Islamic society. Churchill’s quotes were taken from the volume: Sir Winston Churchill; “The River War”, first edition, Volume II, pages 248-250, published by Longmans, Green Company, 1899. If Sir Winston were alive today, it is doubtful that a person in Great Britain criticizing Islam publicly could be arrested, and then fined or jailed, and even more doubtful that any Muslims would be sitting in the English Parliament!  

I wonder why these other countries didn't just send their ambassadors then. Oh, that's right, they live there anyway. Hey Mr. Ambassador, walk across the street from your office so you can show we care. No, everybody got the message of where we stood and how concerned the president is.

  Who said other terror groups were not active?    You started of by claiming "Just saying, more heads are cut off by Christians in a month than by Muslims in a year. Just ask Mexico."    You have two people challenge that claim (me included) as to how beheadings in Mexico related to those committed by Muslims in the name of religion. This was a discussion of Muslim terrorism not drug cartels. The title of the thread is Muslims and western culture, not the drug war.    In fact as stated above, the beheadings in Mexico have nothing to do with religion and deal with killing drug rivals or those that interfere.    Now that your statement that "Christians" are beheading people has been squashed, you come up with Russia. Okay, how many Russians are killing people (much less your claim of beheadings) over religion in what is generally a non-sectarian state? Well, other than the Muslim killings? And yes some Christians have beheaded people but not in the name of Christianity.    Then you try to recover from that by posting an article on "terror" attacks in the USA but they mention nothing of beheadings...... which after all if how you began this narrative. So how many of those Jews are beheading people in the USA over religion? In Mexico? In Russia? Anywhere?   By the article that you posted it is claimed that non-Muslims commit more than 90% of terror attacks (whatever the article is claiming as a terror attack). You are comparing what wikipedia claims in the Muslim population of the USA at 0.6% to the other 99.4% that are not. Hmmmm..... the numbers are higher for the almost 99 and a half percent than for the 0.6%? No kidding..........    In fact by the page you posted, the 0.6% of Muslims in the USA (per wikipedia) committed 6% of the terror attacks (per your article) or at a 1,000% higher rate than their population.    Of course the page you used as proof also listed "Latino" terrorism as almost half of all terror attacks (with a listed population by the US Census of only 17%). Do you think that they are attacking people that are not Catholics or perhaps something else like the aforementioned drug cartels over here? How many are illegal aliens?    Feel free to post more proof of beheadings by Christians over religion, which after all is what this thread is about, Muslims in the west. 

  Up to 20 times a year?  :D

  Good. Who suggested that they had been called to your home or anyone specific. Apparently you fit into the narrative that I said above when I stated.......    "I would bet that most people in this forum have lived a lifetime with the police never having been called to their home".    Congratulations, you are like the average person. Zimmerman and other people that can't settle their own family disagreements are not which is all that I said. 

  ....... or you had a brain earlier in life than liberals. 

  According to articles on Carson, he did not lie (unlike the president), gave credit for the information and had the manuscript approved by person that was the claimed victim of the plagiarism.    It is not merely a matter of being "worse". It is a matter of comparing acts that did happen to one that did not. 

    But I think they found that she was 1/64th Indian.    That means that one of her great-great-great-great-great grandparents was an Indian.    That makes her a minority..... right?

.... and later admitted that he lied. Or shovel ready jobs to gain support for the stimulus and later laughed about it saying that there where no not really any shovel ready jobs. So now comes big girl with an accusation against Carson and the articlles show that he had permission to do what he did. Ooooookay........

  Hey, my job requires a GED. 

    What does not kill you will make you stronger........ and might cause you to wet your pants. 

  Uhhh.... you're about a minute late with that rationale....    :D

    Under the name of Christianity?    Drug cartels killing their rivals or enemies of the drug trade can hardly be traced to religion. 

I don't really expect Obama to march in public as a security risk by I also expect a better show from the USA other than to send an AG that has already resigned from office (awaiting a replacement) and then not to march with other world leaders that apparently were not so concerned for their own safety as to not show a united from against terrorism.    I see where the German chancellor, Israel and British prime ministers, French president and others felt strongly enough to be seen in a solid front. At the very least Obama could have send Biden to be seen with the others.    A proud country which has led the world for decades now creeps up from behind, not wanting to be seen. You can bet that our allies are fully aware of what they are facing both in the fight against terror and the claimed support from the USA. You can bet that they are waiting for a change also. 

  Admitted? Sure, according to what you call "admitted".   I looked for a semi-credible source that was not Fox News as I know that would automatically be dismissed as invalid. I found almost instantly an article on ABC News (hardly a spokesman for conservative causes). It said that Carson is claimed by buzzfeed.com to have plagiarized works by conservative author William Federer.    In response according to Federer, the article by buzzfeed is "disingenuous" and it "grossly misinterpreted". Federer claims to have given Carson permission to use his works, the works were used appropriately and he (Federer) "read and approved" Carson's transcript. So the claimed victim of the plagiarism by buzzfeed said that it is not true, is being misrepresented, he has given permission and he read and approved the transcript.  It seems the only "victim" in this claim of theft of another person's work is buzzfeed in their attempt to make a political issue where none exists.   Then again, maybe ABC News is lying to cover for a conservative that may run for president. Yeah, that's it........   [Hidden Content]

Unfortunately (or fortunately in many issues) this is not 1965 where we could bring cap guns to school and play cowboys and Indians or cops and robbers on the playground at recess and it was thought of as healthy play time.    Back then we did not have to worry about nor could we likely have conceived an issue with gang violence, carjacking, home invasion robberies, drive by shootings or mass school shooting perpetrated by children.    What we could not in our wildest dreams think of in 1965 is a reality today. That is the world we live in. We need to teach children and everyone else that if you are in a location that it is likely dangerous to wave a real gun around, it is probably not a good idea to wave a real looking toy or BB/paint ball/airsoft gun around. 

  That is why Ben Carson said that everyone needs to pay income taxes. He believes in progressive taxes as we have today where the more you make, the higher your taxes are. But we have a huge percentage of the public that pays no taxes and others that not only get back no taxes but get a "return" without paying any. How do you pay nothing in and yet get some "back"?    Carson's belief is that if you are paying taxes out of your salary no matter what and if spending goes up, so does your taxes, you might have a different opinion on spending. It is quite easy when you are voting to spend another person's money. It is not so easy when it comes out of your pocket. I vote that since the medical field costs go up way more than the rate of inflation, all members of that industry are making more money than they deserve and therefore need to pay more taxes. There are way more non-healthcare workers than there are workers so let's vote that into law.  See how easy that is when you aren't the one paying the bill?   I have not much of a clue what else Carson stands for but in at least that example, he is entirely correct. In his words, when you have "skin in the game", you have a different opinion. 

Look at the Beaumont Enterprise online today and you will see a story of a man killed by his brother over an argument over which station to watch (I will bet one wanted to see the Cowboys). That is exactly the type of stuff that I was talking about above. I have no clue but I would not be surprised if that was not the first visit by the police at that residence.    Zimmerman seems to fit that mold of always being involved in some kind of short tempered or ill advised confrontation. Sometimes people of that sort tend to attract each other.    He (and thousands of other people) will not likely turn over a new leaf soon and will probably continue to be a frequent attention getter from the police.    The only discussion value of it will be the intent to show that he murdered Martin because he got a speeding ticket last week, he has a previous arrest record or he gets involved in domestic disturbances. None of which is true however it will continue to keep him in the news.    If prior and future acts of violence show guilt in a particular crime, then OJ is guilty of murder beyond the shadow of a doubt. He has a history of domestic violence before the murders and was convicted of an act of violence after his murder trial. Seems like proof to me. I wonder how many of OJ's defenders will look at the Zimmerman issues in the news and conclude that he is guilty by innuendo of actions before and after but will defend OJ with a worse record.