Page 2 of 3

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:38 am
by Nosuperstition
idesigner1 wrote:DearNS,

Confirmation of circumcision won't solve the issue.

In US starting from early 50s lot many white Christians children were circumcised by doctors in hospital after the birth. Some implicate Jews doctors of East coast to make Christians Jews! Medical community touted cleanliness reason to chop penus of new born. Many think this procedure gave some extra revenue to hungry unscrupulous doctors. In those days it costed extra $ 100. Any way great many Christians babies are now circumcised in US. Beside Christians Jew babies are circumcised asjewish ceremony. Chances are good that this killer Mr. Paddock was circumcised.


Now female genital mutilation in Muslim women supposedly downsizes the sexual instincts in those ladies according to members of this forum.Perhaps the same happens in case of male circumcision and since men are supposed to be horny,this also is a way of lessening their instincts.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:01 am
by idesigner1
Post deleted

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:10 am
by manfred
NS, this is drifting far off topic again. BTW, FEMALE "circumcision" is not an equivalent procedure to a male one. By removing the clitoris, a woman;s ability to experience an orgasm is much reduced, and by stitching labia together penetration can be painful.

Female "circumcision" is more correctly called female mutilation.

By contrast, make circumcision is about the removing the foreskin only. This can be painful when done without anaesthetic and will cause discomfort for some days afterwards, but has little or no lasting effect of libido or sexual ability. There is an argument made by some physician that the removal of the foreskin allows for better hygiene, but this is not universally shared. There are also suggestions that circumcision reduces the likelihood of STDs, specially AIDS, but there is no strong evidence to support this.

Now, can we leave this bit for comments on the Vagas attack?

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:24 pm
by Fernando
Meanwhile, back on topic in Las Vegas, here's a video summarising the pointers suggesting that Islamic State was responsible.
Two claims stand out: that the killer had expertise with weapons yet there is no known evidence that he was trained in them; and that IS only claim responsibility for
jihadists' actions, not "random" unrelated attacks.
Btw the Philippines are mentioned - and that's where is girlfriend was while it was happening.
https://youtu.be/bilgG5e2pyo

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:44 pm
by manfred
Apart from the Las Vegas attack, ISIS apparently also said it caused Theresa May's cough during her speech...

https://www.indy100.com/article/isis-claimed-responsibility-theresa-may-cough-7984071?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:29 pm
by Fernando
manfred wrote:Apart from the Las Vegas attack, ISIS apparently also said it caused Theresa May's cough during her speech...

https://www.indy100.com/article/isis-claimed-responsibility-theresa-may-cough-7984071?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100
I think "allegedly" might be the better word. Funny that - if it had come not from a left-wing source but a right-wing one, it would not be a joke but "fake news".
But all such things are jokes, like the fake news that the P45 stunt was by a joker and not remotely inspired by ISIS Corbyn.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:17 pm
by Ariel
Is this normal? Report: FBI Wipes Phones and Laptops of Las Vegas Massacre Eyewitnesses . Or is the FBI corrupt and are they trying to hide something. :clueless:

Image

Workers at the Route 91 festival during which Stephen Paddock unleashed his massacre have reportedly been given back their phones and laptops by the FBI only to discover that all messages and videos from the night of the attack have been wiped clean.

According to a Las Vegas resident who posted a status update on Facebook, “A bunch of people that worked the Route 91 said they got their cell phones back today. They all said that all their phones are completely wiped clean! All messages and info from that weekend are completely gone. Anyone else experience this?”

“A few different people who were vendors there are all saying the same thing,” the woman later comments.

Later in the thread, a Route 91 worker confirms the story, commenting, “Of course. It’s an active federal crime scene. They can wipe it clean. I was the beverage manager for the entire event. My laptop is wiped clean.”

Infowars was separately contacted by another individual who told us the same story. Both individuals asked that their names not be revealed.

The fact that all the information relating to the massacre has been deleted is sure to prompt further claims of a cover-up.

While some assert that the feds wiping data is a routine part of their investigation procedure, if authorities want to stop the many conspiracy theories circulating about the attack, they’re not doing a very good job of it.

As Ann Coulter notes, the media’s treatment of the story and the constantly changing official narrative is only serving to make people more suspicious.

“I don’t know what happened — and, apparently, neither do the cops — but it’s kind of odd that we keep being told things that aren’t true about the Las Vegas massacre, from the basic timeline to this weird insistence that Paddock made a good living at gambling,” writes Coulter.

She points to many questions that remain unanswered about the attack, including why Paddock checked in to the hotel days earlier than authorities first said he did, why he was wearing gloves if he planned to commit suicide and why Paddock chose to “unload 200 rounds into the hallway at a security guard who was checking on someone else’s room before beginning his massacre.”

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:57 pm
by Fernando
Wouldn't that constitute destroying evidence? Aren't there things in data protection law to prevent this?
Anyway, a lot of mobile phone users back up their devices to the cloud, so it could be pointless anyway.
I suppose the critical question, though, it whether it's also done in other circumstances. If not, it really stinks.
BTW I saw elsewhere that the hotel security guard was shot with a hail of bullets BEFORE the main shooting began. Why did it take them several days to either discover or reveal that?

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:41 am
by idesigner1
Blame FBI!

Blame CIA!

Blame Las vegas police!

Blame hotel!

Blame ISIS!

But don't blame gun laws where a guy can obtain 40 automatic weapons and gun powder to demolish half the Las Vegas strip! All bought legally from about three states! No one dare inform police because there is a law you can't question sanity of insane man if he is white and member of NRA! I say white previlage.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 9:19 am
by pr126
The Culture War of Gun Control

After Vegas, the gun control memes and myths come out. It doesn't matter how wrong they are, they will echo in the mediasphere and then the talking points will leak into everyday conversations.


“Guns are uniquely lethal.”

Last year, a Muslim terrorist with a truck killed 86 people and wounded another 458.

Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel, the Tunisian Muslim killer, had brought along a gun, but it proved largely ineffective. The deadliest weapon of the delivery driver was a truck. Mohammed, who was no genius, used it to kill more people than Stephen Paddock would with all his meticulous planning in Vegas.

Do we need truck control?

Deadlier than the truck is the jet plane. Nearly 3,000 people were killed on September 11 by terrorists with a plan and some box cutters. And then there are always the bombs.

The Boston Marathon bomber wounded 264, a suicide bomber at the Manchester Arena last year wounded 250 and the Oklahoma City Bombing (the only non-Islamic terror attack on the list) killed 168 and wounded 680. Paddock was also stockpiling explosive compounds. If he hadn’t been able to get his hands on firearms, he would have deployed bombs. And potentially killed even more people.

More..

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 9:33 am
by manfred
Idesigner, here is my penny's worth on gun laws. Restrictions on buying guns only prevent HONEST people from getting any. Suppose this man really was hell bent on carnying out this shooting, would he not be able to find ways to get guns? Heroine is illegal... people still buy it. Sure, perhaps the US should look at gun laws, as perhaps it would help to occasionally prevent a crime before it happened. But it is not a complete solution to the problem.

I have no idea why he did what he did, as the info given is insufficient to draw secure conclusions. I want answers, like most people, but we are denied them. The claim by ISIS is, it think, far fetched, and unless evidence is given I do no believe that.

Also, one of the (Pakistani) London bombers years ago was repeatedly described in the media and TV as a "meek teaching assistant, well liked by parent and teachers alike". Is that "brown privilege"?

We are merely told about the IMAGE a perpetrator managed to project BEFORE the act. The "retired accountant and grandfather" is the same thing. Sure he was that, and many people assumed that was all there was about him, but clearly that assumption was quite wrong and he had another, very dark dimension to his personality.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 10:42 am
by Fernando
It's all very well saying that guns don't necessarily lead to killings, or that banning them won't stop killings. What we need to know is whether guns lead to more killings. I've no idea what the statistics are but there seem to be a lot of gun killings in the USA either as random one-offs or mass killings by crazed individuals. Regarding the latter, the ready availability of powerful automatic weapons seems to be a feature.
What's the betting that there are restrictions on hiring trucks before they tighten gun controls significantly?

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:22 pm
by Nosuperstition
I have read one Humanist of the old forum warning muslims that in the U.S. people are armed to the teeth and any rioting by muslims will be met with the same violence that happened with guns during the rioting between blacks and whites in the 1960s.So people are not going to give away guns not just because of muslims but also because of racial feelings that exist within the U.S society.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:36 pm
by idesigner1
I am talking about automatic assault weapons. Who needs them? Hunter, sportsman or for self defence?

Why NRA is against checking back ground?

When some one apply for driving license he has to pass a test . There is no fly list for troublesome argumentative air line pessangers.. It's insane argument that as there were few terrorism acts by mad man driver killings innocents, it's ok to let authentic NRA white guy to buy 42 automatic assault weapons and few tons of explosives , no questions asked? No back ground check? Even Hotel in Las Vegas can't check his baggage Even guns were found during check , their law says he is within his right!!. No one dare question mental state of this man. IF YOU ARE WHITE YOU ARE RIGHT :clueless: It's all about their racist cultural prerogative ! Poor victims who went their to have good time!!

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 7:30 am
by manfred
Idesigner, I agree that guns should be licensed and registered, and, sure, there should be background checks on people intending to buy guns. Why would anyone need an assault rifle, anyway?

This should obviously apply to all, and not based on skin colour or any such nonsense.

This would make it harder for people to accumulate guns, or to buy any with a criminal record. The point I tried to make to you is, it does not make it impossible.

Take this man... no previous criminal record, no history of mental illness, so he would probably get a licence to buy a gun. With that he could get one, maybe two guns. If he wants more, he would simply resort to illegal means.

So while gun controls help to some extent, it is silly to suggest they solve the problem. It is equally silly to say that, as it does not completely fix the problem, it is useless. There are gun laws pretty much everywhere in Europe, and we get much less shootings, but we still get some.

And you "race" connection eludes me... A black or Asian retired accountant in the US could have done the exact same thing. Who is saying this man was "right" anyway?

We have not been told anything about why he did it, possibly we never will.

You seem to be latching on one particular thing we do know about him, his skin colour, and you automatically assume that this is a relevant factor. What do you base it on? If someone suggested that any white person committing an atrocity does that this because he is a "white supremacist", does that way of thinking not in itself suggest racial prejudice?

Imagine someone saying "the burglar had shoe size 8! Awful, you know, the size 8 people are all the same. When a size 9 does a burglary everybody shouts and wants him punished. When it is a size 8, people are for motives and such...."

In reality we all want to know the motives for all of these cases. Some we find out, some we do not.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:29 pm
by Nosuperstition
It is said that people of color show more affinity towards and get drunk with the wine of music.Perhaps most of those enjoying that concert are not pure whites.Hence this white man might have felt that he should take revenge on people of color for some imagined white grievance.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:59 pm
by idesigner1
Manfred I like to answer the " white entitlement" case briefly.

1. Guy bought all guns legally, they can be bought in gun shows. Even explosives were bought legally no red flags anywhere. His demeanour, his long record as high roller helped lot at Mandalay hotel

2. Imagine if some pimpish looking black buy , or a Muslim with long flowing beard or an Oriental guy had entered premises with three suitcases and later brought more suitcases , do you think there wouldn't have been any reaction from security? This is I called white previlage. Poor concert goers paid heavy price for this cozy stereotype! Some 50 buthchered!. I understand cultural majoritism, personal preference etc. US is great country in many ways.

3. Look how border line insane, some time uncouth in language. some time paranoid Guy with illogical mindset, Petulant white president Trump is praised and supported by his countrymen! Like Las Vegas country may pay heavy price. By the way I support some ban on Muslim immigration as well as controlling unchecked immigration from its southern border. Country has right to change its immigration policy. But Trump may start unnecessary wars.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:12 pm
by manfred
Hmm...

it is true that often people are more suspicious about Muslim people, and it is not entirely surprising. But that has more to do with past experience than with skin colour or appearance.

When I was young I read a story in the Spanish papers about a Moroccan guy smuggling marijuana into Spain...he had done this successfully for many years, by dressing up as a Catholic priest on the ferry from Morocco. The Spanish customs usually just waived him through. What caught him was, once he was stopped and asked by the customs officer "How long will we be honoured to have your presence here in Spain. reverend father?" and he replied "Inshallah just one day..."

So then they knew something was no right, and they found the drugs, which he had not even concealed, in a bag in the boot of the car.

Skin colour? Race? Or expectations you have from certain people?

Rightly or wrongly we all have some ideas on what people should likely behave like, based entirely on dress or appearance. To me that is hardly "white privilege". I get edgy on a bus if I see a Muslim guy with a backpack. I can't help it.

As to Trump being whatever he is, you surely are not saying that all people with similar skin colour are therefore the same. Is everybody who has a moustache exactly like Hitler? Are all Oriental people like Pol Pot or Kim Yung Un? All black people like Idi Amin?

Lastly, yes, he bought all those gins quite legally. Can people with a different skin colour not currently buy guns legally in the US?

What it comes down to is this: what does a "shooter" look like? The answer is "like anybody you could meet anywhere." Despite of that, we do not expect some little pensioner to be a danger to anyone, generally. Just as we do do not think when a black granny in her Sunday best hat goes into a bank, she will try and rob it.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:39 pm
by idesigner1
Black or non white NRA member buying lots of automatic guns from shops, dealers and in gun show and buying lots explosive will sure attract lots of attention and police or FBI may pay visit , the best scenario or blow up his whole residence and level the block where he lives a worst scenario! Understandable ! Can happen anywhere in the world but their gun laws makes it worst.

Re: And Las Vegas? Surely not?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:53 pm
by Nosuperstition
idesigner1 wrote:Black or non white NRA member buying lots of automatic guns from shops, dealers and in gun show and buying lots explosive will sure attract lots of attention and police or FBI may pay visit , the best scenario or blow up his whole residence and level the block where he lives a worst scenario! Understandable ! Can happen anywhere in the world but their gun laws makes it worst.


Is that so?OMG U.S seems to be racist a lot.I never really thought in this way.