Another security manual recommends using Apple iMessage: this time, ISIS

145679

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 200
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,418member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ElectroTech View Post

    Evil people use guns therefore there is something wrong with guns!


    Shitty analogy.

    The main purpose of a gun is to kill- that's the entire point.

    The main purpose of an iPhone is not to kill things.

    Really?...I thought the main purpose of the iPhone was to kill Samsung.

  • Reply 162 of 200
    joshajosha Posts: 901member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post



    So the shouts of Allahu Akbar were accompanied by Vive le France, then?



    The point is that these countries have neither the obligation nor the responsibility to accept refugees and that some are nearly collapsing underneath them. It’s absolute insanity and it MUST stop.




    no, the point is none of the attackers are confirmed Syrian. and even if the one is, he also had a non-Syrian passport, which means a terrorists could sneak into a country under any guise, so rejecting refugees due to fear of terrorists is a logic fail. thats the point. you can change the point to something else, but thats the point being made.



    Canada plans to bring in 25,000 Syrian migrants in the next month or so.

    Canadian's were very concerned that ISIS fighters may come in with them.

     

    Wisely Canada has decided to limit this large number of migrants in so short a time period;

     to women, children and families.

  • Reply 163 of 200

    It explains so much that you get your information from, and create your world view from, an insane crackpot who lied about everything he said, including the phony fear-Obama/buy-gold investments he used to defraud his audience. Everything he predicted was a lie.

    Unplug your TV set man!
  • Reply 164 of 200
    delayed wrote: »

    Yes, and the intended target is a living being. All too often, a human being. Paper targets exist for practice, so you can be expert at it when you take aim at a living being. By the way, I'm not anti-gun. I just recognize that the current gun debate is just a marketing ploy by the gun industry. Having sold more guns than there are people in the U.S., they need to stir up controversy to stimulate more sales. They don't care who they sell them to.

    There is no "gun debate", however there are people willing and able to relieve you of your constitutionally guaranteed rights if you simply allow it.
  • Reply 165 of 200
    It explains so much that you get your information from, and create your world view from, an insane crackpot who lied about everything he said, including the phony fear-Obama/buy-gold investments he used to defraud his audience. Everything he predicted was a lie.

    Unplug your TV set man!

    Criticism of Glen Beck should not imply an endorsement of anything Obama. Both are charlatans.
  • Reply 166 of 200
    delayed wrote: »

    There is no difference between a "stupid superstitious cult" and your religion. Both believe that a Supreme Being has a need to use an ancient human technology (writing) to communicate with us. Both believe they're doing "God's work", which of course directly implies that God needs human help. Going by your logic, very few people should be allowed access to computers.

    I don't have a religion. I don't believe in magic. If you belong to a group that believes in any kind of magic, congratulations because you belong to a cult.

    And yes, very few should.

    Science is the contradiction to superstition, so it seems pretty silly to use a computer (a device entirely of scientific creation) yet also believe in magic.
  • Reply 167 of 200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    There is no "gun debate", however there are people willing and able to relieve you of your constitutionally guaranteed rights if you simply allow it.



    No, there are people willing and able to relieve your bank account if you'll buy into their BS about some one coming to take your guns. No one in any position of power is looking to take gun rights away. Even if you can find some one who claims to be, they have no support for their position. It's just not going to happen, so the only reason to bring it up is as a marketing ploy. That's just what the NRA does on a regular basis. Congratulations, you've been seduced by advertising.

  • Reply 168 of 200
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    delayed wrote: »

    No, there are people willing and able to relieve your bank account if you'll buy into their BS about some one coming to take your guns. No one in any position of power is looking to take gun rights away.
    I think it's more the old slippery-slope argument. ANY limiting of gun rights is seen by a very vocal segment as the first wave of encroachments on the right to possess firearms. TBH its does look like the Dem are introducing a number of related bills at the moment. Gun-owner organizations are predictably intolerant (there's that word again) of efforts by some groups to push controls of any type on freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Valid concerns? I personally don't know as I've not looked all that hard at the issue.
  • Reply 169 of 200
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by redefiler View Post



    Science is the contradiction to superstition...

    No, it's not. They're two separate fields. Science studies the "how" and not the "why" so for example, a scientist can tell you how the moon orbits the Earth without falling into, but not why they and the stars and galaxies exist. Ultimately, science may tell us how the Big Bang occurred, but not why it happened. Science has nothing to say about the existence of a God or Gods because the answer is not testable.

     

    Religion (superstition) should only try to answer the "why," but too often makes the mistake of trying to answer the "how." Throw in the tendency to argue points from authority, and bad things happen.

  • Reply 170 of 200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    I think it's more the old slippery-slope argument. ANY limiting of gun rights is seen by a very vocal segment as the first wave of encroachments on the right to possess firearms. TBH its does look like the Dem are introducing a number of related bills at the moment. Gun-owner organizations are predictably intolerant (there's that word again) of efforts by some groups to push controls of any type on freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Valid concerns? I personally don't know as I've not looked all that hard at the issue.



    Actually, more than half of NRA members (I believe it was close to 90%) are in favor of closing the background check loop hole for gun shows. It's the gun makers that out vote them. 

     

    Introducing bills to increase background checks is light years away from coming for your guns. Equating the two is much worse than disingenuous.

  • Reply 171 of 200
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    delayed wrote: »

    Actually, more than half of NRA members (I believe it was close to 90%) are in favor of closing the background check loop hole for gun shows. It's the gun makers that out vote them. 

    Introducing bills to increase background checks is light years away from coming for your guns. Equating the two is much worse than disingenuous.
    The bills currently being considered are generally not restricted to background check issues. Do a search for yourself. If you'd like a key word suggestion try "gun control bills" or if you want current specifics try "gun control bills in congress 2015".
  • Reply 172 of 200

    No, at this point I'm tired of dealing with it, and I don't see the burden of proof as being on me. If some one wants to claim that people are coming to take your guns then it's up to them to show at least one specific bill and explain how said bill would result in people with legitimate rights to guns being required to turn them in.

  • Reply 173 of 200
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    delayed wrote: »
    No, at this point I'm tired of dealing with it, and I don't see the burden of proof as being on me..
    Of course there's no burden of proof on you. :rolleyes:

    I would assume that if you think it important to comment vociferously on an issue you'd minimally take a few moments to look into it when contradictory evidence is offered. Perfectly acceptable of course that understanding this particular issue isn't of any great importance to you as I erroneously believed it was. It really isn't for me either as I'm not immediately affected by it. At least not yet and hopefully never.
  • Reply 174 of 200

    You've offered no evidence. You've asked me to find it for you. Here's my evidence: The NRA has lied about this issue for far too long. More guns have made us more safe in exactly the way that smoking makes people healthy. 

     

    Until I see real evidence showing that some one really is trying (with significant likelihood of succeeding) to take peoples legitimate rights to guns away, I'll vote against the NRA at every opportunity.

  • Reply 175 of 200
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    delayed wrote: »
    You've offered no evidence. You've asked me to find it for you.
    No sir I did not. I already found it for myself. I offered you a suggestion on how to do the same. That you are not interested in discovery is a bit disappointing and I would hope that's not evidence of a closed mind.
  • Reply 176 of 200
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    delayed wrote: »
    I'll vote against the NRA at every opportunity.
    There's that big broad brush in your hands again. . .

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/nra-backed-bill-aims-keep-guns-mentally-ill/
  • Reply 177 of 200
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    redefiler wrote: »
    delayed wrote: »

    There is no difference between a "stupid superstitious cult" and your religion. Both believe that a Supreme Being has a need to use an ancient human technology (writing) to communicate with us. Both believe they're doing "God's work", which of course directly implies that God needs human help. Going by your logic, very few people should be allowed access to computers.

    I don't have a religion. I don't believe in magic. If you belong to a group that believes in any kind of magic, congratulations because you belong to a cult.

    And yes, very few should.

    Science is the contradiction to superstition, so it seems pretty silly to use a computer (a device entirely of scientific creation) yet also believe in magic.

    The Big Bang is one huge magic trick.
  • Reply 178 of 200

    Oooh! The NRA is in favor of a bill that wouldn't move the needle at all! Well then, I'll throw everything I have into supporting them. /s

     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

    That you are not interested in discovery is a bit disappointing and I would hope that's not evidence of a closed mind.




    I've seen enough to know they're not interested in doing the right thing. It's all about sales to them, and removing loop holes might cut into sales in a market that's already saturated. I don't need to keep rediscovering this fact.


     

  • Reply 179 of 200
    Originally Posted by Delayed View Post

     It's all about sales to them, and removing loop holes might cut into sales in a market that's already saturated. I don't need to keep rediscovering this fact.


     

    I’m still waiting for you to prove that the pro-gun lobby is behind the anti-gun lobby.

  • Reply 180 of 200
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    delayed wrote: »
    Oooh! The NRA is in favor of a bill that wouldn't move the needle at all! Well then, I'll throw everything I have into supporting them. /s
    So the world is all black and white to you? No consideration needed because . . .

    Organized Religion=Always Bad.
    Belief in an unseen power=Always bad.
    NRA=Always Bad.
    Republicans=Always Bad.

    Hmm. . . I suppose that does make life's little decisions pretty darn easy.
Sign In or Register to comment.