On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:21:09 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 1:54 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc

I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.


And as usual, you are completely wrong about what I am thinking. You
should consider giving up this habit of yours, as you are almost always
incorrect.

It doesn't matter that the "goobers in Virginia" were not as
well-trained as the "typical islamic cell." They are still
terrorists by
definition and may have been intent on mass murder.

Most of the shooters/bombers in this country, the ones who take on
office buildings, schools, abortion clinics, shopping centers,
churches,
et cetera, are "born in the USA" terrorists and mass murderers. Most of
them are white males. They are the ones committing most of the
terrorist
acts in this country.

I'm not ignoring 9-11 or Ft. Hood or the Navy Yard. I'm saying that
*most* of the terrorist events in this country that end up slaughtering
masses of innocent civilians are perpetrated by white American males,
and most of them are doing their killing with firearms, a fact about
which this country is prepared to do...nothing. Oh, and there's also
McVeigh, I guess, a well-known Syrian refugee. Not.

You are using a pretty loose definition of "terrorist" or what terrorism
is.

The goal of terrorist organizations like ISIS or al Qaeda is to create
a high degree of fear and anxiousness about where they may strike next
and to further a political cause. They go out of their way to broadcast
threats, with the intent of putting the public on edge, looking over
their shoulders and wondering what and who next?

Not the same as a mentally disturbed nutcase who decides to shoot up
a movie theater or a school for whatever bizarre personal reasons they
may have. They usually are not on the radar screen and their actions,
although horrific, are a one-time deal. Most die in the execution of
their plan and that's the end of them. Even the example you gave ...
McVeigh ... doesn't really fit the description of a "terrorist". He was
another nut-case with warped, anti-government views.


Please. Stop. McVeigh was a terrorist with political causes. Many of our
recent USA mass shooters had causes. I think by definition these Muslim
terrorists are nutcases, driven by their crazed definition of their
religious beliefs.

From Wiki:

Since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned
terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism:

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror
in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political
purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the
considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial,
ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify
them.

U.S. Code Tittle 22 Chapter 38, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as:
“Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against
noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents,
usually intended to influence an audience.”

- - -

And you think either or both of those definitions fit the "goobers from
fumbuck, VA" ?




According to the news clip, their targets were the facilities of Jews
and blacks. That would fall under the "considerations of a
...racial...religious...nature."

And let's not forget "Criminal acts intended to provoke a state of
terror in the public," like, say, shooting up a school, church, or
shopping center.


Or blowing up an abortion clinic. Terrorism.

And again, nothing is done to the perpetrators...right Krause?

What a f'ing joke you've become.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On 11/20/15 5:26 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:21:09 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 1:54 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc

I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.


And as usual, you are completely wrong about what I am thinking. You
should consider giving up this habit of yours, as you are almost always
incorrect.

It doesn't matter that the "goobers in Virginia" were not as
well-trained as the "typical islamic cell." They are still
terrorists by
definition and may have been intent on mass murder.

Most of the shooters/bombers in this country, the ones who take on
office buildings, schools, abortion clinics, shopping centers,
churches,
et cetera, are "born in the USA" terrorists and mass murderers. Most of
them are white males. They are the ones committing most of the
terrorist
acts in this country.

I'm not ignoring 9-11 or Ft. Hood or the Navy Yard. I'm saying that
*most* of the terrorist events in this country that end up slaughtering
masses of innocent civilians are perpetrated by white American males,
and most of them are doing their killing with firearms, a fact about
which this country is prepared to do...nothing. Oh, and there's also
McVeigh, I guess, a well-known Syrian refugee. Not.

You are using a pretty loose definition of "terrorist" or what terrorism
is.

The goal of terrorist organizations like ISIS or al Qaeda is to create
a high degree of fear and anxiousness about where they may strike next
and to further a political cause. They go out of their way to broadcast
threats, with the intent of putting the public on edge, looking over
their shoulders and wondering what and who next?

Not the same as a mentally disturbed nutcase who decides to shoot up
a movie theater or a school for whatever bizarre personal reasons they
may have. They usually are not on the radar screen and their actions,
although horrific, are a one-time deal. Most die in the execution of
their plan and that's the end of them. Even the example you gave ...
McVeigh ... doesn't really fit the description of a "terrorist". He was
another nut-case with warped, anti-government views.


Please. Stop. McVeigh was a terrorist with political causes. Many of our
recent USA mass shooters had causes. I think by definition these Muslim
terrorists are nutcases, driven by their crazed definition of their
religious beliefs.

From Wiki:

Since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned
terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism:

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror
in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political
purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the
considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial,
ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify
them.

U.S. Code Tittle 22 Chapter 38, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as:
“Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against
noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents,
usually intended to influence an audience.”

- - -

And you think either or both of those definitions fit the "goobers from
fumbuck, VA" ?




According to the news clip, their targets were the facilities of Jews
and blacks. That would fall under the "considerations of a
...racial...religious...nature."

And let's not forget "Criminal acts intended to provoke a state of
terror in the public," like, say, shooting up a school, church, or
shopping center.


Or blowing up an abortion clinic. Terrorism.

And again, nothing is done to the perpetrators...right Krause?

What a f'ing joke you've become.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



What has that to do with the fact that we have far more problems with
armed domestic terrorists these days than foreign terrorists? Do you
think that many of them die while committing their crimes makes the
families of their victims feel better?

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 3:39 PM, Califbill wrote:
Justan Olphart wrote:
On 11/20/2015 1:54 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc

I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.


And as usual, you are completely wrong about what I am thinking. You
should consider giving up this habit of yours, as you are almost always
incorrect.

It doesn't matter that the "goobers in Virginia" were not as
well-trained as the "typical islamic cell." They are still terrorists by
definition and may have been intent on mass murder.

Most of the shooters/bombers in this country, the ones who take on
office buildings, schools, abortion clinics, shopping centers, churches,
et cetera, are "born in the USA" terrorists and mass murderers. Most of
them are white males. They are the ones committing most of the terrorist
acts in this country.

I'm not ignoring 9-11 or Ft. Hood or the Navy Yard. I'm saying that
*most* of the terrorist events in this country that end up slaughtering
masses of innocent civilians are perpetrated by white American males,
and most of them are doing their killing with firearms, a fact about
which this country is prepared to do...nothing. Oh, and there's also
McVeigh, I guess, a well-known Syrian refugee. Not.

Let me take a wild guess. Your solution has something to do with
firearms. Pray tell. What exactly might your solution be?


A couple of nutcases shoot up places. So the Liberal government leaders
want to restrict all gun to owners. But we may have a couple of ISIS
people slip in with Syrian Muslim refugees, so lis ok to let in all of
them. Sense?



A couple of nutcases, eh? Just a couple...


Yup. What, 100,000,000 gun owners in the states? How many mass shooters?
What does your Dr. Dr. Wife do when she gets an unstable person? Notify
the authorities that the dingaling shoot not be able to buy a firearm?

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 1:54 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc

I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.


And as usual, you are completely wrong about what I am thinking. You
should consider giving up this habit of yours, as you are almost always
incorrect.

It doesn't matter that the "goobers in Virginia" were not as
well-trained as the "typical islamic cell." They are still
terrorists by
definition and may have been intent on mass murder.

Most of the shooters/bombers in this country, the ones who take on
office buildings, schools, abortion clinics, shopping centers,
churches,
et cetera, are "born in the USA" terrorists and mass murderers. Most of
them are white males. They are the ones committing most of the
terrorist
acts in this country.

I'm not ignoring 9-11 or Ft. Hood or the Navy Yard. I'm saying that
*most* of the terrorist events in this country that end up slaughtering
masses of innocent civilians are perpetrated by white American males,
and most of them are doing their killing with firearms, a fact about
which this country is prepared to do...nothing. Oh, and there's also
McVeigh, I guess, a well-known Syrian refugee. Not.

You are using a pretty loose definition of "terrorist" or what terrorism
is.

The goal of terrorist organizations like ISIS or al Qaeda is to create
a high degree of fear and anxiousness about where they may strike next
and to further a political cause. They go out of their way to broadcast
threats, with the intent of putting the public on edge, looking over
their shoulders and wondering what and who next?

Not the same as a mentally disturbed nutcase who decides to shoot up
a movie theater or a school for whatever bizarre personal reasons they
may have. They usually are not on the radar screen and their actions,
although horrific, are a one-time deal. Most die in the execution of
their plan and that's the end of them. Even the example you gave ...
McVeigh ... doesn't really fit the description of a "terrorist". He was
another nut-case with warped, anti-government views.


Please. Stop. McVeigh was a terrorist with political causes. Many of
our recent USA mass shooters had causes. I think by definition these
Muslim terrorists are nutcases, driven by their crazed definition of
their religious beliefs.

From Wiki:

Since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly
condemned terrorist acts using the following political description of
terrorism:

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror
in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political
purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the
considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial,
ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify
them.

U.S. Code Tittle 22 Chapter 38, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as:
“Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against
noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents,
usually intended to influence an audience.�

- - -



A "writer" quoting wikipedia? Fantastic!

John H. wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:21:09 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 4:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/20/2015 1:54 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc
I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.

And as usual, you are completely wrong about what I am thinking. You
should consider giving up this habit of yours, as you are almost always
incorrect.

It doesn't matter that the "goobers in Virginia" were not as
well-trained as the "typical islamic cell." They are still
terrorists by
definition and may have been intent on mass murder.

Most of the shooters/bombers in this country, the ones who take on
office buildings, schools, abortion clinics, shopping centers,
churches,
et cetera, are "born in the USA" terrorists and mass murderers. Most of
them are white males. They are the ones committing most of the
terrorist
acts in this country.

I'm not ignoring 9-11 or Ft. Hood or the Navy Yard. I'm saying that
*most* of the terrorist events in this country that end up slaughtering
masses of innocent civilians are perpetrated by white American males,
and most of them are doing their killing with firearms, a fact about
which this country is prepared to do...nothing. Oh, and there's also
McVeigh, I guess, a well-known Syrian refugee. Not.
You are using a pretty loose definition of "terrorist" or what terrorism
is.

The goal of terrorist organizations like ISIS or al Qaeda is to create
a high degree of fear and anxiousness about where they may strike next
and to further a political cause. They go out of their way to broadcast
threats, with the intent of putting the public on edge, looking over
their shoulders and wondering what and who next?

Not the same as a mentally disturbed nutcase who decides to shoot up
a movie theater or a school for whatever bizarre personal reasons they
may have. They usually are not on the radar screen and their actions,
although horrific, are a one-time deal. Most die in the execution of
their plan and that's the end of them. Even the example you gave ...
McVeigh ... doesn't really fit the description of a "terrorist". He was
another nut-case with warped, anti-government views.

Please. Stop. McVeigh was a terrorist with political causes. Many of our
recent USA mass shooters had causes. I think by definition these Muslim
terrorists are nutcases, driven by their crazed definition of their
religious beliefs.

From Wiki:

Since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned
terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism:

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror
in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political
purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the
considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial,
ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify
them.

U.S. Code Tittle 22 Chapter 38, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as:
“Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against
noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents,
usually intended to influence an audience.”

- - -
And you think either or both of those definitions fit the "goobers from
fumbuck, VA" ?



According to the news clip, their targets were the facilities of Jews
and blacks. That would fall under the "considerations of a
...racial...religious...nature."

And let's not forget "Criminal acts intended to provoke a state of
terror in the public," like, say, shooting up a school, church, or
shopping center.

Or blowing up an abortion clinic. Terrorism.
And again, nothing is done to the perpetrators...right Krause?

What a f'ing joke you've become.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
"become"??? He has always been a liar AND a tax cheat.

Timothy McVeigh would himself seem to dispute your calling him a Christian.

He himself said:

In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife. "If I'm going to hell," he wrote, "I'm gonna have a lot of company." His body is to be cremated and his ashes scattered in a secret location.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/200...1/mcveigh.usa4

So, I guess that would make him an Agnostic Terrorist.

I agree with your assessment that his bombing of the Oklahoma federal building was an act of terrorism by definition.

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:54:30 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc

I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.


And as usual, you are completely wrong about what I am thinking. You
should consider giving up this habit of yours, as you are almost always
incorrect.

It doesn't matter that the "goobers in Virginia" were not as
well-trained as the "typical islamic cell." They are still terrorists by
definition and may have been intent on mass murder.

Most of the shooters/bombers in this country, the ones who take on
office buildings, schools, abortion clinics, shopping centers, churches,
et cetera, are "born in the USA" terrorists and mass murderers. Most of
them are white males. They are the ones committing most of the terrorist
acts in this country.

I'm not ignoring 9-11 or Ft. Hood or the Navy Yard. I'm saying that
*most* of the terrorist events in this country that end up slaughtering
masses of innocent civilians are perpetrated by white American males,
and most of them are doing their killing with firearms, a fact about
which this country is prepared to do...nothing. Oh, and there's also
McVeigh, I guess, a well-known Syrian refugee. Not.

You conveniently dodged the issue of the medical establishment and the
families not doing anything about the ones who were as crazy as a ****
house rat. That is most of the mass shooters you are talking about.
I understand that if you are willing to lump in every criminal in the
US, you can rack up some serious numbers but pretty soon you will be
getting down to drug gang murders, a significant number of the
shootings that get into that bogus "mass shooting" statistic.

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:17:24 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 11/20/15 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:48:06 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpjej4OhXc

I think you will find that these goobers in fumbuck Virginia are not
as well trained and certainly not as well equipped as the typical
islamic cell.
The wogs in Paris had automatic weapons and explosives in a place
where guns are pretty much banned. The law had little effect on them.
The leader was on the 10 most wanted list in all of Europe yet he
easily moved across the continent and was found a few hundred meters
from the site of the attack almost a week later, located by Turkish
intelligence, not the French.
You try to draw the parallel between a disturbed teenager and a team
of terrorists but the death toll quickly points out the difference.
You always cite statistics but you also want to rule out 9-11 and you
ignore the muslim shooters like the guys who shot up the navy yard or
Ft Hood.
That is like saying, "other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you like
the play".
The bottom line is 8 guys killed 130 people and wounded 368 in a few
minutes. That is not even in the same ball park with the worst mass
shooting in the US.


Oh.

In 1995, Timothy McVeigh, a white Christian terrorist born in the USA
detonated a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building
in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people and injuring more than 600.

That's...one...guy.

Actually at least 4 (Terry Nichols, Michael and Lori Fortier) but lets
not let facts get in the way of a good rant.


I do get a chuckle over how the gut nutsies minimize the mass murders
committed with guns. I guess those killings don't count because...guns.

Interesting that you are trying to make an anti gun case and you
invoke a 20 year old bombing that dod not involve a gun.

If you are going back that far you might as well include the other WTC
attack or the police murders of women and children at Waco.

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:39:25 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote:


A couple of nutcases shoot up places. So the Liberal government leaders
want to restrict all gun to owners. But we may have a couple of ISIS
people slip in with Syrian Muslim refugees, so lis ok to let in all of
them. Sense?

Harry is just saying there is nothing we can do about that. We
shouldn't care about an ISIS team that can kill hundreds or thousands
because we haven't stopped every psychotic teenager with a gun.

wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:39:25 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote:


A couple of nutcases shoot up places. So the Liberal government leaders
want to restrict all gun to owners. But we may have a couple of ISIS
people slip in with Syrian Muslim refugees, so lis ok to let in all of
them. Sense?

Harry is just saying there is nothing we can do about that. We
shouldn't care about an ISIS team that can kill hundreds or thousands
because we haven't stopped every psychotic teenager with a gun.



Maybe he should leave the basement and ask Dr. Dr. Why she and her
colleagues fail so oven.