Mass shootings can't happen in Germany because of gun control.

[odeon]

Because of their cheerleading to pour millions of Arab and African Muslims into Europe?

Because it is the humane thing to do. In case you didn't know, there is a war going on and people are fleeing for their lives.

[Jack]

What media outlet are 'liberal'?

The vast majority are here.

In what way?

By reporting news stories which support left-wing politics, and/or promoting a left-wing opinionated slant to reporting of events. While there are a couple of mainstream news outlets in the US which are considered to have a conservative bias, and all news outlets probably display some degree of centrism, US news generally has a liberal political tone.

[Jack]

You did not say all. Correct.

You do imply that the Germans, especially the media, may be deliberately missing out on terrorist motivation of the shooter in München. I do not get why the Germans would do that. I see not a single reason why they do.

This happened to be a shooter like they've had before, a kid running amok. Not that different from the plane that crashed a while ago. A man going down with a plane full of people, for no other reason than his own bizarre psyche.


I cannot understand why media would benefit from taking a terrorist reason away from it, if it was there. There is no logical reason to do so.

Initially, the US Department of Justice released a redacted transcript of the Orlando shooter's call to 911, which had removed reference to terrorists and the Islamic state.  It was the media outrage which prompted an uncensored release, though news reports claim there were a total of three calls made to 911 and the FBI is still concealing what was said on the other calls. There is no logical reason to do so.

[Al Swearegen]

On a much happier note. Whilst the Swedes seem to have it figured that gun control is responsible for the latest shooting in Germany, the Swedes have worked out why they have been "the rape capital of the world"
http://www.expressen.se/kvallsposten/forklaringen-till-vagen-av-valdtakter-i-sommar/

I just heard there was another terrorist attack in Germany, this time 12 people. Wasn't a gun this time. It was a bomb. I think we can cite furniture as behind this attack.

You're such a sad case, Al. Your butthurt knows no limits.

Butthutt? By what do you imagine o am butthurt?

I understand some furniture decapitated a French Priest today. I think we can all safely rule out any suggestion of radical Muslim extremism.

It's either serious butthurt or you seriously like me and this is your version of pulling my hair.

Or you could simply be an idiot and think your words have merit.

Do you imagine the there is merit in what you say Odeon? If showing you lying and trying to bait and switch was not enough to disavow you and anyone else the what you write needs to be taken with a grain of salt, then I don't know what else is to be shoqn

[Al Swearegen]

A loner, a quiet teen, a kid with psychological problems, a teen obsessed with mass shootings, especially the one done by Breivik.

It's only waiting for the verdict that he was autistic. The other kind of dangerous people.

A Muslim man screaming "Allahu akbar" before killing innocents and the German media being unable to imply a radical Muslim extremist narrative, instead chose to infer a relationship with Breivik, the far right wing terrorist. I can understand why the Liberal Media in the Liberal Germany would do that. Doesn't mean I will not see that there was possibly a little bit of both.

What I read in Dutch and German news is that this shooting was not IS related. "Amokläufer".

If I were IS, I'd claim anything I could get away with. Anything to spread the fear. That's what they want, and they are pretty good at it, so far.

That there are IS related attacks is beyond doubt. That that needs attention too. That there are other shootings and attacks is also clear. Blaming all on IS would make the world delightfully clear, with good and bad, god and devil. The world is not that clear. The lone shooters/car drivers/ etc will be part of our world and will go undetected till they do their deeds.

(With the car I am not referring to the truck in Nice, but to Apeldoorn, 2009)

I do not think people ARE blaming ALL on IS. So not sure how this holds water with what you are saying?

Germany first thought this was a terrorist attack, then they concluded it was not. Yet you say it probably is, but that Liberal Media does not want to have it so. That is what I reacted on. Germany has a history with terrorism. Germans are not fainthearted when it comes to naming something by the name it deserves. The RAF knew how to kill. They were part of the news a lot, when I was a youngster.

Further, if I were part of IS, I would make sure lots of nasty incidents were claimed by IS. Anything to spread the fear. If I were a member of IS, I would be delighted that people thought this loner was a soldier for the bloody cause.

You can't be "reacting" on my comment because I have never said ALL terror attacks are. So it would make no sense at all to even infer it.

You did not say all. Correct.

You do imply that the Germans, especially the media, may be deliberately missing out on terrorist motivation of the shooter in München. I do not get why the Germans would do that. I see not a single reason why they do.

This happened to be a shooter like they've had before, a kid running amok. Not that different from the plane that crashed a while ago. A man going down with a plane full of people, for no other reason than his own bizarre psyche.


I cannot understand why media would benefit from taking a terrorist reason away from it, if it was there. There is no logical reason to do so.

I can well imagine. If Germany wishes to be seen as inclusive, views the open borders as important and Europe as being a supernation of which Germany is stripped of individual identity, then it starts making sense.

Look at Angela Merkel here



German flags, how perfectly revolting. Why celebrate your own country's identity?
What I posted above can be, like any ideology or perspective, taken to some strange, crazy or dangerous lengths.

If you believe that regular attacks by radicalised Muslims may panic the population and perhaps make
it seem that you are not as tolerant as you would like to be perceived, then you spin things. Why? Well even here, whilst I was so very careful to criticise radical Muslim extremists and made it absolutely clear that this is the group I had issues with, what was Odeon's response?

He called me a bigot. Could not back himself when asked to show where I had been a bigot and doubled down irrespective of what I had said. That is expected whenever you go there. Are there problems with Muslims who are radical Muslim extremists...No..you are a bigot. You hate all Muslims. You are so intolerant.

I think they know this and I think they are trapped by their own ideological positions. I think the European media take the same position as the governments and the culture generally and so they look to throw the scent off with every attack. I do not find it cautious I find it harmful.

[odeon]

On a much happier note. Whilst the Swedes seem to have it figured that gun control is responsible for the latest shooting in Germany, the Swedes have worked out why they have been "the rape capital of the world"
http://www.expressen.se/kvallsposten/forklaringen-till-vagen-av-valdtakter-i-sommar/

I just heard there was another terrorist attack in Germany, this time 12 people. Wasn't a gun this time. It was a bomb. I think we can cite furniture as behind this attack.

You're such a sad case, Al. Your butthurt knows no limits.

Butthutt? By what do you imagine o am butthurt?

I understand some furniture decapitated a French Priest today. I think we can all safely rule out any suggestion of radical Muslim extremism.

It's either serious butthurt or you seriously like me and this is your version of pulling my hair.

Or you could simply be an idiot and think your words have merit.

Do you imagine the there is merit in what you say Odeon? If showing you lying and trying to bait and switch was not enough to disavow you and anyone else the what you write needs to be taken with a grain of salt, then I don't know what else is to be shoqn

My money is on butthurt, then, probably combined with that other thing.

This is like talking politics with a five year old. It's fun for a while but ultimately utterly futile and a bit nasty.

[Al Swearegen]

On a much happier note. Whilst the Swedes seem to have it figured that gun control is responsible for the latest shooting in Germany, the Swedes have worked out why they have been "the rape capital of the world"
http://www.expressen.se/kvallsposten/forklaringen-till-vagen-av-valdtakter-i-sommar/

I just heard there was another terrorist attack in Germany, this time 12 people. Wasn't a gun this time. It was a bomb. I think we can cite furniture as behind this attack.

You're such a sad case, Al. Your butthurt knows no limits.

Butthutt? By what do you imagine o am butthurt?

I understand some furniture decapitated a French Priest today. I think we can all safely rule out any suggestion of radical Muslim extremism.

It's either serious butthurt or you seriously like me and this is your version of pulling my hair.

Or you could simply be an idiot and think your words have merit.

Do you imagine the there is merit in what you say Odeon? If showing you lying and trying to bait and switch was not enough to disavow you and anyone else the what you write needs to be taken with a grain of salt, then I don't know what else is to be shoqn

My money is on butthurt, then, probably combined with that other thing.

This is like talking politics with a five year old. It's fun for a while but ultimately utterly futile and a bit nasty.

Its an interesting picture you paint. It's on the heels of you inferring gold stars should be given for good behaviour and blacks should have their guns taken away.

So holding with what I said above, taking what you say with a grain of salt is best.

['andersom']

A loner, a quiet teen, a kid with psychological problems, a teen obsessed with mass shootings, especially the one done by Breivik.

It's only waiting for the verdict that he was autistic. The other kind of dangerous people.

A Muslim man screaming "Allahu akbar" before killing innocents and the German media being unable to imply a radical Muslim extremist narrative, instead chose to infer a relationship with Breivik, the far right wing terrorist. I can understand why the Liberal Media in the Liberal Germany would do that. Doesn't mean I will not see that there was possibly a little bit of both.

What I read in Dutch and German news is that this shooting was not IS related. "Amokläufer".

If I were IS, I'd claim anything I could get away with. Anything to spread the fear. That's what they want, and they are pretty good at it, so far.

That there are IS related attacks is beyond doubt. That that needs attention too. That there are other shootings and attacks is also clear. Blaming all on IS would make the world delightfully clear, with good and bad, god and devil. The world is not that clear. The lone shooters/car drivers/ etc will be part of our world and will go undetected till they do their deeds.

(With the car I am not referring to the truck in Nice, but to Apeldoorn, 2009)

I do not think people ARE blaming ALL on IS. So not sure how this holds water with what you are saying?

Germany first thought this was a terrorist attack, then they concluded it was not. Yet you say it probably is, but that Liberal Media does not want to have it so. That is what I reacted on. Germany has a history with terrorism. Germans are not fainthearted when it comes to naming something by the name it deserves. The RAF knew how to kill. They were part of the news a lot, when I was a youngster.

Further, if I were part of IS, I would make sure lots of nasty incidents were claimed by IS. Anything to spread the fear. If I were a member of IS, I would be delighted that people thought this loner was a soldier for the bloody cause.

You can't be "reacting" on my comment because I have never said ALL terror attacks are. So it would make no sense at all to even infer it.

You did not say all. Correct.

You do imply that the Germans, especially the media, may be deliberately missing out on terrorist motivation of the shooter in München. I do not get why the Germans would do that. I see not a single reason why they do.

This happened to be a shooter like they've had before, a kid running amok. Not that different from the plane that crashed a while ago. A man going down with a plane full of people, for no other reason than his own bizarre psyche.


I cannot understand why media would benefit from taking a terrorist reason away from it, if it was there. There is no logical reason to do so.

I can well imagine. If Germany wishes to be seen as inclusive, views the open borders as important and Europe as being a supernation of which Germany is stripped of individual identity, then it starts making sense.

Look at Angela Merkel here



German flags, how perfectly revolting. Why celebrate your own country's identity?
What I posted above can be, like any ideology or perspective, taken to some strange, crazy or dangerous lengths.

If you believe that regular attacks by radicalised Muslims may panic the population and perhaps make
it seem that you are not as tolerant as you would like to be perceived, then you spin things. Why? Well even here, whilst I was so very careful to criticise radical Muslim extremists and made it absolutely clear that this is the group I had issues with, what was Odeon's response?

He called me a bigot. Could not back himself when asked to show where I had been a bigot and doubled down irrespective of what I had said. That is expected whenever you go there. Are there problems with Muslims who are radical Muslim extremists...No..you are a bigot. You hate all Muslims. You are so intolerant.

I think they know this and I think they are trapped by their own ideological positions. I think the European media take the same position as the governments and the culture generally and so they look to throw the scent off with every attack. I do not find it cautious I find it harmful.

The media does not hesitate to see the IS connection in the other sttacks. So, where is the benefit for the media to hide it in this single case?

I do not get it.

[Al Swearegen]

A loner, a quiet teen, a kid with psychological problems, a teen obsessed with mass shootings, especially the one done by Breivik.

It's only waiting for the verdict that he was autistic. The other kind of dangerous people.

A Muslim man screaming "Allahu akbar" before killing innocents and the German media being unable to imply a radical Muslim extremist narrative, instead chose to infer a relationship with Breivik, the far right wing terrorist. I can understand why the Liberal Media in the Liberal Germany would do that. Doesn't mean I will not see that there was possibly a little bit of both.

What I read in Dutch and German news is that this shooting was not IS related. "Amokläufer".

If I were IS, I'd claim anything I could get away with. Anything to spread the fear. That's what they want, and they are pretty good at it, so far.

That there are IS related attacks is beyond doubt. That that needs attention too. That there are other shootings and attacks is also clear. Blaming all on IS would make the world delightfully clear, with good and bad, god and devil. The world is not that clear. The lone shooters/car drivers/ etc will be part of our world and will go undetected till they do their deeds.

(With the car I am not referring to the truck in Nice, but to Apeldoorn, 2009)

I do not think people ARE blaming ALL on IS. So not sure how this holds water with what you are saying?

Germany first thought this was a terrorist attack, then they concluded it was not. Yet you say it probably is, but that Liberal Media does not want to have it so. That is what I reacted on. Germany has a history with terrorism. Germans are not fainthearted when it comes to naming something by the name it deserves. The RAF knew how to kill. They were part of the news a lot, when I was a youngster.

Further, if I were part of IS, I would make sure lots of nasty incidents were claimed by IS. Anything to spread the fear. If I were a member of IS, I would be delighted that people thought this loner was a soldier for the bloody cause.

You can't be "reacting" on my comment because I have never said ALL terror attacks are. So it would make no sense at all to even infer it.

You did not say all. Correct.

You do imply that the Germans, especially the media, may be deliberately missing out on terrorist motivation of the shooter in München. I do not get why the Germans would do that. I see not a single reason why they do.

This happened to be a shooter like they've had before, a kid running amok. Not that different from the plane that crashed a while ago. A man going down with a plane full of people, for no other reason than his own bizarre psyche.


I cannot understand why media would benefit from taking a terrorist reason away from it, if it was there. There is no logical reason to do so.

I can well imagine. If Germany wishes to be seen as inclusive, views the open borders as important and Europe as being a supernation of which Germany is stripped of individual identity, then it starts making sense.

Look at Angela Merkel here



German flags, how perfectly revolting. Why celebrate your own country's identity?
What I posted above can be, like any ideology or perspective, taken to some strange, crazy or dangerous lengths.

If you believe that regular attacks by radicalised Muslims may panic the population and perhaps make
it seem that you are not as tolerant as you would like to be perceived, then you spin things. Why? Well even here, whilst I was so very careful to criticise radical Muslim extremists and made it absolutely clear that this is the group I had issues with, what was Odeon's response?

He called me a bigot. Could not back himself when asked to show where I had been a bigot and doubled down irrespective of what I had said. That is expected whenever you go there. Are there problems with Muslims who are radical Muslim extremists...No..you are a bigot. You hate all Muslims. You are so intolerant.

I think they know this and I think they are trapped by their own ideological positions. I think the European media take the same position as the governments and the culture generally and so they look to throw the scent off with every attack. I do not find it cautious I find it harmful.

The media does not hesitate to see the IS connection in the other sttacks. So, where is the benefit for the media to hide it in this single case?

I do not get it.

I have already stated where the benefit is.
Here is the thing. This guy was a Muslim guy and radicalised and his attack was a terror attack and inspired by the radical Muslim extremists complete with the "God is great" pronouncement.
That is on the face of things straight up Radical Muslim extremism.
However:
He was young
He was a loner
He was mentally ill
He was not a card carrying ISIS member
He was inspired rather than conscripted

Therefore....which "angle" do you go for? As I said, bit of A and bit of B

[odeon]

My money is on butthurt, then, probably combined with that other thing.

This is like talking politics with a five year old. It's fun for a while but ultimately utterly futile and a bit nasty.

Its an interesting picture you paint. It's on the heels of you inferring gold stars should be given for good behaviour and blacks should have their guns taken away.

So holding with what I said above, taking what you say with a grain of salt is best.

I'm sorry, did you have a point?

[benjimanbreeg]

Because of their cheerleading to pour millions of Arab and African Muslims into Europe?

Because it is the humane thing to do. In case you didn't know, there is a war going on and people are fleeing for their lives.

No it is not, it's the most idiotic thing to do.  The most humane thing to do is not destroy countries so that people have a reason to leave, and then encourage them to do so by making it well known that they will now be picked up a few miles of the coast of Libya if they try to get to Europe by boat.  They ought to told that they have no place in Europe and they will be taken straight back to their set sail from.  Or better still, stop the boats leaving shore. 

[benjimanbreeg]

What media outlet are 'liberal'?

The vast majority are here.

In what way?

By reporting news stories which support left-wing politics, and/or promoting a left-wing opinionated slant to reporting of events. While there are a couple of mainstream news outlets in the US which are considered to have a conservative bias, and all news outlets probably display some degree of centrism, US news generally has a liberal political tone.

'Liberal' you mean?  They are liberal in the slightest.  Call it 'left wing' if you want.  They are just all corporate/globalist media. 

[Jack]

What media outlet are 'liberal'?

The vast majority are here.

In what way?

By reporting news stories which support left-wing politics, and/or promoting a left-wing opinionated slant to reporting of events. While there are a couple of mainstream news outlets in the US which are considered to have a conservative bias, and all news outlets probably display some degree of centrism, US news generally has a liberal political tone.

'Liberal' you mean?  They are liberal in the slightest.  Call it 'left wing' if you want.  They are just all corporate/globalist media.

Liberal and conservative political viewpoints are synonymous with left and right wing in the US.

['andersom']

Therefore....which "angle" do you go for? As I said, bit of A and bit of B

It appears now not to be a coincidence that all his victims were foreigners. Not only did he admire Breivik.  He also seemed to admire Hitler. That he took pride in being a German is what clearly can be heard in the footage.

I think that bit of option B can be skipped.

[benjimanbreeg]

What media outlet are 'liberal'?

The vast majority are here.

In what way?

By reporting news stories which support left-wing politics, and/or promoting a left-wing opinionated slant to reporting of events. While there are a couple of mainstream news outlets in the US which are considered to have a conservative bias, and all news outlets probably display some degree of centrism, US news generally has a liberal political tone.

'Liberal' you mean?  They are liberal in the slightest.  Call it 'left wing' if you want.  They are just all corporate/globalist media.

Liberal and conservative political viewpoints are synonymous with left and right wing in the US.

Apparently so.