San Bernardino

Of course we'll never have a perfect system. And, yes, it's about managing risk.

But, if we're all in agreement that we need to keep our radical Muslims, then we need to both be able to define what is a radical Muslim, and have some system that attempts to determine who meets the definition.

Do we currently have either?

No one here is even willing to discuss how we define a radical vs. how we define a moderate.

Let's try it again. Can you believe in a strict literal interpretation of the Koran, and still be considered a moderate?

 

If that religion advocates for the destruction of "unbelievers" then the followers of said religion shouldn't be allowed to enter the country if they want to continue to practice that religion.

 

If you believe the penalty for apostasy should be death, can you still be defined as a moderate Muslim?

 

If you believe a woman must produce four male witnesses to prove an accusation of rape, can you still be defined as a moderate Muslim?

 

Things they may or may not believe in the context of a theocracy are not necessarily relevant because the U.S. will never be one.

The people who come here are and will always be subject to our laws, not sharia law.

 

Boy, remember when this thread first started?

Early reports were that the shooters were three white males. Based on that, and the target, a government center that helped the mentally challenged, liberals were so excited.

We not only had white males, as opposed to Muslims, as the shooters, but we had potential victims who were as sympathetic as the Connecticut school children. At last, they could make another strong push for gun legislation.

Even when it became apparent that the intended targets of the shooting weren't mentally challenged kids, the fact that it was government employees, targeted by white males, liberals still assumed we were looking at some radical anti-government type. Still a good situation.

Reports that the shooter had been identified early on as Farook Syed on the police scanner were openly mocked. This wasn't about Muslim terrorism, and this case was going to allow us to forever compare incidents of Muslim terrorism to this one, perpetrated by white males.

At least one website remembers, and thinks we should be asking questions about it.

I can't believe Smallpotatoes didn't post this. He'll surly be outraged when he sees it:

Media Refusing to Cover Police & Witness Accounts of “3 White Male Shooters” in San Bernardino
By Matt Agorist on December 9, 2015

As is the case with many horrific events in recent US history, the San Bernardino shooting leaves many Americans with more questions than answers.



“There’s a lot of disconnects, and there’s a lot of unknowns, and a lot of things that quite frankly don’t add up,” insisted attorney David S. Chelsey, who represents Farooq’s family.

As the Free Thought Project previously reported, witnesses and investigators have both described a terrorist onslaught carried out with military precision by suspects who were trained and capable. Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, didn’t appear to have the necessary background and skillset, according to Chelsey.

He expressed particular skepticism that Malik, who was nursing a newborn child, was suitable to carry out a depraved mission of that kind: “She was only about ninety pounds, so it’s unlikely she could even carry a weapon, or wear some type of a vest, or do any of this.”
...
As is the case with many horrific events in recent US history, the San Bernardino shooting leaves many Americans with more questions than answers. With a government so apt to deceive its citizens at the drop of a hat, who’s to know what really happened?

One thing, however, should remain certain, and it’s that we must always question everything. The second all Americans begin to accept the word of their leaders as the gospel truth is the second that liberty dies for good.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/me...-shooters-san-bernardino/#EGQJM43dFX8howoU.99

 

You are completely fucking unhinged.

 

I'm not worried about them implementing Sharia as law.

I'm worried that if they hold these views, it's a pretty good indication that they are a radical, and not a moderate.

If they are radical, they are a greater threat to participate in an act of terror.

If they are radical, they should not be allowed into our country.

 

No shit?

 

MC just said it was irrelevant.

 

If you believe a woman must cover her face, and cannot be allowed to work outside of the home, can you still be considered a moderate Muslim?

 

So it WAS Syrian refugees.