Libs have become what they supposedly hate

HFNY

cnn.com/2017/05/28/us/fareed-zakaria-liberals-cnntv/index.html?sr=fbcnni052817fareed-zakaria-liberals-cnntv/index.html0730PMStoryLink&linkId=38100059

Meanwhile, after they were busy claiming that a Bernie loving crazy white guy in Portland showed that White Nationalism is the biggest threat (led by Huffington Post), ISIS blew up Kabul and Muslim terrorists are getting deadlier in the Philippines.

It's even reached Manila: https://yahoo.com/news/witnesses-gunshots-explosions-philippine-mall-183444308.html

The comments are hilarious, calling out CNN and other mainstream media for advancing the line that the Philippine security forces have everything under control...."move along people, nothing to see here"

m3
m322 hours ago
Of course they will deny terrorism, to protect the other "ism": TOUR-ISM.
ReplyReplies (14)9830

apostlejohn7777
apostlejohn777723 hours ago
What every major city in America would look like if a Democrat got elected.
ReplyReplies (9)6048

Piter Devries
Piter Devries22 hours ago
A moderate Muslim is one who's out of ammunition.
ReplyReplies (9)10231

Ted
Ted22 hours ago
So a person going into a hotel and setting off bombs and shooting guns at people is not an act of terror? The PC police are all over this one.
ReplyReplies (8)6119

TierbsHsotBoobs

White nationalists killing Americans is a bigger threat to Americans than dumbfuck ISIS wannabes killing people in the Philippines.

HTH

HFNY

San Bernardino victims:



Fort Hood victims:



Orlando victims:

HFNY

And since you are worried about Bernie loving white guys, did he do 9/11 too?

TierbsHsotBoobs

HFNY said:

San Bernardino victims:



Fort Hood victims:



Orlando victims:

That's a better effort.

Stick to actual threats to Americans. NOGAF about the Philippines.

HFNY

You got it

TierbsHsotBoobs

HFNY said:

You got it

That's a problem, just as white Christian terrorism is a problem:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/


If you're going to argue about being TUFF on one form of religious terrorism, be TUFF on all of them.

allpurpleallgold

250 black people were killed by police in 2016. I'm hearing a number that low isn't a problem.

HFNY

Problem is being anti-government attacks aren't about race or religion. The worst government attack of the all, by Timothy McVeigh, was all about inflicting damage on the Federal Government (he bombed a Federal Government building and killed nearly exclusively other whites). The writer of that study clearly lumps in those types of attacks with Dylan Roof.

Also:

washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HFNY said:

You got it

That's a problem, just as white Christian terrorism is a problem:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/


If you're going to argue about being TUFF on one form of religious terrorism, be TUFF on all of them.

oregonblitzkrieg

allpurpleallgold said:

250 black people were killed by police in 2016. I'm hearing a number that low isn't a problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7-TTWgiYL4

HFNY

Also that study the writer did came before the San Bernardino shooting (14 dead) and the Orlando shooting (49 dead).

Updated facts blow up that narrative (besides conflating anti-government attacks with religious or racial attacks).

TierbsHsotBoobs

HFNY said:

Problem is being anti-government attacks aren't about race or religion. The worst government attack of the all, by Timothy McVeigh, was all about inflicting damage on the Federal Government (he bombed a Federal Government building and killed nearly exclusively other whites). The writer of that study clearly lumps in those types of attacks with Dylan Roof.

Also:

washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HFNY said:

You got it

That's a problem, just as white Christian terrorism is a problem:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/


If you're going to argue about being TUFF on one form of religious terrorism, be TUFF on all of them.

So you're cool with white Christian terrorism if it is also anti-government terrorism.

Got it.

PurpleJ

Of course baabs is on the terrorist side.

TierbsHsotBoobs

PurpleJ said:

Of course baabs is on the terrorist side.

I hate all terrorists.

Except for the Lemon Party terrorists. Those guys are awesome.

PurpleJ

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

PurpleJ said:

Of course baabs is on the terrorist side.

I hate all terrorists.

Except for the Lemon Party terrorists. Those guys are awesome.

No you support Islamic terrorism.

TierbsHsotBoobs

PurpleJ said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

PurpleJ said:

Of course baabs is on the terrorist side.

I hate all terrorists.

Except for the Lemon Party terrorists. Those guys are awesome.

No you support Islamic terrorism.

Link?

HFNY

Huh? I just explained why an anti-government attack 21 years ago had nothing to do with race or religion. Read McVeigh's manifesto!

And if crazy Bernie loving white guys are such a threat like Huffington Post and CNN like to tell us (for political reasons), why is the USA spending $100 billion a year protecting us from them? Even CNN is willing to call that duck a duck.

money.cnn.com/2015/11/16/news/economy/cost-of-fighting-terrorism/

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HFNY said:

Problem is being anti-government attacks aren't about race or religion. The worst government attack of the all, by Timothy McVeigh, was all about inflicting damage on the Federal Government (he bombed a Federal Government building and killed nearly exclusively other whites). The writer of that study clearly lumps in those types of attacks with Dylan Roof.

Also:

washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HFNY said:

You got it

That's a problem, just as white Christian terrorism is a problem:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/


If you're going to argue about being TUFF on one form of religious terrorism, be TUFF on all of them.

So you're cool with white Christian terrorism if it is also anti-government terrorism.

Got it.

PurpleJ

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

PurpleJ said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

PurpleJ said:

Of course baabs is on the terrorist side.

I hate all terrorists.

Except for the Lemon Party terrorists. Those guys are awesome.

No you support Islamic terrorism.

Link?

HERE

TierbsHsotBoobs

PurpleJ said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

PurpleJ said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

PurpleJ said:

Of course baabs is on the terrorist side.

I hate all terrorists.

Except for the Lemon Party terrorists. Those guys are awesome.

No you support Islamic terrorism.

Link?

HERE

YBE.

TierbsHsotBoobs

HFNY said:

Huh? I just explained why an anti-government attack 21 years ago had nothing to do with race or religion. Read McVeigh's manifesto!

And if crazy Bernie loving white guys are such a threat like Huffington Post and CNN like to tell us (for political reasons), why is the USA spending $100 billion a year protecting us from them? Even CNN is willing to call that duck a duck.

money.cnn.com/2015/11/16/news/economy/cost-of-fighting-terrorism/

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HFNY said:

Problem is being anti-government attacks aren't about race or religion. The worst government attack of the all, by Timothy McVeigh, was all about inflicting damage on the Federal Government (he bombed a Federal Government building and killed nearly exclusively other whites). The writer of that study clearly lumps in those types of attacks with Dylan Roof.

Also:

washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HFNY said:

You got it

That's a problem, just as white Christian terrorism is a problem:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/


If you're going to argue about being TUFF on one form of religious terrorism, be TUFF on all of them.

So you're cool with white Christian terrorism if it is also anti-government terrorism.

Got it.

McVeigh is a white Christian who committed a terrorist attack. It was every bit as anti-government as 9/11.

Hope this helps.

HFNY

McVeigh's manifesto:

I explain herein why I bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. I explain this not for publicity, nor seeking to win an argument of right or wrong. I explain so that the record is clear as to my thinking and motivations in bombing a government installation.

I chose to bomb a federal building because such an action served more purposes than other options. Foremost, the bombing was a retaliatory strike; a counter attack, for the cumulative raids (and subsequent violence and damage) that federal agents had participated in over the preceding years (including, but not limited to, Waco.) From the formation of such units as the FBI’s “Hostage Rescue” and other assault teams amongst federal agencies during the ’80’s; culminating in the Waco incident, federal actions grew increasingly militaristic and violent, to the point where at Waco, our government – like the Chinese – was deploying tanks against its own citizens.

Knowledge of these multiple and ever-more aggressive raids across the country constituted an identifiable pattern of conduct within and by the federal government and amongst its various agencies. (see enclosed) For all intents and purposes, federal agents had become “soldiers” (using military training, tactics, techniques, equipment, language, dress, organization, and mindset) and they were escalating their behavior. Therefore, this bombing was also meant as a pre-emptive (or pro-active) strike against these forces and their command and control centers within the federal building. When an aggressor force continually launches attacks from a particular base of operation, it is sound military strategy to take the fight to the enemy.

Additionally, borrowing a page from U.S. foreign policy, I decided to send a message to a government that was becoming increasingly hostile, by bombing a government building and the government employees within that building who represent that government. Bombing the Murrah Federal Building was morally and strategically equivalent to the U.S. hitting a government building in Serbia, Iraq, or other nations. (see enclosed) Based on observations of the policies of my own government , I viewed this action as an acceptable option. From this perspective, what occurred in Oklahoma City was no different than what Americans rain on the heads of others all the time, and subsequently, my mindset was and is one of clinical detachment. (The bombing of the Murrah building was not personal , no more than when Air Force, Army, Navy, or Marine personnel bomb or launch cruise missiles against government installations and their personnel.)

I hope that this clarification amply addresses your question.

Sincerely,

Timothy J. McVeigh