Firstly, he is an atheist. His comments on-line reveal that.
Not quite, at best it's a little murky.
Loughner mentions an army official writing "none" in the space denoting religious affiliation on an application form.
So actually, Loughner is not a self-avowed atheist. He might in fact be an atheist, but "none" could also mean he chose not to disclose that information.
His "In God We Trust" reference refers to the inscription on paper money.
Although, given his tenuous grasp on reality, who really knows.
Seems to me, with that statement, YOU are politicizing this more than even the sheriff did.
And for the record, did he actually say that the shooter was motivated because of Giffords political affiliation? I havent seen that clip if he has.
Everyone in the room would have known what he was implying by what he said. The Democrats have been characterizing those wanting the borders secured and those opposed to health care as racist and insighting violence for some time. He didn't stick to the facts of the case.
But you said that there were threats from this kid, not general threats and acts of vandalism which those articles are pointed to, there's nothing pointing to this kid making threats or calling in threats.
So again your post is speculation.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Alex Villec, 19, a volunteer for the event, told the Arizona Daily Star that the gunman asked to speak to Ms. Giffords, but Mr. Villec told him to go to the back of the line. The gunman did that, and minutes later he walked toward her.
“He was intent,” Mr. Villec said. “He was intent when he came back – a pretty stone-cold glance and glare.”
“I didn't see his gun, but it was clear who he was going for,” he added. “He was going for the congresswoman.”
Loughner mentions an army official writing "none" in the space denoting religious affiliation on an application form.
So actually, Loughner is not a self-avowed atheist. He might in fact be an atheist, but "none" could also mean he chose not to disclose that information.
His "In God We Trust" reference refers to the inscription on paper money.
Although, given his tenuous grasp on reality, who really knows.
He also was quite offended by the offer of a Bible when he was at the recruiting station. Usually that's a tell tale sign but, of course with his mental state who knows.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
Everyone in the room would have known what he was implying by what he said. The Democrats have been characterizing those wanting the borders secured and those opposed to health care as racist and insighting violence for some time. He didn't stick to the facts of the case.
No SOME Democrats have been guilty of this, and Tuscon, being a border town, is the absolute hotspot for this stuff right now and there is no denying that the level of hate and indeed viotrol that has been taking place in that area is at a dangerous level.
Look at this ad by her tea party opponent during the last campaign.
Quote:
Jesse Kelly, meanwhile, doesn’t seem to be bothered in the least by the Sarah Palin controversy earlier this year, when she released a list of targeted races in crosshairs, urging followers to “reload” and “aim” for Democrats. Critics said she was inciting violence.
He seems to be embracing his fellow tea partier’s idea. Kelly’s campaign event website has a stern-looking photo of the former Marine in military garb holding his weapon. It includes the headline: “Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.”
This kind of junk has escalated so badly in recent years that, again, I have no doubt a day like today was inevitable.
Last edited by transplant99; 01-08-2011 at 11:35 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
No SOME Democrats have been guilty of this, and Tuscon, being a border town, is the absolute hotspot for this stuff right now and there is no denying that the level of hate and indeed viotrol that has been taking place in that area is at a dangerous level.
Look at this ad by her tea party opponent during the last campaign.
This kind of junk has escalated so badly in recent years that, again, I have no doubt a day like today was inevitable.
It sounds like an innocent play on words. I'm guessing the 10 oclock event was at a gun range. The target was victory not Giffords. The chosen event was a little strange but, I suppose Jesse Kelly might have felt the need to show her commitment to the second amendment. Giffords has a pro gun voting record and a high NRA rating. Kelly might have been trying to woo the pro gun voters from Giffords.
Shooting someone for political reasons does not have to be a left-right thing either. Given his "second constitution" ramblings, he could have simply shot her for being a politician. That is still political, just not partisan.
This is so true. This is more about the people versus the political establishment more than anything.
The statement "the more things change, the more they stay the same" describes America accurately. The democrat/republican parties are just the left/right arm of the same corporate body, and Americans are seeing that their votes don't change much, and as a result comes unrest and violence.
I don't think the kind of person who is capable of shooting 17 people in cold blood is someone who could be said to have any kind of rational political viewpoint.
If an otherwise capable and sound thinking adult can't legally consent to sex after three drinks, how in the hell can anyone say that a mass-murdering lunatic was "liberal" or "conservative"?
He's nuts, and its sad that he didn't get adequate help before he ended up hurting other people.
Oh and it has been reported that this guy was never accepted into the military, but there seems to be some confusion about this.
The Army released a statement.
Quote:
The Army said in a statement that the suspect in the shooting was never in the Army.
"He attempted to enlist in the Army but was rejected for service. In accordance with the Privacy Act, we will not discuss why he was rejected," the Army said in a statement.
It must have been something to get rejected from an army that even takes convicted felons... but yet he was allowed to buy 2 handguns!
Sheriff Dupnik is a Democrat and judging by is comments a classless one. I've been glad to see the rest of the leadership within both parties chose to take the high road today and not play this for political points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop
Well, for one he's an elected official just like any other politician. So part of his job is to express his opinion, just like Obama right on down the line.
It'd be a different story if he was a civil servant (I'll use the example of CPS Chief Rick Hansen interjecting himself into last fall's Calgary mayoral race).
Disagree with his politics if you want, but he has a history of taking controversial stands on issues.
He has a distinct, demonstrable and personal interest in the outcome of this case and has already made prejudicial public comments that, on the surface, appeared to have little connection to the known evidence.
If he was the sheriff of the next county, if had made the comments at a local Chamber luncheon or had already disqualified himself from the case, then I probably would't care.
Let's face it, the young perpetrator is never going to see the light of day but the sheriffs public comments will probably seem like a gift from the heavens from a desperate defence team seeking to avoid the death penalty and any aspect of the investigation involving the sheriff can be made to seem suspect.
He should do the right thing and remove himself from the investigation into the death of his close personal friend and close political associate.
EDIT The latest on the shooter at the link below and still no connection to a particular side of political discourse. It's actually looking like the congressman may have been an accessible symbol of government in general rather than a target because of her beliefs.
I really hope that this little tidbit does not become a focus. Her life and tragic death should not be trivialized into her date of birth.
...but in America you know it will.
As for Sheriff Putnik; I watched his entire press conference live and it was pretty clear to me that he was speaking from the heart. Not some planned out, partisan speech but a speech talking about how TV and radio personalities are being irresponsible with their rhetoric. Putnik said he himself has received numerous threats in recent years and noted that if the crap that spews from these people doesn't stop; no one will want to be involved in public office in the future.
Those claiming he should step down or that he is playing politics are gravely misinformed...
The Following User Says Thank You to stamphater For This Useful Post:
Let's face it - gun control isn't going to reduce firearm related crime. If a crook wants a gun - he'll get one and it won't be registered to him when he shoots a clerk in a liquor store.
Gun control is about making it difficult for the average Joe to buy, register and own a gun. If process to do this is long, complicated and expensive and forces people to think it's not worth getting a gun after all - it's a good start and I'm ok with it.
If you control the guns, it will make it harder for criminals to get them. Organized crime will still probably be able to get them but the mass murderer who goes berzerk will have a lot harder time getting access to guns.
Also gun control lowers the supply of guns and fewer guns out there makes it harder for criminals to steal them from people who have them.
The Following User Says Thank You to GreenTeaFrapp For This Useful Post:
He has a distinct, demonstrable and personal interest in the outcome of this case and has already made prejudicial public comments that, on the surface, appeared to have little connection to the known evidence.
When you say distinct and demonstrable you're suggesting something other than being the Sheriff of the biggest county on the border and having to deal with the on-going battles inflamed by the rhetoric in the media? This is the Sheriff that is forced to deal with keeping the Minutemen out of the face of the Border Patrol and shooting at anyone with brown skin.
The county Sheriff wouldn't have access to the know evidence?
County supersedes municipality law enforcement in every way in Arizona. County would be in the middle of this investigation and the Sheriff would be front and center. Something this high profile he would be on scene and assume command of the investigation. He would have access to all information and would know all the facts available before making a statement.
"Dupnik told reporters that the suspect had "kind of a troubled past" that included brushes wtih the law. Though he provided no details, he said, "We understand that there have been law enforcement contacts with the individual where he made threats.""
If he was the sheriff of the next county, if had made the comments at a local Chamber luncheon or had already disqualified himself from the case, then I probably would't care.
Or it could be that he made those comments as someone who lives in the middle of that toxic environment, much if it fueled by hatred on the radio and television. The Minutemen get a lot of coverage from the likes of Dobbs, Hannity and Beck, but they're a dangerous group that do nothing but inflame the fringe in a county where latinos are the norm, not the exception. This dangerous rhetoric foments conflict and leads to violence and it feeds the delusions of the fringe.
Let's face it, the young perpetrator is never going to see the light of day but the sheriffs public comments will probably seem like a gift from the heavens from a desperate defence team seeking to avoid the death penalty and any aspect of the investigation involving the sheriff can be made to seem suspect.
How are the Sheriff's comments going to help the defense team?
Quote:
He should do the right thing and remove himself from the investigation into the death of his close personal friend and close political associate.
I don't disagree with this at all. That point is likely moot as I'm sure the Feds have moved in and are now taking control of the investigation. A federal judge was murdered so this becomes a bigger kettle of fish. Pima County is going to be pushed aside in the coming days if they have not already.
Quote:
EDIT The latest on the shooter at the link below and still no connection to a particular side of political discourse. It's actually looking like the congressman may have been an accessible symbol of government in general rather than a target because of her beliefs.
That article says nothing like you suggest. It is a rehash of all the information released yesterday with a confirmation of non-attendance at ASU. The only thing that comes close to what you're saying is this.
"Still, nothing in his background or Web postings suggested he was preparing to execute public officials and bystanders in a hail of bullets outside a Safeway supermarket."
That is inaccurate just on the information posted in this thread.
Quote:
And people who knew him say he had problems with organized religion.
I'm not sure why people keep trying to drag the religion angle into this discussion? It is an irrelevant point. The guy didn't kill a priest or a rabbi or a cleric, he killed a politician in a premeditated action.
After reading more and more of this kids ramblings on the web I am really leaning to him being a schizophrenic. He's at the age where this illness tends to surface and his writings seem to make no sense, as if written when he was struggling with his delusions and attempting to convince himself of what was real and not. Much of his writing was politically oriented and this is where his delusions got the best of him. It is likely that the tenor and content in the media fed this delusion and this was his impulse to act. Gilfford's stance on many issues were just those views that would have fed the delusions on this kid. I have no doubt this kid was damaged goods and dealing with some mental illness, but his motivation appears to have been political and his target selected with intent. This was not a random event.
