Fort Lauderdale shooting

[Cyclone]

You make a good point. It was the targeting of holiday makers that made me go down the Muslim route.

 

You did predict it was Muslim, you later claimed this was down to history and logic.

It turns out that history nor logic would support your supposition though and yet you're still pretending to be reasonable.

 

---------- Post added 07-01-2017 at 14:05 ----------

 

Muslims do commit disproportionate amounts of these tyes of incidents though, linked no doubt to Americas awful foreign policy.

 

And this statement was just plain wrong wasn't it. You were just making things up to justify your prejudices.

[FriedChicken]

What's the difference between terrorism and this?

 

And why do people go 'phew, it's not another 'terrorist' attack'?

 

What's the difference?

[Jpeters]

You did predict it was Muslim, you later claimed this was down to history and logic.

It turns out that history nor logic would support your supposition though and yet you're still pretending to be reasonable.

 

---------- Post added 07-01-2017 at 14:05 ----------

 

 

And this statement was just plain wrong wasn't it. You were just making things up to justify your prejudices.

 

I didn't predict it was a Muslim at all.

 

The statement was accurate.

[Michael_W]

the point is, people WANT to make assumptions and generally the ones that do assume its muslims generally are the ones that are islamophobic, thats the issue, people WANT to use it to further their views

 

rightly or wrongly

 

Of course people WANT to make assumptions and do so in their comments, you and almost everyone else does on here, posters make assumptions about other posters, what's the difference ?

You post in the Sheffield football section but I will bet you ain't been to watch those teams and matches you comment on, therefore I will assume that you make assumptions in many of your posts there too ...... everyone is entitled to their view and make what assumptions they like, it's not illegal yet

 

The fact that quite a few terrorist atrocities in recent years have been made by, or on behalf of, Islamic terrorist organisations may have something to do with some posters making such assumptions on this incident ...... rightly or wrongly eh

[melthebell]

What's the difference between terrorism and this?

 

And why do people go 'phew, it's not another 'terrorist' attack'?

 

What's the difference?

 

The word terror, was it done to terrorise, or just kill?

 

---------- Post added 07-01-2017 at 14:37 ----------

 

Of course people WANT to make assumptions and do so in their comments, you and almost everyone else does on here, posters make assumptions about other posters, what's the difference ?

You post in the Sheffield football section but I will bet you ain't been to watch those teams and matches you comment on, therefore I will assume that you make assumptions in many of your posts there too ...... everyone is entitled to their view and make what assumptions they like, it's not illegal yet

 

The fact that quite a few terrorist atrocities in recent years have been made by, or on behalf of, Islamic terrorist organisations may have something to do with some posters making such assumptions on this incident ...... rightly or wrongly eh

 

Yup, I assume you're an idiot, rightly or wrongly

[FriedChicken]

The word terror, was it done to terrorise, or just kill

 

I'd be terrorised if I'd have witnessed a mass shooting regardless if it was a 'terrorist attack' or a crazy yank.

[Cyclone]

The point is whether the intent is to cause terror amongst the general population (not those present) or not (arguably with the aim of political or ideological change).

[The Joker]

What's the difference between terrorism and this?

 

And why do people go 'phew, it's not another 'terrorist' attack'?

 

What's the difference?

 

For some reason, people aren't bothered if you kill someone of your own or a lesser colour or religion.

 

For example, white folk killing white folk is OK, after all we didn't bomb the Oirish when they were bombing us back in the 1960s, the 1970s, the 1980s, or even the 1990s.

 

White folk bombing brown folk is also OK, after all we did bomb Iraq back to the stone ages and set in action a cause of events that will take decades to resolve. But that's OK, 'cos of terrorism. And they're of a lesser colour and a different religion too.

 

Brown folk bombing brown folk is OK as well, after all we've been supporting Middle Eastern dictators for decades to kill their own people. Not that they needed our help, they're still at it today.

 

However, Brown folk killing white folk is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG so the xenophobic gob-frothers must seize any opportunity at all to point the finger of blame at Muslims, even when they had nothing to do with any attack.

 

D'you see?

[melthebell]

and a bit more about the mind of the arrested "ex serviceman"

 

His brother said he had been receiving psychological treatment recently.

 

His aunt told a local newspaper he had "lost his mind" while serving in Iraq.

[Harrystottle]

This is the point. I support the right of ordinary people to own a gun if they want to do so. But anyone with severe mental problems being allowed to own one is not a good idea, and the USA really has to come to terms with this. Some people aren't in a fit state to own a gun.