DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Terroist Attack On Planned Parenthood Center in Colorado

...and you too... I guess.

No problem Clem..like I said agree with 99% of what you write and SO FAR when we have disagreed I understand why you feel the way you do:)

No problem Clem..like I said agree with .0009% of what you write and SO FAR when we have disagreed I understand why you feel the way you do.

you two need to get a room....

idk if you really need a plan of action when going into a public place and shooting it up. You kinda just go there and shoot it up. The terrorists in Paris had other plans, but resorted to just shooting some people up. Does their change in planning make them not terrorists? Are terrorists anything more than people inciting terrorists? Are murderers anything more than people who murder? Words exist to label things, not to distort them.

Assuming a terrorist is someone who tries to incite terror for political reasons -- which apparently is a big debate here -- then this guy is a terrorist. He's tried to sabotage a planned parenthood in the past, so already, you have a record of targeting the health clinic. He often praised the Army of God, a Taliban-esque group that have used kidnapping, murder, bombs and anthrax threats against Health Clinics and Doctors who provide abortions. His 2nd wife, his biggest fan, said that he was always "planning revenge". Honestly, this guy is a clear cut terrorist. He planned the attack, attacked PP's before, and celebrated the kidnapping of Abortion doctors. I mean, yeah, this guy is a nutjob. But I'm sure a lot of terrorists are nut jobs. I haven't met any terrorists, but I bet they're all nutjobs. You just have to be one to want to incite this much violence against someone you don't know.

IDK what youve been reading on here but it feels pretty distorted to me...and I'm pretty sure the word meaning thing has been put to rest??

And I dont know why you responded to me...already said i could see why one would label him a terrorist..Just wasnt ready to use that verbiage till I learned more.

So wth am I missing here CHS?

Apparently the fact that he's a terrorist.

Booming Mass Weapons?

Jesus man didnt I already concede its a possibility and was waiting for more info

Please dont turn into Rock type posting Ive enjoyed our interaction thus far

I've enjoyed our interactions too. But if I told you, "I see why people believe in gravity, but how do we know that it actually exists and isn't just invisible dragons pushing everything down at a rate of 9.8 m/s^2. That's why the moon doesn't have that strong gravity, because not many invisible dragons can fly there." you'd hopefully get a little frustrated with me. Despite my nice tone, I'm still wrong and should be pointed out that I'm wrong. Right?

I'm sorry man I dont do well with parables or these hypothetical what if things..Are you telling me I'm wrong because people chose to argue over word meaning and mine didnt align with theirs??

Sorry man my brain isnt wired for hypothetical s..more of a fact based reasoning for me...Soooo if i was wrong and misread my sincerest apologies CHS

General reply:

The mental health system will remain broken because it doesn't have any real advocates. It's the type of subject that everyone says SOMEBODY needs to do something about it. But what happens when a room full of people are standing around pointing at someone else? Nothing gets done.

Half the group homes out there are only cash cows for the scam artists who run them. Many of the people in placement are people that either their issues are so great that their family can't handle, or the families simply got tired of having to deal with them. They have no voice or advocate. When their funding gets cut, there is no mental health NAACP "Rev" equivalent taking the masses to the streets. You won't see some sort of catchy hashtag like #mentalhealthmatters. And the reason you won't see any of this is because the mentally ill aren't a) a voting block and b) by their very nature a group you can control through propaganda nor are they people who can form a group that you can use to threaten others in order to get what you want.

yep.

look, i dunno the numbers, but it SEEMS like way back before i was a twinkle in anybody's eyes, we had way more mental health institutions than we do now.

i know there were a lot of places that closed, and we decided to throw in people with real mental health problems into general pop prisons.

horrible idea.

I am of the firm belief that the entire world is Nuts.

Thank you for reading.
Film at 11

Look up Pennhurst for a good explanation of why they closed a lot of them. Many of the places were underfunded and deplorable. That is when mental health care changed for most of the country.

It's all about the money. There's none to be made off of getting mentally ill people help. It's not like we're told if we spend more on education it'll improve our workforce, or if we spend more on infrastructure it'll help the economy become more efficient. Spending on mental health is an investment only in terms of morality, not anything concrete.

And with mental health I'm also including people with developmental disabilities... two separate things, but both populations who often require additional services.

Even IF we increased spending and such, most people will never see any tangible benefits to it, except the families and those of us on the front line such as cops, EMS, county crisis centers, etc. There's a guy we've been dealing with for 5 yrs that should be in a long term facility like the one I used to work for but was shut down by the State because they didn't want to fund it anymore. This guy is schizophrenic as all get out, but he isn't a danger to himself or others, so I can't just scoop him up and take him to a crisis center. But what am I supposed to do when the guy is aggressively panhandling, trespassing, locking himself in a public restroom whackin off? Lawfully I can't commit him for those acts, but you can't just let him go either. So, he ends up in jail for 2 weeks or more at a time because he technically was committing a criminal act.

Funny,,,I could have sworn you were done with me.

That's exactly what he's telling you. It's much more fun to throw jabs about the terms used than it is to actually accept that almost everybody here agrees with 95% of the opinions on what actually happened. Evidently there is some level of self-satisfaction some get if you just use the word "terrorist" associated with a whacked out guy who hates Obama.

It's like if a white guy shoots up a 7-11, you must call him a thug... don't bother calling him a criminal or a scumbag or a monster... a black person who does that is a thug, ergo, the white guy must also be called a thug.

You don't think these threads get to 8-10 pages because of issue debate do you? LMAO.. hell no. Semantics brother, it's all about the semantics.

No. I'm not. The refusal by some to label this as terrorism is a problem. This is terrorism. When people do this it creates two languages and this is bad. When terrorism only looks like radical Islam, it allows other sorts of terrorism to fester. Having two sets of languages is doublespeak and it's bad. It was bad in 1984 and it's bad in real life.

Yawn... I don't deal well with subterfuge.

This is pretty strange since you've made up 5 back stories for your persona on here. Not to mention the constant trolling, which you admit you do, is rather deep in subterfuge.

Yes, you give another good example of your subterfuge.
I am glad you recognize it, now you can work on fixing it.

jc

I live about 8 miles away from where this shooting was. Today, Officer Swasey was laid to rest. Some touching images came out of today. People lined the streets where the funeral procession was going, waving flags, paying their respects. Several major roads and a decent chunck of the interstate was closed. People caught in the traffic from the road closures got of their cars to pay respects. Then there was this picture of firefighters on an overpass as the procession goes by.



A picture a friend took from where he was at.

Trump calls for 'complete shutdown' on Muslims entering US

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-call...--election.html

Trump urges 'complete shutdown' on Muslims entering US, an idea condemned by Republican rivals

By Jill Colvin and Bruce Smith, Associated Press

MOUNT PLEASANT, S.C. (AP) -- Donald Trump called Monday for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States," an idea swiftly condemned by his rival GOP candidates for president and other Republicans.

The proposed ban would apply to immigrants and visitors alike, a sweeping prohibition affecting all adherents of Islam who want to come to the U.S. The idea faced an immediate challenge to its legality and feasibility from experts who could point to no formal exclusion of immigrants based on religion in America's history.

Trump's campaign said in a statement such a ban should stand "until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." It said the proposal comes in response to a level of hatred among "large segments of the Muslim population" toward Americans.

"Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life," Trump said in the statement.

At an evening rally in South Carolina, Trump supporters cheered and shouted in support as he read his statement. Trump warned during his speech that without drastic action, the threat of attacks is "going to get worse and worse."

"As he says, we have to find out who they are and why they are here," Rod Weader, a 68-year-old real estate agent from North Charleston who attended the rally and said he agreed with Trump's plan "150 percent." ''Like he said, they are going to kill us and we've got to stop it."

Since the Paris attacks, a number of Republican presidential contenders have proposed restrictions on Syrian refugees — with several suggesting preference for Christians seeking asylum — and tighter surveillance in the U.S.

But Trump's proposed ban goes much further than those ideas, and his Republican rivals were quick to reject the latest provocation from a candidate who has delivered no shortage of them.

"Donald Trump is unhinged," Jeb Bush said via Twitter. "His 'policy' proposals are not serious."

John Kasich slammed Trump's "outrageous divisiveness," while a more measured Ted Cruz, who has always been cautious about upsetting Trump's supporters, said, "Well, that is not my policy."

Trump's plan also drew criticism from the heads of the Republican Party in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, the first three states to vote in next year's presidential primaries.

New Hampshire GOP's chairwoman Jennifer Horn said the idea is "un-Republican. It is unconstitutional. And it is un-American," while South Carolina chairman Matt Moore said on Twitter, "As a conservative who truly cares about religious liberty, Donald Trump's bad idea and rhetoric send a shiver down my spine."

Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski said Trump's proposed ban would apply to "everybody," including Muslims seeking immigration visas as well as tourists seeking to enter the country.

His campaign did not immediately respond to questions about whether it would also include Muslims who are U.S. citizens and travel outside of the country, including members of the military, or how a determination of someone's religion might be made by customs and border officials.

Instead, Trump said via a campaign spokeswoman: "Because I am so politically correct, I would never be the one to say. You figure it out!"

There are more than 5,800 servicemen and women on active U.S. military duty and in the reserves who self-identify as Muslim and could be assigned to serve overseas. Trump said in an interview Monday night on Fox News, "They'll come home." He added, "This does not apply to people living in the country, except that we have to vigilant."

It was also unclear whether Trump's ban would apply to Muslim allies in the fight against Islamic State militants. Ari Fleischer, a former aide to Republican President George W. Bush, tweeted, "Under Trump, the King Abdullah of Jordan, who is fighting ISIS, won't be allowed in the US to talk about how to fight ISIS."

But at Trump's rally in South Carolina, the proposed ban struck supporter Shelley Choquette as reasonable, because "it's not going to be forever. I think everybody needs to be checked."

Religion can factor into immigration decisions, but that typically happens when people are fleeing religious persecution. People of a particular religion may get favorable treatment by the United States, as when Russian Jews sought to leave the Soviet Union.

In the late 1800s, Congress passed legislation broadly aimed at halting Chinese immigration. But said Leti Volpp, a University of California expert on immigration law, "there is no precedent for a religious litmus test for admitting immigrants into the United States."

"Excluding almost a quarter of the world's population from setting foot in the United States based solely upon their religious identity would never pass constitutional muster," Volpp said.

Trump's proposal comes a day after President Barack Obama spoke to the nation from the Oval Office about the shootings in San Bernardino, California, which Obama said was "an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people."

The FBI said Monday the Muslim couple who carried out the massacre had been radicalized and had taken target practice at area gun ranges, in one case within days of the attack last week that killed 14 people.

Trump's campaign has been marked by a pattern of inflammatory statements, dating back to his harsh rhetoric about Mexican immigrants. He has taken a particularly hard line against Muslims in the days since the Paris attacks, advocating enhanced surveillance of mosques due to fears over radicalization.

"Donald Trump sounds more like a leader of a lynch mob than a great nation like ours," said Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "He and others are playing into the hands of ISIS. This is exactly what ISIS wants from Americans: to turn against each other."

White House spokesman Josh Earnest accused Trump of playing on people's fears and trying to tap into "a darker side, a darker element" of American society.

From the Democratic presidential campaign, Bernie Sanders said "Trump and others want us to hate all Muslims" and Hillary Clinton called the proposal "reprehensible, prejudiced and divisive."

On Capitol Hill, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona said, "It's just foolish."

But will it hurt Trump in the campaign? "I have no idea," McCain said. "I thought long ago that things he said would hurt his prospects, and he continues to go up."

___

Associated Press writers Mark Sherman, Laurie Kellman, Josh Lederman and Alan Fram in Washington and Bruce Smith and Bill Barrow in South Carolina contributed to this report.

___

Some times I wonder if he truly believes what he says or is he a dem plant to help his friend Hilary get elected:/

Ha! Just imagine a Candidate who cares more for his fellow citizens safety than he does about being liked, PC, prejudiced or divisive.

Unheard of.

I read one of Trumps books over 20 years ago. His business model when building hotels, casinos, etc. is to create controversy to keep his project in the news. If zoning says he can build a 30 story building, he designs a 35 story building and then makes a giant news story out of how they are oppressing his right to build what he wants. If the requirement is that 60% of his building is residential units he designs it to 50% and then makes a news story out of it on purpose. That's why Trump projects are always in the news, because that's how he wants it.

I feel he is running his campaign with the same mindset. Say whatever outrageous thing you can to stay in the news. Take whatever the news story of the day is, go even further out, and make a brash statement... the key at the end of it all, is to stay in the news. I have no idea how much of it he believes or how much of it is really his heartfelt conviction, I just know that everything he says and does is for one calculated reason... to stay in the news.

and it's working.

It is working. He is the lead almost every night on the local and national news. He has perfected this strategy over several decades in the development business. I think many people (including myself) felt that by now he would have said something so brash and controversial that he couldn't recover... but so far he has walked that line and not alienated those that like him. I still think it could happen, but it hasn't happened yet.

I've never read any of his stuff..never liked the guy personally..but he has my attention now. But your reply makes sense to me

He has spent very little of his own money on his campaign due to the fact he is in the News so much he hasn't needed to run ads like the other candidates in order to be noticed and heard.
America needs someone with the business sense to fix the economic mess we are in. Someone who is focused and shrewd enough to get it done. Someone who cares less about all the social issues of our times and has the savvy to fix this economic mess.
Is Trump that guy?

The question is what does he actually care about and what is he simply manipulating for personal gain?

He's a very successful narcissist who loves the spotlight on himself, and at all times.

Anything other than Hillary is fine with me. Nothing could be as terrible as her.

So you're saying it's okay to reverse the term limits of a president so we can have Obama for four more years?

I didn't get all the way into it but that is the strategy behind his buildings as well. He can pay to advertise and try to create a buzz around a new casino... or he can create a controversy and let the media do it for him for free. Anybody who knows how Trump does development isn't at all shocked about how he is running this campaign. I'm just not sure how much I believe him.

There is another Yahoo news feed this morning that "Trump doubles down on ban on Muslims".... this is about the 8th time the headline of Trump doubling down has been in the news in the last 6 months.

He has picked up on what people are tired of with politicians and he's playing it like a fiddle...

People are tired of wishy washy politicians who say what they mean until they upset somebody then they backpeddle and apologize and waffle.. Trump does not. Once he realizes what he said is a story, he pounds his fist and says, "Damn right that's what I said and I meant it." People respond to that.

I don't know if Trump will win, not sure I want him to win.. but I hope this part of his campaign changes the way we act and the way we view politicians forever. It's ok to take a stand, it's ok if that stand pisses some people off, it's ok if not everybody loves you, it's ok to lay your feelings out there and not back down from them the first time you are challenged... we need more politicians who are willing to do that.

He has already changed the dynamic in the republican primary and forced the others to step up their game and take a serious stand on serious issues.. part of me would like to see him get the nomination for just that reason, to challenge Hillary and force her to take a stand... She is the master at playing politics, at playing the victim... and it would be interesting just to sit and watch how that dynamic of her against Trump played out and maybe even more importantly, how the media reported on it.

Yes, I agree with you.

Now for a moment just imagine if Trump plays his hand and ends up winning the nomination.

He will be head to head with Hillary and getting all the attention he needs. He steps back from all the rhetoric and becomes the calm, calculating, presidential candidate who surrounds himself with brilliant people like he has done his entire business career. He matches Hillary with good and detailed plans while telling us he will make America great again.

Could be interesting.

If he is capable of doing that, it would make it interesting. I just know that Hillary is very smart and will know how to push his buttons and get him going. Plus the media will keep digging deeper and deeper and all of the attention will be on him, he won't be fighting for it, it will already be his.I'm not sure he can be calm during that.

Trump is kinda like a car accident in the on coming lanes that you just have to rubber neck..LOL I almost like to watch him to see what he's going to do next..LOL