House of Reps. member Giffords shot in Arizona today

Actually, while most all of the earlier reports have been that she was shot from behind, so you're right that if David didn't know that he probably hadn't read much, they now think it may have been from the front (which I find a bit more chilling -- execution-style I guess). They don't know for sure:

Quote:

TUCSON, Ariz. -- Doctors now think that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords might have been shot in the front of the head, not the back.

After she was wounded last weekend, doctors said the bullet traveled the length of the left side of the congresswoman's brain, entering the back of the skull and exiting the front.

At a briefing Tuesday, Dr. Peter Rhee said it now looks like she was probably shot in the front, with the bullet going out the back, although they can't say for certain.

He said that's based on consultations with two specialists who came to Tucson.

http://www.kpho.com/news/26452731/detail.html

btw, I was speaking as an American.

For years you and other Republicans have been arguing that we are in a war of ideology, against radical Islaam. Yet you now seem to be suggesting that these terrorists weren't really religious and were nothing more than criminals. This is counter to the argument you've made for years and supports the arguments that I and others have made for years: namely, that we should treat Terrorism as a criminal problem and not a War problem.

You don't remember any of that? At all?

What exactly is the hypocrisy you refer to? Or did that just sound nice on the end of the post.
Cycloptichorn

This whole subject arose because I made the comparison of Sirhan Sirhan to the modern terror movements, but was told by certain posters here that I did not know what I was talking about, because Sirhan Sirhan was not of the Islamic faith.

The point of the hypocrisy here is that liberals seem to want to disavow any connection with Islam to the modern terror movement, and this was one of your arguments, cyclops, for wanting a mosque built very near Ground Zero. So I am merely pointing out that the poster or posters cannot have it both ways with Sirhan Sirhan.

I have always felt that Islamic terrorists use religion as a crutch to justify their real goal, and I have always believed their real motivation and goal was a hatred of Jews and the elimination of the state of Israel.

I have also believed that the mainstream Islamic religion has not done enough to distance themselves and condemn terrorist actions. I think it is also a fact that there are hate filled people that are sprinkled in among or camouflage themselves within the Islamic religion as well, as some of the figures that have been found to raise funds and communicate with terror cells have been connected with mosques, even here in this country.

Ill tell you what invite Sarah to read my topics. If she leaves a post............ Then I would consider it honor..... To attemp to understand her point of view

I have posted it more than once, but here goes again. My point is that the common thread between Sirhan Sirhan and the modern Islamic terrorist is not the Islamic religion, but instead the hatred of Jews and the goal of eliminating the State of Israel. That is the root that drove Sirhan Sirhan, and it is also the root that has grown into the fabric of the present day terror movements, and even into some exreme factions of the Islamic faith. If you cannot see the link, common thread, or root of it, cyclops, I think you are very dense.

you're kidding again, right...?

and it is also the root that has grown into the fabric of the present day terror movements, and even into some exreme factions of the Islamic faith. If you cannot see the link, common thread, or root of it, cyclops, I think you are very dense.

okie wrote:

I have posted it more than once, but here goes again. My point is that the common thread between Sirhan Sirhan and the modern Islamic terrorist is not the Islamic religion, but instead the hatred of Jews and the goal of eliminating the State of Israel. That is the root that drove Sirhan Sirhan, and it is also the root that has grown into the fabric of the present day terror movements, and even into some exreme factions of the Islamic faith. If you cannot see the link, common thread, or root of it, cyclops, I think you are very dense.

But that wasn't your initial point. You initially said that he was an 'Islaamist who was before his time.' And that Hannity had pointed that out on the air the other day. Both of you were perfectly wrong.

I can certainly see that you are now changing your argument rather than admitting that you blithely parroted a lie that you heard in the right-wing media. Can't you just say 'I was wrong when I said Sirhan was an Islaamist?'
Cycloptichorn

Whether Hannity or I got it perfectly right with the exact terminology is not so important as the fact that we pointed out a very accurate and pertinent point, that Sirhan Sirhan was ahead of his time in terms of carrying out a crime, based upon the common thread of hating Jews, Israel, etc. If I offended you, my apologies, cyclops!

entering the back of the skull and exiting the front.