Church shooting in South Carolina

[Premo316]

As a show of solidarity with the victims, both the dead and the living, of the shooting at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, I have temporarily changed my faith designation to "African Methodist Episcopal".

I also encourage others to do the same both here and on other forums that you may frequent.

[seanD]

Obama already beat you both to it.

He also played the race card; two in one shot. Gun control accommodated with the racial angle is going to be strong with this one.

[KingsGambit]

Abigail is right that mass shootings generally are not a common occurrence in other countries like they are in the US (yes, I know, Anders Brevik, that's why I said common). We do need discussion on why this is the case. Today is probably not the day for that discussion.

[fm93]

He also played the race card; two in one shot. Gun control accommodated with the racial angle is going to be strong with this one.

I think if a murderer says "You're raping our women and taking over our country. You have to go" to an all-black congregation, wears a jacket emblazoned with an apartheid emblem, drives a car with Confederate-themed license plates, was known to frequently make racist jokes, and specifically says "I'm here to shoot black people"...it's pretty hard to deny that race was a hugely significant factor in the incident.

[seanD]

I think if a murderer says "You're raping our women and taking over our country. You have to go" to an all-black congregation, wears a jacket emblazoned with an apartheid emblem, drives a car with Confederate-themed license plates, was known to frequently make racist jokes, and specifically says "I'm here to shoot black people"...it's pretty hard to deny that race was a hugely significant factor in the incident.

Nah, you don't politicize a tragedy like that some hours later after the event, especially knowing that the nation is already under the strain of racial tension from events in the past months, unless you're a piece of crap conniving provocateur such as Obama. The racism narrative will also continue to accommodate the coming gun control campaign fury to try and stifle gun control opposition. We'll have to wait and see if I'm right about the latter.

[Raphael]

Nah, you don't politicize a tragedy like that some hours later after the event, especially knowing that the nation is already under the strain of racial tension from events in the past months, unless you're a piece of crap conniving provocateur such as Obama. The racism narrative will also continue to accommodate the coming gun control campaign fury to try and stifle gun control opposition. We'll have to wait and see if I'm right about the latter.

By all accounts his actions were motivated by his opinions of race, i.e. a racially motivated crime.

The only way would have been more clear is if he had been wearing an AWB emblem. (I am surprised he didn't go with the Vierkleur)

Weirdly, from what I've heard, he has no connection to South Africa.

[seanD]

By all accounts his actions were motivated by his opinions of race, i.e. a racially motivated crime.

The only way would have been more clear is if he had been wearing an AWB emblem. (I am surprised he didn't go with the Vierkleur)

Weirdly, from what I've heard, he has no connection to South Africa.

You missed my point. We all know it was racially motivated, so we didn't need Obama to emphasize that.

The fact that this took place in a black church obviously also raises questions about a dark part of our history. This is not the first time that black churches have been attacked. And we know that hatred across races and faiths pose a particular threat to our democracy and our ideals.

That part of the speech was unnecessary, and as I stated in my last post, based on how racially charged this nation already is right now, it was irresponsible. And being that I’m biracial, I take personal offense to that crap. It’s disgusting. Don't even get me started on how he used it to politicize gun control. He’s both a political opportunist vulture and a race-baiting provocateur, so I wouldn’t expect anything less from that scumbag.

[Starlight]

Nah, you don't politicize a tragedy like that some hours later after the event, especially knowing that the nation is already under the strain of racial tension from events in the past months, unless you're a piece of crap conniving provocateur such as Obama.

Given the right had a field day attacking Obama for years over not being quick enough to politicize Benghazi by officially labeling it a "terrorist attack", I'm calling BS on your whole "this time around he spoke too soon, which shows he's evil" argument.

Clearly you just hate the guy and anything he does is wrong. While I also strongly dislike Obama (for campaigning on 'change' but then perpetuating the status quo once he got into power, and being too corporatist/war-hawk/right-wing and way too prepared to compromise with absurd Republican demands), that doesn't mean every single action of his is terrible or done from terrible motives.

[seanD]

Given the right had a field day attacking Obama for years over not being quick enough to politicize Benghazi by officially labeling it a "terrorist attack", I'm calling BS on your whole "this time around he spoke too soon, which shows he's evil" argument.

Clearly you just hate the guy and anything he does is wrong. While I also strongly dislike Obama (for campaigning on 'change' but then perpetuating the status quo once he got into power, and being too corporatist/war-hawk/right-wing and way too prepared to compromise with absurd Republican demands), that doesn't mean every single action of his is terrible or done from terrible motives.

I refer you to post #37. I didn't say he shouldn't have responded. And there's a far far far difference in lying about a video, knowing it wasn't at all about a video. So, please, spare me the false comparison.

[Darth Executor]

Given the right had a field day attacking Obama for years over not being quick enough to politicize Benghazi by officially labeling it a "terrorist attack"

How is that politicizing it?

[Darth Executor]

drives a car with Confederate-themed license plates

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow...163334484.html

[Starlight]

And how long before the left turns this tragedy into a gun control argument. One day?

In the US? I don't know.
In the rest of the Western world? About 0 seconds. I've had about 4 conversations with people here on the subject so far which have all gone something like:
"Did you see the US had yet another mass shooting?"
"Yeah. They're just insane when it comes to gun control laws."
"Yeah. They don't seem to learn."
"It's so predictable it's depressing."
"I wonder if they'll ever do anything about it?"
"Probably not. They're crazy."
"Yeah." ~shakes head in disgust~

That's pretty much the universal attitude of people in the rest of the West toward American gun issues: Mildly outraged disgust at the immoral insanity that is the US's lack of gun regulation that just keeps on killing people.

[Starlight]

How is that politicizing it?

What people choose to label "terrorism" and not label "terrorism" can be quite subjective, and quite political. It is currently quite fashionable in the US to label any violence Muslims do as "terrorism" but to refrain from applying that same label to right-wing Christians committing violence. However right-wing terrorists kill a lot more people in the US per year than do Muslims, so there's quite a lot of denialism happening. Due to political pressure from outraged conservative groups, Obama was forced to largely shut down the agency that Bush had established to monitor those potential right-wing terrorists.

[Darth Executor]

What people choose to label "terrorism" and not label "terrorism" can be quite subjective, and quite political.

Only extremists would consider labeling Benghazi a terrorist attack to be political. I suppose you're right in that Obama didn't want to label it a terrorist attack to placate his far left base.

However right-wing terrorists kill a lot more people in the US per year than do Muslims

lolno

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/07/op...sin/index.html

Militants linked to al Qaeda or inspired by jihadist ideology have carried out four terrorist attacks in the United States since September 11, which have resulted in 17 deaths. Thirteen of them were in a shooting incident at Fort Hood, Texas, in November 2009.

By contrast, right-wing extremists have committed at least eight lethal terrorist attacks in the United States that have resulted in the deaths of nine people since 9/11, according to data compiled by the New America Foundation.

And if, after investigation, Sunday's attack on the Sikh temple in Wisconsin is included in this count, the death toll from right-wing terrorism in the U.S. over the past decade rises to 15.

Not only do they not kill a lot more people in the US per year, they don't kill more people, period. Though that might change now since trigger happy muslims can go to Syria to get their slaughter on and the subject of this thread got a pretty big body count.

[Starlight]

lolno
Not only do they not kill a lot more people in the US per year, they don't kill more people, period.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/op...or-threat.html

Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.

In contrast, right-wing extremists averaged 337 attacks per year in the decade after 9/11, causing a total of 254 fatalities, according to a study by Arie Perliger, a professor at the United States Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center. The toll has increased since the study was released in 2012.