New York Daily News says one of the San Bernardino victims deserved his fate

[meridian5455]

NY Daily News says Jewish victim just as culpable as the Jihadi terrorists who killed him.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/san-bernardino-bloodbath-born-bigots-article-1.2456491?utm_content=buffer0141d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw

This is disgusting and it's a window into the left's hate of Jews and Christians.

 

[EnigmaO01]

NY Daily News says Jewish victim just as culpable as the Jihadi terrorists who killed him.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/san-bernardino-bloodbath-born-bigots-article-1.2456491?utm_content=buffer0141d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw

This is disgusting and it's a window into the left's hate of Jews and Christians.

It's even more disgusting how you come on here on a daily basis blaming everything on either the president or "the left" based on some opinion piece.

You must not have a life.

 

[Czernobog]

NY Daily News says Jewish victim just as culpable as the Jihadi terrorists who killed him.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/san-bernardino-bloodbath-born-bigots-article-1.2456491?utm_content=buffer0141d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw

This is disgusting and it's a window into the left's hate of Jews and Christians.

This is a lie. Nowhere in the article does it say, suggest, imply, or even hint that Nicholas Thalasinos "deserved" what happened to him. What it does say, correctly, is that he was a hateful, spiteful, ugly human being, and that his death does not change those facts. We have this really stupid adage: "Never speak ill of the dead," Why? Was Hitler a monster? Does his being dead suddenly make that not true any more? When Charlie Manson dies, will his death suddenly make him not the murderous sociopath that everyone knows that he is? Saddam Hussein is dead because a self-aggrandizing, greed-driven narcissist perpetrated a lie on the American People. Does that make him, in death, any less of the monster that the world knew him to be?

Why does a person's death, even at the hands of a monster, suddenly absolve a person of the vile life that they, themselves, lived? Why does being dead magically make it "uncivilized" to honestly recount who a person was? No one is, or has, suggested that Nicholas Thalasinos deserved to get shot in the face. But, Nicholas Thalasinos was a vile human-being, and being shot in the face did not magically make that not true.

 

[Macduff]

This is a lie. Nowhere in the article does it say, suggest, imply, or even hint that Nicholas Thalasinos "deserved" what happened to him. What it does say, correctly, is that he was a hateful, spiteful, ugly human being, and that his death does not change those facts. We have this really stupid adage: "Never speak ill of the dead," Why? Was Hitler a monster? Does his being dead suddenly make that not true any more? When Charlie Manson dies, will his death suddenly make him not the murderous sociopath that everyone knows that he is? Saddam Hussein is dead because a self-aggrandizing, greed-driven narcissist perpetrated a lie on the American People. Does that make him, in death, any less of the monster that the world knew him to be?

Why does a person's death, even at the hands of a monster, suddenly absolve a person of the vile life that they, themselves, lived? Why does being dead magically make it "uncivilized" to honestly recount who a person was? No one is, or has, suggested that Nicholas Thalasinos deserved to get shot in the face. But, Nicholas Thalasinos was a vile human-being, and being shot in the face did not magically make that not true.

Didn't you notice how Stasi says 13 innocent people are dead, as opposed to 14?
Why is anyone making character judgments on any of the people who were shot? How would you know? Because a hateful person like Linda Stasi said so? This is the kind of bullshit that is being spread by that lunatic lawyer who represents the shooter's family.

 

[Goofball]

This is a lie. Nowhere in the article does it say, suggest, imply, or even hint that Nicholas Thalasinos "deserved" what happened to him. What it does say, correctly, is that he was a hateful, spiteful, ugly human being, and that his death does not change those facts. We have this really stupid adage: "Never speak ill of the dead," Why? Was Hitler a monster? Does his being dead suddenly make that not true any more? When Charlie Manson dies, will his death suddenly make him not the murderous sociopath that everyone knows that he is? Saddam Hussein is dead because a self-aggrandizing, greed-driven narcissist perpetrated a lie on the American People. Does that make him, in death, any less of the monster that the world knew him to be?

Why does a person's death, even at the hands of a monster, suddenly absolve a person of the vile life that they, themselves, lived? Why does being dead magically make it "uncivilized" to honestly recount who a person was? No one is, or has, suggested that Nicholas Thalasinos deserved to get shot in the face. But, Nicholas Thalasinos was a vile human-being, and being shot in the face did not magically make that not true.

The writer says there were only 13 innocent victims, so it seems you agree with her that he deserved to die.

Are there no boundaries to your defense of terrorists?

 

[GordonGecko]

meridian is one of those Rightys who believes "only conservatives are Jews and Christians"....then proves every day he is neither.

 

[Rorschach]

I know this does not surprise you, meridian.

 

[Spookycolt]

The only thing that beats the liberals love of terrorists is their hate for jews.

 

[GordonGecko]

The only thing that beats the liberals love of terrorists is their hate for jews.

So how do you explain all the "self-hating Jews" who are liberals???

 

[Spookycolt]

So how do you explain all the "self-hating Jews" who are liberals???

Religion and trickle down economics.