Orlando shooting/The non gun debate

[account_inactive]

But it really is about the guns.  Okay.  Carry on.

And radical Islam.

Well sorta.

But mainly guns, yeah.

[downbeatplumb]

So Im posting this to see what you all honestly feel. is this just another news item tailor made for the up comming election or is there/should their be a 9-11 feel to this?

This appears to be just another day in America.
As a religious country it has people angry at things that shouldn't bother them.
A gay club should only annoy you if it plays the music too loud.

[Drich]

So Im posting this to see what you all honestly feel. is this just another news item tailor made for the up comming election or is there/should their be a 9-11 feel to this?

This appears to be just another day in America.
As a religious country it has people angry at things that shouldn't bother them.
A gay club should only annoy you if it plays the music too loud.

So, the Charlie Hebdo and the Paris shootings are what??? another day in France? France is not known for it's strong religious ties nor guns, and this very thing happened there twice... So then why do people who attacked those at a soccer game and cafe goers not seem to count as 'people angry at things that shouldn't bother them?'

[Drich]

Is radical islam a 'thing' that most of you are willing to acknowledge? I know Hillary and Obama seemed to have stricken that word from their lexicons.

[Drich]

I've got another question... If islam does have a radical side why won't the imams denounce it? I have heard this imam speak 3 different times now, and not once has he made this distinction. He seems to speak to all of Islam as being peaceful and hints around the idea that those who do evil are not apart of it, but never identifies these acts as being evil...

Is this why Obama and Clinton do not acknowledge 'radical Islam' because Muslims don't make this distinction?

[The Grand Nudger]

Muslims make the True Muslim™ distinction.  You're familiar, I assume?

[abaris]

If islam does have a radical side why won't the imams denounce it?

They do. Regularly. It's just not splashed in the same fat headlines all over the front page. Who's fault is that, one might wonder. But if you look, there's always muslim officials distancing themselves from the attacks.

Orlando isn't any different. The head of American muslims distanced himself.

[Drich]

Muslims make the True Muslim™ distinction.  You're familiar, I assume?

Again if this were true, then by not denouncing 'radical islam' what we consider moderate islamists themselves are not moderate. Because if 'moderate islam' represents 'the true islamic religion' then the 'evil radicals' are apostate/heretics for the lack of a better term. So by not identifying them as radicals or openly condemning their actions... Radical islam becomes apart of moderate islam. Do you get it?

Maybe that is why obama and clinton will not make the radical islam distinction as it is not a distinction islam itself is willing to make.

[abaris]

Again if this were true, then by not denouncing 'radical islam' what we consider moderate islamists themselves are not moderate.

Maybe have an informed opinion before spewing bullshit? As I said above, they always distance themselves. After every given attack. You just have to look, since news like that aren't as juicy as the attacks themselves.

[Drich]

If islam does have a radical side why won't the imams denounce it?

They do. Regularly. It's just not splashed in the same fat headlines all over the front page. Who's fault is that, one might wonder. But if you look, there's always muslim officials distancing themselves from the attacks.

Orlando isn't any different. The head of American muslims distanced himself.

Again I have heard this central Fl imum speak on this subject several times and never once has he yet to identify this attack as a evil act perpetrated by a radical fanatic/s.
 
He simply says Islam is a religion of peace, do not rush to judgement, has held the media and politicians responsible for death threat on social media, and carefully worded the response 'those who practice evil do not worship allah' with the implication on the evil acts, but does not out right identify the shooting or the shooter as having committed an evil act.

my question is why? If someone like donald trump and hillary clinton can both agree on this being an evil act or even a terrorist act, then why is this man giving the impression that he is walking on egg shells?