Another shooting - San Bernadino California.

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Hard to say. I don't pretend to know how long the Battle of Ar Mageddon will last.

Easy to say -- you just don't want to say it.

You'd never want to let them out, would you?
 
Upvote 0

Calvinist Dark Lord

Regular Member
Apr 8, 2003
1,589
468
Near Pittsburgh, which is NOT in Scotland!
✟27,806.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Anyone who would threaten to murder a fellow American for exercising their rights under the constitution to participate in our form of government would strike me as someone who does not love their country. Do you disagree? Do you feel that threatening to murder people who exercise their right to representative democracy guaranteed in our founding document is a patriotic act?
Reading comprehension not your strong suit? Please demonstrate where i have threatened anyone.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I advocate killing off ISIS and Al Qaida including all their women and children (that they have radicalized), as Trump also says. I do not advocate killing all Muslims.

You'd rather let them all die in your camps...
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,343.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Reading comprehension not your strong suit? Please demonstrate where i have threatened anyone.

If you are not threatening violence with "being put up against a wall and 'posing for rifle fire'" what exactly are you trying to convey?

i fear an even more painful 'lesson' will be given if anyone is foolish enough to attempt to interfere with the rights under the first 10 amendments.

i pray that this 'lesson' does not have to happen so that those responsible for attempting to subjugate the
American Peoples into bondage will not be put against a wall to 'pose for rifle fire' if they're fortunate, or something worse if they're not.
 
Upvote 0

Calvinist Dark Lord

Regular Member
Apr 8, 2003
1,589
468
Near Pittsburgh, which is NOT in Scotland!
✟27,806.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
If you are not threatening violence with "being put up against a wall and 'posing for rifle fire'" what exactly are you trying to convey?
i see.

What part of "i pray that this 'lesson' does not have to happen..." did you have trouble comprehending?
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,343.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
i see.

What part of "i pray that this 'lesson' does not have to happen..." did you have trouble comprehending?

The part where you think shooting people is an appropriate response for exercising their constitutional rights. I thought I made that clear?
 
Upvote 0

Calvinist Dark Lord

Regular Member
Apr 8, 2003
1,589
468
Near Pittsburgh, which is NOT in Scotland!
✟27,806.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The part where you think shooting people is an appropriate response for exercising their constitutional rights. I thought I made that clear?
Keep on moving those goal posts Belk, perhaps you may even find defensible ground.

First: You asked me "Why do you hate America?"

i ask you to: ...explain how you reached that conclusion from what you quoted.

Then: you accuse me of threatening to murder people.

Your first fall back: Note that you're still begging the question of whether i hate America.

i then ask you: "Please demonstrate where i have threatened anyone."

To which you reply: "If you are not threatening violence with "being put up against a wall and 'posing for rifle fire'" what exactly are you trying to convey?"

Which of course begs the question of whether or not i have threatened anyone.

Then i directly challenge your assertion: "What part of "i pray that this 'lesson' does not have to happen..." did you have trouble comprehending?"


And now you fall back again to claim that i think shooting people an appropriate response for blah, blah, blah...

So i ask you again, what in the language of that post stated that i thought any such thing?

i take it you'll have your next fall back position already prepared.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,343.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Keep on moving those goal posts Belk, perhaps you may even find defensible ground.


I am not moving any goal posts. I have simply given my responses to each of your questions and my position remains the same. Perhaps the difficulty is you are not understanding my responses?
First: You asked me "Why do you hate America?"

i ask you to: ...explain how you reached that conclusion from what you quoted.

Then: you accuse me of threatening to murder people.

Your first fall back: Note that you're still begging the question of whether i hate America.

Apparently you missed the part in that reply where I explained why I found your stance to be anti American and hence my comment. Would you like me to re-iterate or paraphrase it?



I also asked in that post if you were not attempting to convey a threat of violence then what was it you were attempting to convey? It still looks like a threat of violence to me so perhaps you could enlighten me as to where I am in error?

And now you fall back again to claim that i think shooting people an appropriate response for blah, blah, blah...

So i ask you again, what in the language of that post stated that i thought any such thing?

And, again, that would be the part where you claim that those who are attempting to 'subjugate the American people' will get a painful lesson and might be lined up and shot. That you hope this lesson does not need to happen (ie that people do not mess with the first ten amendments) does not change the concept that you seem to view it as an appropriate response.
i take it you'll have your next fall back position already prepared.

As I said, I have been consistent throughout. But please, feel free to explain how I am wrong on your position. It certainly will not have been the first time I have been mistaken.
 
Upvote 0

Calvinist Dark Lord

Regular Member
Apr 8, 2003
1,589
468
Near Pittsburgh, which is NOT in Scotland!
✟27,806.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I am not moving any goal posts. I have simply given my responses to each of your questions and my position remains the same. Perhaps the difficulty is you are not understanding my responses?
Which have failed to make your point.


Apparently you missed the part in that reply where I explained why I found your stance to be anti American and hence my comment. Would you like me to re-iterate or paraphrase it?
No need. You would still be in error.




I also asked in that post if you were not attempting to convey a threat of violence then what was it you were attempting to convey? It still looks like a threat of violence to me so perhaps you could enlighten me as to where I am in error?
No, what you were in fact doing was trying to enforce your own ideas upon text that would not support it. That you misinterpreted is neither here nor there, the text does not support your contentions.



And, again, that would be the part where you claim that those who are attempting to 'subjugate the American people' will get a painful lesson and might be lined up and shot. That you hope this lesson does not need to happen (ie that people do not mess with the first ten amendments) does not change the concept that you seem to view it as an appropriate response.
Seem. That is of course to your own misinterpretation of the text that i wrote.


As I said, I have been consistent throughout. But please, feel free to explain how I am wrong on your position. It certainly will not have been the first time I have been mistaken.
Consistently incorrect. As for my views you need simply look at the political affiliation that i have. Then go to the website for that party or Wikipedia and read it's statement concerning the use of force. i'll post it here for your convenience:

The Libertarian Party said:
"I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals."

This pledge is a requirement for membership in the party. i strongly hold to this pledge, since as a Christian my yes means YES! and my no means NO!

That i tell you something such as what i posted is likely to happen, i DO NOT say it with any joy, but with the knowledge of how tyranny and tyrants usually end...it isn't pretty.


i'd like to think that such a thing could never happen in this country, but many things that i thought never possible have in fact happened. i simply, unlike those tyrants, don't believe that the American people will tolerate such things for much longer.

So the bottom line is that i meant what i wrote. That you chose to read something else into it is not my problem.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,343.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Which have failed to make your point.


No need. You would still be in error.


Given your inability to even identify my argument in your last response I'll take this with a grain of salt.



No, what you were in fact doing was trying to enforce your own ideas upon text that would not support it. That you misinterpreted is neither here nor there, the text does not support your contentions.



Seem. That is of course to your own misinterpretation of the text that i wrote.


Consistently incorrect.


So you agree that I am not moving the goal posts in my responses?

As for my views you need simply look at the political affiliation that i have. Then go to the website for that party or Wikipedia and read it's statement concerning the use of force. i'll post it here for your convenience:


This pledge is a requirement for membership in the party. i strongly hold to this pledge, since as a Christian my yes means YES! and my no means NO!

That i tell you something such as what i posted is likely to happen, i DO NOT say it with any joy, but with the knowledge of how tyranny and tyrants usually end...it isn't pretty.


i'd like to think that such a thing could never happen in this country, but many things that i thought never possible have in fact happened. i simply, unlike those tyrants, don't believe that the American people will tolerate such things for much longer.

So the bottom line is that i meant what i wrote. That you chose to read something else into it is not my problem


I see. So let me paraphrase my understanding of your position to ensure I have it correct:

You feel that our current government is Tyrannical. You believe that if people amend the constitution to modify any of the first ten amendments this will be a further sign of tyranny. You feel that people are feed up and are soon to erupt into violence. You feel violence in the service of politics and changing society is wrong and so you are against the coming uprising.

Does this accurately reflect your views?
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
and then the attorney general...

She is a very good Dhimmi.

It did not even take a conquest to relegate American leftists to Jihadist servitude.

Also I did not know thoughts could be prosecuted. First how would one know what others were thinking?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uncle Siggy
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Uncle Siggy

Promulgator of Annoying Tidbits of Information
Dec 4, 2015
3,652
2,737
Ohio
✟61,528.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The world is getting completely nuts-
It seems that the only people to NOT get persecuted for their thoughts are atheist

I'm curious as to what religion Loretta Lynch "claims" to follow??
 
Upvote 0

interpreter

Senior Member
Mar 4, 2004
6,309
157
76
Texas
✟7,377.00
Faith
Anglican
Which have failed to make your point.


No need. You would still be in error.




No, what you were in fact doing was trying to enforce your own ideas upon text that would not support it. That you misinterpreted is neither here nor there, the text does not support your contentions.



Seem. That is of course to your own misinterpretation of the text that i wrote.


Consistently incorrect. As for my views you need simply look at the political affiliation that i have. Then go to the website for that party or Wikipedia and read it's statement concerning the use of force. i'll post it here for your convenience:



This pledge is a requirement for membership in the party. i strongly hold to this pledge, since as a Christian my yes means YES! and my no means NO!

That i tell you something such as what i posted is likely to happen, i DO NOT say it with any joy, but with the knowledge of how tyranny and tyrants usually end...it isn't pretty.


i'd like to think that such a thing could never happen in this country, but many things that i thought never possible have in fact happened. i simply, unlike those tyrants, don't believe that the American people will tolerate such things for much longer.

So the bottom line is that i meant what i wrote. That you chose to read something else into it is not my problem.
I'm happy to see that Rand Paul, like Ted Cruz, is backing Trump in the big schism in the Republican Party. Paul and Cruz have pretty much said the same thing as Trump. Cruz says he will ban Muslim immigrants any nation where ISIS is present. Isn't that pretty much every Muslim nation on earth? Paul says Muslims should be banned from 34 Islamic nations and names them. Again pretty much every Muslim nation on earth. Yet it is only Trump who gets all the media attention.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums