Can anyone answer this:

A man in muslim religious garb charges a police cruiser and shoots 13 rounds from a 9mm, some with the gun held inside the car, hitting the officer 3 times, who managed to give chase and shoot the assailant prior to collapsing. The shooter pledged his allegiance to ISIS, stated he shot the cops because the police enforce laws contrary to the teachings of Islam, and had made at least 2 trips to the Middle East staying there months.

YET....the mayor of Philly went on TV and stated this shooting had "nothing to do with islam", that the problem is lack of gun control. So, who thinks the mayor should be required to undergo a full mental examination prior to resuming his "duties", whatever he views them to be? BTW, the gun used was a weapon stolen from a police officer!

Originally Posted by Guest

Can anyone answer this:

A man in muslim religious garb charges a police cruiser and shoots 13 rounds from a 9mm, some with the gun held inside the car, hitting the officer 3 times, who managed to give chase and shoot the assailant prior to collapsing. The shooter pledged his allegiance to ISIS, stated he shot the cops because the police enforce laws contrary to the teachings of Islam, and had made at least 2 trips to the Middle East staying there months.

YET....the mayor of Philly went on TV and stated this shooting had "nothing to do with islam", that the problem is lack of gun control. So, who thinks the mayor should be required to undergo a full mental examination prior to resuming his "duties", whatever he views them to be? BTW, the gun used was a weapon stolen from a police officer!

I think he meant that ISIS is not about Islam. The religion, to many is a peaceful religion, just like our Christian religion does not support the KKK. Just my thoughts on it. I am not saying that I agree with that thought, just a hypothesis.
Normally, based on the evidence given to us by the news network, I would usually or automatically consider this to be a terrorist attack. However, this guy was a nut case, so I wonder if he was just using this as a catalyst for the attack on the police. I'm not saying he wasn't a terrorist, but it appears that he was not a part of or member of a terrorist organization, even if he says that Islam was his motivator. Just basing my thoughts on the limited information gathered from the news. It's not meant to be an argument, but just my thoughts. I am not going to jump to the conclusion that this is a terrorist plot when it might be just a solitary nutcase with an anger issue, criminal anger issue. For some reason, it seems that every time we have a killing, someone wants to assign a label to it, trying to rationalize how it could happen and understand why it wasn't avoided. Sometimes, it just happens and can't be preempted. AND, this is not a case for gun control. It was a stolen gun, a police weapon that had been stolen. So, lets not start a gun control debate over this.

I respect your opinion, and it may be true. Right now, law enforcement is examining his computers, we do not yet know if he had ties to ISIS or if he was a "lone wolf". Even so, the question arises--How many lone wolves make up a pack? IMHO, if you subscribe to the philosophy of ISIS, are motivated by jihadist teachings, and then act on them, you ARE a part of an organized terrorist network, even if you don't carry a membership card

You don't have to dress in white hoods, attend KKK meetings, burn a cross on your lawn----if you go out and lynch a minority in the name of KKK teachings and pledge allegiance to them, you ARE a Klansman, at least de facto. Are you ALSO some nut job---well, what religious fanatic isn't?

At least this time some Muslim leaders in the US are condemning the mayor for his ridiculous comments, acknowledging this was radical Islam at work, and denouncing the shooter. Progress?

Originally Posted by Guest

I respect your opinion, and it may be true. Right now, law enforcement is examining his computers, we do not yet know if he had ties to ISIS or if he was a "lone wolf". Even so, the question arises--How many lone wolves make up a pack? IMHO, if you subscribe to the philosophy of ISIS, are motivated by jihadist teachings, and then act on them, you ARE a part of an organized terrorist network, even if you don't carry a membership card

You don't have to dress in white hoods, attend KKK meetings, burn a cross on your lawn----if you go out and lynch a minority in the name of KKK teachings and pledge allegiance to them, you ARE a Klansman, at least de facto. Are you ALSO some nut job---well, what religious fanatic isn't?

At least this time some Muslim leaders in the US are condemning the mayor for his ridiculous comments, acknowledging this was radical Islam at work, and denouncing the shooter. Progress?

Your KKK statement kind of made my case. Saying you are KKK does not make you a Christian. Saying you are ISIS does not make you Islamic. But, like I said before, that's just my opinion. It's not meant to be an argument, just an attempt to explain what I thought the mayor may have meant.

Originally Posted by Guest

Your KKK statement kind of made my case. Saying you are KKK does not make you a Christian. Saying you are ISIS does not make you Islamic. But, like I said before, that's just my opinion. It's not meant to be an argument, just an attempt to explain what I thought the mayor may have meant.

Sorry, not really. Saying you're KKK does not make you a Christian, it makes you part of a radical "Christian" sect. Saying you're ISIS does not make you a peace loving Muslim, it makes you a jihadist. There IS a difference. Also the KKK is not really a religious sect, and they do not quote the bible in defense of their bigotry. ISIS is much more aligned with Islam and the Koran, even if it is a perverted interpetation

Originally Posted by Guest

Sorry, not really. Saying you're KKK does not make you a Christian, it makes you part of a radical "Christian" sect. Saying you're ISIS does not make you a peace loving Muslim, it makes you a jihadist. There IS a difference. Also the KKK is not really a religious sect, and they do not quote the bible in defense of their bigotry. ISIS is much more aligned with Islam and the Koran, even if it is a perverted interpetation

Not to argue with you, because I do see your opinion and agree to a certain extent. But, the KKK does use the Bible consistently in their poisonous spouting. I was not trying to say that ISIS is not Islamic, but meant that they are NOT a good example of Islam. Just like the KKK is not a good example of Christianity. Although, there are many liberal atheists on here that try to use the KKK to describe conservatives, as well as radical Christians to describe conservatives. But, even though I did not communicate my opinion very well, it is much as what you said.
In my opinion, the mayor was attempting to communicate that idea, so as not to implicate or condemn ALL Muslims. Regardless of his political affiliation, which I have no idea what that may be, I was not defending him, but trying to give him the benefit of doubt as to the intent of his comment. His comment that seems to agitate some. I doubt he meant it that way. Just my opinion, and I may be wrong. He might be a flaming liberal, defending Islam for all I know.

Originally Posted by Guest

Not to argue with you, because I do see your opinion and agree to a certain extent. But, the KKK does use the Bible consistently in their poisonous spouting. I was not trying to say that ISIS is not Islamic, but meant that they are NOT a good example of Islam. Just like the KKK is not a good example of Christianity. Although, there are many liberal atheists on here that try to use the KKK to describe conservatives, as well as radical Christians to describe conservatives. But, even though I did not communicate my opinion very well, it is much as what you said.
In my opinion, the mayor was attempting to communicate that idea, so as not to implicate or condemn ALL Muslims. Regardless of his political affiliation, which I have no idea what that may be, I was not defending him, but trying to give him the benefit of doubt as to the intent of his comment. His comment that seems to agitate some. I doubt he meant it that way. Just my opinion, and I may be wrong. He might be a flaming liberal, defending Islam for all I know.

I'll agree with most of that. Sad that any violent extremists can hide behind any religion. I might buy the concept of the mayor trying to say this event had nothing to do with the true nature of Islam, except that he immediately deflected into a gun control statement---basically just a rehash of Obama talking points. In addition, he made an "anti-bigotry" pledge to Muslim supporters during his election bid this past summer, so I suspect his motivation was political (as always with the far left)

Originally Posted by Guest

He might be a flaming liberal,...

He is.

Originally Posted by Guest

He is.

He's that, but he must also be some kind of a moron, or at the very least confused. Even leaders in the American Muslim community disagreed with him. So that only leaves Bernie Sanders, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and George Clooney on his side

Remember what they said about Indians back in the 1800's.

The gun was stolen it was not legal duh

Originally Posted by Guest

Remember what they said about Indians back in the 1800's.

...and your viewpoint on the current situation is exactly what?

The muslem religions as stated in the Koran actually does preach that if you die spreading the faith by violent action you get salvation. You see and wonder about women strapping bombs to themselves and blowing themselves up in a crowd. Even if they have been damned for cheating on their husband the belief is their slate is cleaned and they get salvation.

FOR THE LIBERALS
Obama say we should allow more muslims into the United States. If, you have cancer.
Not all your cells are cancerous. You your doctor say you need more cancer cells-YOU/I WOULD WONDER ABOUT HIS SANITY.

For the Christians-
The acts of the Muslims are no different than what Christians has done in the past.
READ about the Holocaust,the Spanish inquisition, bringing-forcing your faith-on the Incas, the American Indians with the reported goal of bringing them salvation-WHILE YOU STOLE THEIR GOLD, THEIR LAND AND THEIR HEALTH.

My theory---it takes over 2000 years for a religion to mature. Christianity is just about there. Islam has 600 years to go.