Man caught with 2 guns and koran at Hotel Entrance at Disneyland Paris

originally posted by: Byrd

What's happened to all the folks who support the 2nd Amendment? It doesn't say "guns permitted EXCEPT if you're Black/Muslim/Afghani/etc/etc." It applies to everyone, rich or poor, and no matter what religion. You could walk around carrying a legal long gun and books on whatever religion you like, under the law.

While the event here happened in France (not the US)....this is something that needs to be repeated and repeated.

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Byrd

What's happened to all the folks who support the 2nd Amendment? It doesn't say "guns permitted EXCEPT if you're Black/Muslim/Afghani/etc/etc." It applies to everyone, rich or poor, and no matter what religion. You could walk around carrying a legal long gun and books on whatever religion you like, under the law.

While the event here happened in France (not the US)....this is something that needs to be repeated and repeated.

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

Whatever the reasons for this man to carry a gun are, the French police do not believe it to be terrorist related. I think some people on ATS see gun + koran = IS terrorist. Now, if it was gun + bible, what would they then think?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
While the event here happened in France (not the US)....

Ooops! Reading fail on my part! Thanks for the correction!

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

Agreed.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

What do you mean, who in Europe deccided this, and who is kicking who around?

And how is it not relevant?

a reply to: uncommitted

I think some people on ATS see gun + koran = IS terrorist. Now, if it was gun + bible, what would they then think?

How many terrorist attacks have happened in France in the name of christianity, lately, as opposed to in the name of islam?

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Byrd

What's happened to all the folks who support the 2nd Amendment? It doesn't say "guns permitted EXCEPT if you're Black/Muslim/Afghani/etc/etc." It applies to everyone, rich or poor, and no matter what religion. You could walk around carrying a legal long gun and books on whatever religion you like, under the law.

While the event here happened in France (not the US)....this is something that needs to be repeated and repeated.

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

Whatever the reasons for this man to carry a gun are, the French police do not believe it to be terrorist related. I think some people on ATS see gun + koran = IS terrorist. Now, if it was gun + bible, what would they then think?

If by "You people on ATS" you are referring to the author of the article in the OP, Alix Culbertson...then yes. But I don't think they are an ATS member.

originally posted by: NeoSpartan
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

What do you mean, who in Europe deccided this, and who is kicking who around?

And how is it not relevant?

How is him having a Koran relevant to anything, other than an agenda to demonize people of that faith?

Hitler was super focused on the religion of people in his country, too. (thats right...Godwin's Law....plopped it down right here on page 3)

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You answered only one out of three questions.

It is completely relevant in the light of the current situation. You know, IS(ISLAMIC State) and recent mass shootings in France in the name of islam.

How can you say it is not relevant?

originally posted by: NeoSpartan
a reply to: uncommitted

I think some people on ATS see gun + koran = IS terrorist. Now, if it was gun + bible, what would they then think?

How many terrorist attacks have happened in France in the name of christianity, lately, as opposed to in the name of islam?

My comment was based upon the fact that if someone has a copy of the koran then it seems to be assumed that the person is an Islamic terrorist. As it happens, you are suggesting that an IS terrorist attack is in the name of Islam, whereas I think most Muslims would say the attack is not in their name - big difference.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Byrd

What's happened to all the folks who support the 2nd Amendment? It doesn't say "guns permitted EXCEPT if you're Black/Muslim/Afghani/etc/etc." It applies to everyone, rich or poor, and no matter what religion. You could walk around carrying a legal long gun and books on whatever religion you like, under the law.

While the event here happened in France (not the US)....this is something that needs to be repeated and repeated.

To me, the fact that a koran was present and is being reported as if relevant is as prejudiced as anything I have seen in the last 30 years. With this whole Syria thing, its almost like EUrope decided to import some second class citizens to kick around.

Whatever the reasons for this man to carry a gun are, the French police do not believe it to be terrorist related. I think some people on ATS see gun + koran = IS terrorist. Now, if it was gun + bible, what would they then think?

If by "You people on ATS" you are referring to the author of the article in the OP, Alix Culbertson...then yes. But I don't think they are an ATS member.

In fairness I said "some people on ATS", you have quoted me as saying "you people on ATS". There are many on ATS who are intolerant of Muslims, they have become the token bogeyman that recently was (for American users, who tend to be the highest posters on ATS) reserved for Mexicans for a short while, but usually those of the Jewish faith.

a reply to: uncommitted

My comment was based upon the fact that if someone has a copy of the koran then it seems to be assumed that the person is an Islamic terrorist. As it happens, you are suggesting that an IS terrorist attack is in the name of Islam, whereas I think most Muslims would say the attack is not in their name - big difference.

Right, let's ignore the part where this person was caught with not only a koran, but with 2 FIREARMS.

Did you ignore this part on purpose?

It is not even relevant if other muslims think it was in their name or not, I said in the name of islam.

Were these attacks not made in the name of islam? They obviously were, wether they were representing all muslims or not.

originally posted by: NeoSpartan
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You answered only one out of three questions.

It is completely relevant in the light of the current situation. You know, IS(ISLAMIC State) and recent mass shootings in France in the name of islam.

How can you say it is not relevant?

Mostly because I was raised in a nation where religious freedom is paramount, and was fully immersed in this mindset of abject tolerance.

To make sure the answer to all 3 questions you posed is clear:

1. I mean that the governments of Europe are importing people that they KNOW are going to be treated like second class citizens. They KNOW that some of the folks that are being imported may be dangerous, and will poison the well for the rest.

2. See above....the governments of Europe decided to participate, along with the US (but we aren't talking about the US here) in destabilizing the middle east and fomenting war which created a refugee crisis. Given the decades long lamenting of shrinking populations from the government of countries like France, and that this is a conspiracy site....perhaps it was all part of the plan to repopulate a Europe that just wasn't keeping itself populated.

3. Seems to me that if you have a handful of incidents, regardless of how atrocious they are, and you allow them to paint a picture of an entire population....thats called "prejudice".

a reply to: uncommitted

To be fair, you are correct. My mistake.

That said, it doesn't impact the sentiment of what I stated: that the author of the article made the connection. We are just discussing it.

originally posted by: NeoSpartan
a reply to: uncommitted

My comment was based upon the fact that if someone has a copy of the koran then it seems to be assumed that the person is an Islamic terrorist. As it happens, you are suggesting that an IS terrorist attack is in the name of Islam, whereas I think most Muslims would say the attack is not in their name - big difference.

Right, let's ignore the part where this person was caught with not only a koran, but with 2 FIREARMS.

Did you ignore this part on purpose?

It is not even relevant if other muslims think it was in their name or not, I said in the name of islam.

Were these attacks not made in the name of islam? They obviously were, wether they were representing all muslims or not.

And the French police has already said based on a preliminary investigation they do not consider this in anyway terrorist related - did you ignore that on purpose?

www.bbc.co.uk...

If a white American male carries out mass shootings on other people in America, is he representing all white American males - yes or no?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

1. I mean that the governments of Europe are importing people that they KNOW are going to be treated like second class citizens. They KNOW that some of the folks that are being imported may be dangerous, and will poison the well for the rest.

So this alone would warrant all the "xenophobia" against all of them, since there is no way to tell them apart. You know this, and still act like we should welcome them with open arms?

2. See above....the governments of Europe decided to participate, along with the US (but we aren't talking about the US here) in destabilizing the middle east and fomenting war which created a refugee crisis. Given the decades long lamenting of shrinking populations from the government of countries like France, and that this is a conspiracy site....perhaps it was all part of the plan to repopulate a Europe that just wasn't keeping itself populated.

So, why should we be happy to welcome these people if they are here only because of a government conspiracy involving the replacement of native populations with muslims?

3. Seems to me that if you have a handful of incidents, regardless of how atrocious they are, and you allow them to paint a picture of an entire population....thats called "prejudice".

Ignoring the obvious widespread problems is called "ignorance", or rather "suicidal stupidity".

Off course you have a crystal clear view of European reality overthere in Texas.......

a reply to: uncommitted

The discussion was about wether or not the possession of the koran was relevant enough to get mentioned along with the guns.

It was completely relevant at the time of reporting.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: uncommitted

To be fair, you are correct. My mistake.

That said, it doesn't impact the sentiment of what I stated: that the author of the article made the connection. We are just discussing it.

Most of us do discuss without prejudice, many of us tend not to jump to conclusions before all facts are known, some enter the debate with a pre-determined view of what happened and why based on their own prejudice - sometimes of course that may turn out to be correct, many times it will not. I know you fall into the first and second categories, and I always endeavour to ensure I follow your example.

Is funny, I guess in our "apologetic" society we need to wait until the persons in questions goes on a mass shutting before deem them either a "lone wolf" with mental problems or a terrorist sleeping cell.

What a mess we are getting into in the name of "don't judge before finding the facts" actually finding the facts means people will get killed first.

Nothing to see here is just the "minority report working".

originally posted by: NeoSpartan
a reply to: uncommitted

The discussion was about wether or not the possession of the koran was relevant enough to get mentioned along with the guns.

It was completely relevant at the time of reporting.

Actually it wasn't, and it was reported from a news source, not the police. All the possession of a copy of the koran means on face value is that the person had a copy of the koran in their possession - no more, no less.

a reply to: NeoSpartan

No, but I do have a crystal clear view of treating immigrant populations like 3rd class citizens, having grown up here just an hour or two from Mexico (and all the familial relations we have in Mexico)

What it sounds to me like is, like here in the US, your biggest beef is with your government. Your government, along with mine, made the situation in Syria unbearable. That is your tax dollars funding all the violence (along with mine). Your tax dollars spent destroying their life there, only to import them into your country and keep kicking them. You are complicit in the behavior of your government, just like I am. Silence is consent, but to keep funding it goes beyond simple silent consent. Its a hard fact for most people to accept: that they own the atrocities of the government they elect and fund. But its the truth. And we are in that boat together, despite the Atlantic separating us.


Regardless, this is an international forum. And any member is welcome to discuss any topic on ATS within T&C.