Politifact: Democrats never mentioned terrorism on Day One of DNC

[urasim]

Democrats don't discuss terrorism a lot because they are not unenlightened xenophobic paranoid bunch. They want to discuss important matters "that actually make a difference" such as tax, education, and minimum wage.

It's unintelligent to think terrorism is solely perpetrated by a single demographic.
It's unintelligent to label people xenophobic when they aren't actually afraid of foreigners.
It's unintelligent to not discuss something because you're scared of being labeled xenophobic/racist/sexist.
It's unintelligent to say that people dying isn't important.

You know nothing about the people you're describing, yet you feel inclined to label them derogatory things. A move only intellectually dishonest people do in an attempt to silence dissent.

[Damajin]

Well, then, if you see terrorists around you killing people right now on your watch, then you should be scared. What if you don't? Then it is the fear of random lightnings.

This is functionally wrong. The time to be scared or concerned is long before anything happens, and using that as the impetus to take appropriate precautions to protect and be able to respond to a problem. You need to see problems from a long ways off and be able to already have a set and somewhat practiced response to them. When you see actual terrorists or even a more regular conflict whether physical or otherwise it is time to react and respond to ensure your safety and the safety of others especially your immediate family and friends.

The people who are overcome with fear at the moment of a crisis or confrontation end up as the easy targets, the proverbial fish in a barrel. Your advice and attitude are very poor for self preservation.

[urasim]

Here you are looking at all Muslims, while there you are only looking at police shootings and not, say, at all cases of interaction of police officers with citizens.

Whoa, whoa, whoa... I never said anything about ALL Muslims... Save your dishonest bullshit tactics for stupid people. That shit doesn't work here.

I never said all cops are racist. I never said no cops are racist. What BLM presupposes is that there's systemic racism in the police force. Less blacks have been killed by police this year than whites have been killed by terrorists. I'd say that warrants a discussion whether you like it or not. The regressive left faulty reasoning of "it's not enough for democrats to talk about" is fucking bullshit and insulting to everyone who's suffered from these extremists.

Especially when the US is partly to blame for them existing in the first place.

[alexw]

That was the case in France too, a while ago
I got a feeling that Terrorism is a topic that will most likely be touched on similar conferences there, in the future though.

Let us hope that America retains their current special status and doesn't have to worry about Terrorists in the future!


I really tried, trust me. But I couldn't keep a straight face at someone comparing Terrorism to inanimate objects.

No, the reason you don't answer is because you can't give an answer without highlighting the stupidity of your position on terrorism. Either you would have to say its not something to be afraid of, which given that it kills more people than terrorism, means you should not be personally afraid of terrorism too. Or you come up with absurd suggestions to tackle a minor issue that would be completely out of proportion to the threat.

[Flurryfang]

I think the USA have a lot more problems, which should take higher priority then a few attacks from terroist every now and then. Sure, its still a problem, but it is fixing itself atm, so fix the gun deaths, the racism and the economy. Stuff like that is something, which politicians can actually do something about.

[urasim]

Either you need a hearing aid or you refuse to here out democratic leaders.

You sure showed him! Not providing quotes or anything to prove your point!

Oh, wait, you just failed? Oops!

You were better off not saying anything at all.

[JustSomeGuy42]

In all seriousness, urasim, how would you like the US policy vis a vis ISIS to be different? Are you responding mostly to the rhetoric or the substance?

I ask because I believe that the POTUS's strategy is explicitly to ignore them in his speeches, while squeezing them on the battlefield with local proxies, air war, and covert ops.The goal is to defeat them without making it _seem_ like the US defeated them, thereby making them the Middle East's problem instead of another 10+ year occupation.

Have you studied the conditions leading to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire? Because what we're dealing with here is the very long, very slow disintegration of the organizing principle for a huge chunk of the planet. There have been jihadi movements in the hulk of the Ottoman sphere for over 140 years now, and so long as the powers in the region are weak, that will continue. ISIS screwed up by pretending they had the apparatus of a state, which meant they could be attacked like a state, and their pseudo-state will be crushed between all the rocks and hard places in the region in the next couple years. The movement they represent, however, of an aggrieved and disenfranchised Sunni power block trapped between a growing Iran, an increasingly muscular Turkey, and a quietly allied-with-America Jordan, is not so easily defeated. Do you have thoughts about how the US (and, more broadly, the Western coalition) should proceed?

Or are you just talking about the uptick in domestic terrorism (in the US and France, by native-born or naturalized citizens, in some cases veterans), possibly triggered in unstable individuals by the cultural memes released by this conflict? And what do you think the governments of France and the US should do about that?

[Jimmy Woods]

It's not like that have a day dedicated to national security or anything. Oh I guess people OUTRAGE because they want a complete disorganized say whatever comes out of your ass fact free style convention that they saw last week at the RNC convention. Other people dislike politicians and just want them to do their fucking job of governing and not being a total embarrassment.

[Wulfey]

In all seriousness, urasim, how would you like the US policy vis a vis ISIS to be different? Are you responding mostly to the rhetoric or the substance?

I ask because I believe that the POTUS's strategy is explicitly to ignore them in his speeches, while squeezing them on the battlefield with local proxies, air war, and covert ops.The goal is to defeat them without making it _seem_ like the US defeated them, thereby making them the Middle East's problem instead of another 10+ year occupation.

Have you studied the conditions leading to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire? Because what we're dealing with here is the very long, very slow disintegration of the organizing principle for a huge chunk of the planet. There have been jihadi movements in the hulk of the Ottoman sphere for over 140 years now, and so long as the powers in the region are weak, that will continue. ISIS screwed up by pretending they had the apparatus of a state, which meant they could be attacked like a state, and their pseudo-state will be crushed between all the rocks and hard places in the region in the next couple years. The movement they represent, however, of an aggrieved and disenfranchised Sunni power block trapped between a growing Iran, an increasingly muscular Turkey, and a quietly allied-with-America Jordan, is not so easily defeated. Do you have thoughts about how the US (and, more broadly, the Western coalition) should proceed?

Or are you just talking about the uptick in domestic terrorism (in the US and France, by native-born or naturalized citizens, in some cases veterans), possibly triggered in unstable individuals by the cultural memes released by this conflict? And what do you think the governments of France and the US should do about that?

Don't know if you heard, but when Trump is President he will order the military to destroy ISIS. So all that history stuff doesn't really matter.

[Garnier Fructis]

You can hand waive it's expected.

They said they'll discuss it later. How is this hand waving? Is it really that devastating that they didn't talk about it on day 1?

This may come a shock to you, but not everyone is pissing-their-pants scared of terrorists.

[Orlong]

That link literally shows two pictures with flags on stage, one with physical flags and one with digital

that was before people came in. Notice the empty seats? They were testing the video boards

- - - Updated - - -

I know the article is a bit long, but the pictures of the flags at the DNC are at the very end. It's understandable that you didn't make there.

Those were digital flags before anyone came in. Im literally watching right now and dont see a single flag on the stage (I even paused it and looked very closely). In fact the roll call just ended and Bernie wasnt wearing one on his lapel and now, Terry McCauliff is speaking and he doesnt have one either. Its blatantly obvious the Democrats are NOT patriotic and it pains them to every espouse our greatness. Its why Obama went on a world apology tour, and it took him almost 6 years before he regretfully started wearing an American flag lapel pin

- - - Updated - - -

Some funny stats, BTW.

http://www.lifeinsurancequotes.org/a...ly-statistics/

"The odds of being the victim of a shark attack are 1 in 11.5 million worldwide. Although there are 65 annual shark attacks each year, only a handful are fatal."
"The chances of being killed in a terrorist attack are about 1 in 20 million. A person is as likely to be killed by his or her own furniture, and more likely to die in a car accident, drown in a bathtub, or in a building fire than from a terrorist attack."
"The chances a person will be killed by an asteroid are 1 in 200,000, which is much higher than the odds of being killed by hail, which is 1 in 734,400,000."

Democrats have missed such important threats as shark attacks and asteroids! Shame on them!!!

All of which are uncontrollable and accidental. Terrorism is deliberate and we CAN and SHOULD do something to prevent that. You cant prevent getting hit with an asteroid.


Here we are three quarters through day 2 and still not a single mention of ISIS or terrorism, not even a mention of the church attack and priest beheading nor a moment of silence for him. They are despicable!

[Polyxo]

Some funny stats, BTW.

http://www.lifeinsurancequotes.org/a...ly-statistics/

"The odds of being the victim of a shark attack are 1 in 11.5 million worldwide. Although there are 65 annual shark attacks each year, only a handful are fatal."
"The chances of being killed in a terrorist attack are about 1 in 20 million. A person is as likely to be killed by his or her own furniture, and more likely to die in a car accident, drown in a bathtub, or in a building fire than from a terrorist attack."
"The chances a person will be killed by an asteroid are 1 in 200,000, which is much higher than the odds of being killed by hail, which is 1 in 734,400,000."

Democrats have missed such important threats as shark attacks and asteroids! Shame on them!!!

Like I said, nothing about sharks.

[Orlong]

Oh that's coming later in the convention where the mothers of innocent black teens come out to speak on how their son "dindunuffin" and was an aspiring college bound honor student (not a drug dealer, robber, assaulter, etc).

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7588/6...ck-ben-shapiro

Here are just some of the speakers slated for the DNC:

Sybrina Fulton, Mother Of Trayvon Martin. The Democrats have attempted to play the Martin’s killing as a case-in-point of white police racism. There are just three problems: first, the man who shot him, George Zimmerman, was not white; second, George Zimmerman was not a cop; third, Trayvon Martin was by all available evidence sitting atop Zimmerman’s prone body and slamming his head into the concrete when Zimmerman shot him. Zimmerman was not only acquitted of a murder charge, the Department of Justice couldn’t find anything to charge him for either.

Lezley McSpadden, Mother Of Michael Brown. Michael Brown was a thug who strong-arm robbed a convenience store, then punched Officer Darren Wilson, tried to grab his gun and shoot him, and finally tried to charge him before being shot. This is true according to witness testimony; even Eric Holder’s DOJ could not find something wrong with the shooting. That didn’t stop the left from manufacturing from whole cloth a narrative of evil white police officers shooting black men surrendering by shouting “Hands up, don’t shoot!”

Gwen Carr, Mother Of Eric Garner. Eric Garner was not murdered by police. He resisted arrest and was placed in a submission hold by the cops; he then died of a heart attack because he was dramatically overweight. Garner had a long history of health issues ranging from diabetes to sleep apnea to asthma so bad that he had to quit a city job. Garner shouldn’t have died over selling “loosies,” but blaming his death on cop racism is asinine.

Maria Hamilton, Mother Of Dontre Hamilton: This case isn’t a household name because Hamilton grabbed an officer’s baton and hit him in the neck with it before the officer shot him. The officer was fired because Hamilton was a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic.

Lucia McBath, Mother Of Jordan Davis: Jordan Davis was murdered by Michael David Dunn at a gas station in Florida. Davis was playing his music loudly in his car; Dunn confronted him, then got a gun and shot 10 rounds into the car. Davis was convicted of first degree murder. So what exactly is the problem with the criminal justice system or police, then?

Geneva Reed-Veal, Mother Of Sandra Bland. Sandra Bland committed suicide while in police custody. Rumors of an evil police murder and coverup circulated on the internet, but there was no evidence to back any of them



[Infracted - Use of racist slurs]

Also funny how none of them have the same last name as their mother except Hamilton. Perhaps that should be a clue as to why they grew up so bad

- - - Updated - - -

That'd be Trump's campaign slogan, friend.

You can't "Make America Great Again" if it's already great.

Its great, but not as great as it can and should be, and WILL be under President Trump.

By the way, Make America Great Again was a slogan also used by President Reagan after Jimmy Carter made us weak (who also btw is speaking at the DNC right and also refuses to wear an American flag lapel pin which is despicable for a former president) and he followed through and dismantled the USSR and removed the Berlin Wall

[Zan15]

I dont think I saw even a single American flag at their convention either. How pathetic

you mean

"i did not watch the dnc.....and heard someone spouting off this nonsence and decided to repeat it without investigating it"


http://www.snopes.com/flags-banned-at-dnc/

[Natrii]

So then, they just chose to not lead with fear, saving it for the finale :P

[Orlong]

In all seriousness, urasim, how would you like the US policy vis a vis ISIS to be different? Are you responding mostly to the rhetoric or the substance?

I ask because I believe that the POTUS's strategy is explicitly to ignore them in his speeches, while squeezing them on the battlefield with local proxies, air war, and covert ops.The goal is to defeat them without making it _seem_ like the US defeated them, thereby making them the Middle East's problem instead of another 10+ year occupation.

ISIS never would have even rose to power if Obama left our troops in Iraq to finish the job instead of pulling them out. There should never be a timetable to finish a war. You finish it when its done. And yes I know Bush set the date, but Obama could have said we need more time and should have kept them there

[Polyxo]

Also funny how none of them have the same last name as their mother except Hamilton. Perhaps that should be a clue as to why they grew up so bad

- - - Updated - - -



Its great, but not as great as it can and should be, and WILL be under President Trump.

By the way, Make America Great Again was a slogan also used by President Reagan and he followed through

Greatness quotient = 1/brown people?

[Fincayra]

No. Im admitting that we need to show the bastards why we are the greatest nation on the earth and remove them from it. Not just handwave them away and act like they dont exist, But our current leadership seems to have a problem with doing so.

[Draco-Onis]

ISIS never would have even rose to power if Obama left our troops in Iraq to finish the job instead of pulling them out. There should never be a timetable to finish a war. You finish it when its done. And yes I know Bush set the date, but Obama could have said we need more time and should have kept them there

You may want to be careful you have twisted yourself so much to make this lie work you may have broken a bone, the amount of cognitive dissonance here is astounding. ISIS came from an extremist wing of Al-Qeda who does not have a specific country they operate in cells, the troops were removed because according to the agreement Bush signed they would no longer be protected from Iraqi laws, he set the time table.

After reading all this it's pretty obvious you live in an alternate reality.

[Kujako]

ISIS never would have even rose to power if Obama left our troops in Iraq to finish the job instead of pulling them out.

Yes, shame on him for following the agreement Dubya signed. Question, what do you call an army in a country that doesn't want them there?