Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This thread has had enough warnings. Future off topic posts are seeing warnings given out with no more warnings. Stop it

 motyak wrote:
This thread has had enough warnings. Future off topic posts are seeing warnings given out with no more warnings. Stop it

So, what exactly is the topic then? Unless you've deleted some posts the most recent discussion has been about the appropriateness of labeling this an act of Christian terrorism and how that relates to labeling other terrorist acts, which seems entirely on-topic.

 Peregrine wrote:

 motyak wrote:
This thread has had enough warnings. Future off topic posts are seeing warnings given out with no more warnings. Stop it

So, what exactly is the topic then? Unless you've deleted some posts the most recent discussion has been about the appropriateness of labeling this an act of Christian terrorism and how that relates to labeling other terrorist acts, which seems entirely on-topic.

Some guys were talking about ww1 guns for some reason

Prior to each warning post previously there was a string of off topic posts (what abortion is and isn't, whether a fetus is alive). In this case, the post needed deleting rather than just a warning, as it was "Oh yeah? I have this rifle and it does X, you should try Y rifle if you want Z". Which is in no way on topic.

DutchWinsAll wrote:
While the latter is surely a thing, it's not been at the forefront of East v West ideological battles nearly as much as Islamic terrorism.

Sure, but it has been at the forefront of West vs. West ideological battles. You know, the whole "culture war" thing.

America lost it's gak when an overweight backwoods Kentuckian tried to prevent marriage certificates.

But this is a very recent thing. Even just a few years ago we had states passing gay marriage bans with overwhelming majorities, and it hasn't been all that long since the courts struck down laws against homosexuality. Attitudes have changed significantly in a very short time, and even then we still have mainstream republican presidential candidates attending a Christian "why the bible says gay people should be executed" conference. We're better at controlling our extremists, but we still have them.

So, don't get complacent and think that terrorism is something that white Christians would never do. There are violent Christian extremists in the US, and there is a larger far-right fringe that stops just barely short of criminal advocacy of violence. If the shooter in this case did in fact choose his targets as an attack on abortion then it fits into an existing pattern of similar attacks and beliefs in the US.

 Peregrine wrote:
Unless you've deleted some posts the most recent discussion has been about the appropriateness of labeling this an act of Christian terrorism and how that relates to labeling other terrorist acts, which seems entirely on-topic.

Aye, once some debris has been cleared.

I'm not sure I'd call this terrorism (no group, no manifesto, no accomplices) but I would call it crazy. How the bleep do you justify murder when attacking an abortion clinic? Shooting cops and some insignificant nurses? If every life is sacred you shouldn'y try to end some lives just because you don't like their day job.

Spetulhu wrote:
I'm not sure I'd call this terrorism (no group, no manifesto, no accomplices) but I would call it crazy. How the bleep do you justify murder when attacking an abortion clinic? Shooting cops and some insignificant nurses? If every life is sacred you shouldn'y try to end some lives just because you don't like their day job.

You're missing the point. The "left" in this country has been desperately trying for years to tie the Christian "right" to the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc. Thus when an abortion clinic get shot up, it must be an example of Christian motivated/conspired terrorism. It just has to be. The "left's" blind hatred of conservative Christians is so extreme they don't even see how toxic their own views have become.

I understand elections are coming up and most of the candidates suck but that isn't an excuse for the base rudeness that's welling up all over the internet. Seriously, everyone needs to just step back and take a damn chill pill.

 Breotan wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:
I'm not sure I'd call this terrorism (no group, no manifesto, no accomplices) but I would call it crazy. How the bleep do you justify murder when attacking an abortion clinic? Shooting cops and some insignificant nurses? If every life is sacred you shouldn'y try to end some lives just because you don't like their day job.

You're missing the point. The "left" in this country has been desperately trying for years to tie the Christian "right" to the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc. Thus when an abortion clinic get shot up, it must be an example of Christian motivated/conspired terrorism. It just has to be. The "left's" blind hatred of conservative Christians is so extreme they don't even see how toxic their own views have become.

I understand elections are coming up and most of the candidates suck but that isn't an excuse for the base rudeness that's welling up all over the internet. Seriously, everyone needs to just step back and take a damn chill pill.

The odds of a high profile target of hate by some groups being shot up on an unrelated matter is pretty small I imagine. Short of a personal grievance with one of the staff or it being just randomly picked out of a telephone book, the attack has to be related to its function. It's far from being the first such attack. The hate whipped up by the sorts of people that protest outside abortion clinics and who are reluctant to condemn such killings doesn't help distance them from such extremists. Hell, even on the thread we've had posters say they only felt sorry for the police who died, not the staff.

 Breotan wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:
I'm not sure I'd call this terrorism (no group, no manifesto, no accomplices) but I would call it crazy. How the bleep do you justify murder when attacking an abortion clinic? Shooting cops and some insignificant nurses? If every life is sacred you shouldn'y try to end some lives just because you don't like their day job.

You're missing the point. The "left" in this country has been desperately trying for years to tie the Christian "right" to the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc. Thus when an abortion clinic get shot up, it must be an example of Christian motivated/conspired terrorism. It just has to be. The "left's" blind hatred of conservative Christians is so extreme they don't even see how toxic their own views have become.

I understand elections are coming up and most of the candidates suck but that isn't an excuse for the base rudeness that's welling up all over the internet. Seriously, everyone needs to just step back and take a damn chill pill.

So, we have confirmed reports that the shooter was a fundamentalist Christian, anti-government agitator, and reports from the police that the fictional videos related to Planned Parenthood appear to have been a contributing factor to the crime.

What would you call this act?

Mind you, this is not the first time that a Planned Parenthood facility or an abortion provider has been attacked or murdered. In those latter instances, I will point to Dr. David Gunn, murdered after Operation:Rescue created wanted poster-style pictures of him, killed by a man who professed to be a "born-again Christian". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_David_Gunn

Another shooting in Pensacola, FL, claimed the lives of a doctor and a clinic escort in 1994. The shooter claimed to be a member of the Army of God and had previously been a minister. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Jennings_Hill

John Salvi, who killed two PP receptionists (one in 1994, the second in 1996) was a known associate of Donald Spitz, a rather infamous anti-abortion activist and leader of the group "Army of God", suspected in mass-mailings of anthrax-laced letters to abortion doctors nationwide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Salvi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Spitz

And that's just four events that ended in murder, it doesn't even touch on the thousands of cases of assault, intimidation, arson, vandalism, breaking and entering, kidnapping and similar crimes staged against abortion clinics and abortion providers. It is terrorism, flat out terrorism, as defined by "the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims."

 jreilly89 wrote:
As someone who lives in said town, I just want to point out: whether this guy was a Muslim, Jew, Christian, or just some fething crazy asshat, it's really upsetting that as soon as this tragedy is resolved, everyone starts leaping to ploitics, using this as an example for gun control, Syrian refugees, what have you.

Those were people who were hurt or killed. The cop who was killed went to my Alma Mater, and my coworker knew him.

Just something I wish people would take into consideration before using this as evidence for any political motivations.

I do understand your personal feeling based on your close connection to this particular incident, however if this was a general rule, no-one could ever discuss any distressing public events except in terms of general platitudes.

 Psienesis wrote:


John Salvi, who killed two PP receptionists (one in 1994, the second in 1996) was a known associate of Donald Spitz, a rather infamous anti-abortion activist and leader of the group "Army of God", suspected in mass-mailings of anthrax-laced letters to abortion doctors nationwide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Salvi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Spitz

You do know the letters were not actually laced with Anthrax, right? They did threaten, and they did send white powder they claimed was anthrax, but it was not actually anthrax...

 CptJake wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:


John Salvi, who killed two PP receptionists (one in 1994, the second in 1996) was a known associate of Donald Spitz, a rather infamous anti-abortion activist and leader of the group "Army of God", suspected in mass-mailings of anthrax-laced letters to abortion doctors nationwide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Salvi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Spitz

You do know the letters were not actually laced with Anthrax, right? They did threaten, and they did send white powder they claimed was anthrax, but it was not actually anthrax...

While that may be true, it still doesn't absolve it of an act of terrorism. The white powder was meant to invoke fear, for political purposes. That is pretty much the definition of terrorism.

But being a "known associate" doesn't mean a ton either. At least that's what everyone said back in 2007 whenever someone pointed out that Barack Obama was a known associate of Bill Ayers.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 motyak wrote:
This thread has had enough warnings. Future off topic posts are seeing warnings given out with no more warnings. Stop it

So, what exactly is the topic then? Unless you've deleted some posts the most recent discussion has been about the appropriateness of labeling this an act of Christian terrorism and how that relates to labeling other terrorist acts, which seems entirely on-topic.

Some guys were talking about ww1 guns for some reason

DurchWinsAll mentioned a rifle he has and I made one short, friendly post talking about it, which seems to be deleted.

His post seems to remain unedited though. Perhaps any OT content should be removed from it so nobody makes the mistake of paying attention to it and inadvertently gets the banhammer?

Part Two:

Anti-abortion people have always reminded me of anti-gun people: That is in America at least, they want to restrict your Constitutional right because they don't like it.

They even use the same arguments. Saving lives vs. taking lives. Bloody pictures of children. Founding father's wouldn't have wanted this; "Saving children" etc.

I just wish more people would mind their own damn business.

Don't like abortion? Don't have one or also grow a womb and then don't have one.

Don't like guns? Then don't buy one or move to somewhere they aren't allowed.

OT my friend just sold me a WW1 issue American made Enfield. I need to put a new stock on it, but damn does that fether kick! I can't believe that was the standard infantry round for 2 world wars!

There is wisdom here, and reflects most people (reflected in polling). They are not fans of abortion but, within limits, want it legal.
I like that the WAPO article notes that this Army of God group got hammered (pun intended) by the PoPo back in the 90s. Best thing for it.

I'd bet dollars to donuts, it will come out that this is a general nutso guy, who happens to be slightly more nutso over this topic. Alternatively, he just randomly lost it. Are there links to a timeline of what actually went down and who he was shooting at? Did he go into the PP or did the first shootout occur outside and he went in after? That would help determine if the PP was the actual target.

 djones520 wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:


John Salvi, who killed two PP receptionists (one in 1994, the second in 1996) was a known associate of Donald Spitz, a rather infamous anti-abortion activist and leader of the group "Army of God", suspected in mass-mailings of anthrax-laced letters to abortion doctors nationwide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Salvi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Spitz

You do know the letters were not actually laced with Anthrax, right? They did threaten, and they did send white powder they claimed was anthrax, but it was not actually anthrax...

While that may be true, it still doesn't absolve it of an act of terrorism. The white powder was meant to invoke fear, for political purposes. That is pretty much the definition of terrorism.

But being a "known associate" doesn't mean a ton either. At least that's what everyone said back in 2007 whenever someone pointed out that Barack Obama was a known associate of Bill Ayers.

Not a 'may' be true. It is true.

And I made it clear they DID threaten Anthrax, which obviously was done to instill fear.

But there is a difference between mass mailing an actual bio agent that sickens and can even kill and sending talcum powder (or what ever they actually sent).

I have no idea what your 'known associate' diatribe is aimed at, I didn't mention that at all.

Look at what you quoted. Was responding to both.

Got it, I had thought your whole response was pointed at what I typed.

 Breotan wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:
I'm not sure I'd call this terrorism (no group, no manifesto, no accomplices) but I would call it crazy. How the bleep do you justify murder when attacking an abortion clinic? Shooting cops and some insignificant nurses? If every life is sacred you shouldn'y try to end some lives just because you don't like their day job.

You're missing the point. The "left" in this country has been desperately trying for years to tie the Christian "right" to the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc. Thus when an abortion clinic get shot up, it must be an example of Christian motivated/conspired terrorism. It just has to be. The "left's" blind hatred of conservative Christians is so extreme they don't even see how toxic their own views have become.

I understand elections are coming up and most of the candidates suck but that isn't an excuse for the base rudeness that's welling up all over the internet. Seriously, everyone needs to just step back and take a damn chill pill.

It's more a case of the left painting the right with the same brush they use to paint Islam. Where at least Muslims admit they have a terrorist problem and speak out against it, unlike christians. the rights blind hatred and toxic views directly lead to these murders, and worse yet are taken up as talking points from politicians.

If it turns out this guy was just a nut case, is all of Christianity still going to be blamed?

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:
I'm not sure I'd call this terrorism (no group, no manifesto, no accomplices) but I would call it crazy. How the bleep do you justify murder when attacking an abortion clinic? Shooting cops and some insignificant nurses? If every life is sacred you shouldn'y try to end some lives just because you don't like their day job.

You're missing the point. The "left" in this country has been desperately trying for years to tie the Christian "right" to the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc. Thus when an abortion clinic get shot up, it must be an example of Christian motivated/conspired terrorism. It just has to be. The "left's" blind hatred of conservative Christians is so extreme they don't even see how toxic their own views have become.

I understand elections are coming up and most of the candidates suck but that isn't an excuse for the base rudeness that's welling up all over the internet. Seriously, everyone needs to just step back and take a damn chill pill.

The odds of a high profile target of hate by some groups being shot up on an unrelated matter is pretty small I imagine. Short of a personal grievance with one of the staff or it being just randomly picked out of a telephone book, the attack has to be related to its function. It's far from being the first such attack. The hate whipped up by the sorts of people that protest outside abortion clinics and who are reluctant to condemn such killings doesn't help distance them from such extremists. Hell, even on the thread we've had posters say they only felt sorry for the police who died, not the staff.

The gunman murdered 3 people, a police officer and two civilians who were accompanying people to the clinic. None of the people murdered were PP staff. The investigating authorities still haven't issued any statements declaring that they've determined the motivation behind the shooting but they have issued statements that they believe the gunman was working alone. Waiting until more facts become public is the best course of action at this point in determining what led up to this horrible crime.

The difficulty of course is perspective. While one crime is too many, how many events have there been in this century? What group openly advocates for it? Thats the difficulty in "painting with the same brush."

Frankly there have been as many if not more enviroterrorist attacks, but the concept of blaming the environmental movement for Earth First, blaming them for creating a hateful environment for such, or in some way linking them all to terrorism, is just stupid.

 Frazzled wrote:
This is true. There needs to be an underlying organization though to be organized terrorism.

I'm not sure that anyone claimed it was organized terrorism. Just that there are Christian Terrorists but they are never referred to as such.

I am just amazed at some of this thread.

Yes, wether you folks want to admit or not. There are terrible christians. Personally, most christians I have encountered are horrendous people, but thats my own personal bias.

Alot of this is sticking hands over your ears and screaming "Lalala my religion isn't terrible!" Fun fact, most of them are! They all tend to promote a level of exsclusion and bigotry! And you know what? Whatever, that's human nature. We're a violent tribe minded species and normally your 'tribes' awfulness doesn't extend beyond hurtful words, not great but hey we can live with that.

But the fact that you plant your feet, dig in hard, and refuse to admit that your faith is capable of producing monsters. Which leads to this giant loop, running in circles trying to get some of you to admit that yes, you occasionally make monsters.

Every idiology and dogma in history has made monsters. You are not special.

And it's ok. Just because some of your religion is terrible doesn't mean you're terrible. One monster does not make you all monsters. But you really need to take a hard look at the monstrous things, see them for what they are. And maybe, just maybe, find a way to end the monstrosities.

lonestarr777 wrote:
I am just amazed at some of this thread.

Yes, wether you folks want to admit or not. There are terrible christians. Personally, most christians I have encountered are horrendous people, but thats my own personal bias.

I'm amazed that a guy stating most Christians he has "encountered are horrendous people" believes he should be taken seriously.

Relapse wrote:
If it turns out this guy was just a nut case, is all of Christianity still going to be blamed?

As long as the Muslim nut cases cause all of Islam to be blamed...

 skyth wrote:

Relapse wrote:
If it turns out this guy was just a nut case, is all of Christianity still going to be blamed?

As long as the Muslim nut cases cause all of Islam to be blamed...

Exactly. Just because there is a Christian nutcase, doesn't mean Christianity is somehow bad. Same for Islam, same for every religion.

 CptJake wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
I am just amazed at some of this thread.

Yes, wether you folks want to admit or not. There are terrible christians. Personally, most christians I have encountered are horrendous people, but thats my own personal bias.

I'm amazed that a guy stating most Christians he has "encountered are horrendous people" believes he should be taken seriously.

I would. Some of the people that are the loudest about being Christian are the least Christ-like people I know. It really depends on where you are.

The problem is the decent Christians often don't identify themselves as such and would skew the perception bias towards the loud crowd of people who don't act very Christ-like.

lonestarr777 wrote:
I am just amazed at some of this thread.

Yes, wether you folks want to admit or not. There are terrible christians. Personally, most christians I have encountered are horrendous people, but thats my own personal bias.

Alot of this is sticking hands over your ears and screaming "Lalala my religion isn't terrible!" Fun fact, most of them are! They all tend to promote a level of exsclusion and bigotry! And you know what? Whatever, that's human nature. We're a violent tribe minded species and normally your 'tribes' awfulness doesn't extend beyond hurtful words, not great but hey we can live with that.

But the fact that you plant your feet, dig in hard, and refuse to admit that your faith is capable of producing monsters. Which leads to this giant loop, running in circles trying to get some of you to admit that yes, you occasionally make monsters.

Every idiology and dogma in history has made monsters. You are not special.

And it's ok. Just because some of your religion is terrible doesn't mean you're terrible. One monster does not make you all monsters. But you really need to take a hard look at the monstrous things, see them for what they are. And maybe, just maybe, find a way to end the monstrosities.

And we have revealed much in one post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skyth wrote:

Relapse wrote:
If it turns out this guy was just a nut case, is all of Christianity still going to be blamed?

As long as the Muslim nut cases cause all of Islam to be blamed...

because every President has said that since never.

 CptJake wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
I am just amazed at some of this thread.

Yes, wether you folks want to admit or not. There are terrible christians. Personally, most christians I have encountered are horrendous people, but thats my own personal bias.

I'm amazed that a guy stating most Christians he has "encountered are horrendous people" believes he should be taken seriously.

Nah, this is the part that strains credulity:

And it's ok. Just because some of your religion is terrible doesn't mean you're terrible. One monster does not make you all monsters. But you really need to take a hard look at the monstrous things, see them for what they are. And maybe, just maybe, find a way to end the monstrosities

There is no way to stop people from doing bad things. Some people are going to do bad things, terrible horrible criminal things. There is no stopping this, there is only trying to make sure society reacts to such crimes in a pragmatic and productive manner.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 skyth wrote:

Relapse wrote:
If it turns out this guy was just a nut case, is all of Christianity still going to be blamed?

As long as the Muslim nut cases cause all of Islam to be blamed...

Exactly. Just because there is a Christian nutcase, doesn't mean Christianity is somehow bad. Same for Islam, same for every religion.

For that matter various political and social ideologies have enabled people to commit horrendous crimes.

The blunt fact is that every society has a number of nutjobs, who might fly off the handle for any kind of reason, and a larger number of other people who make use of a belief system -- religious or political -- to justify doing what they want to do for obscure psychological reasons.