TexasCHLforum.com

dale blanker wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

EHooper02 wrote:I really only have one question:

If what he said wasn't wrong, why has it been deleted and you have been left to defend his statement?

Understand your board is probably under a lot of fire right now, and I'm certainly not trying to add to that. Just something to think about, I feel.

Only Charles can answer your question, but I can tell you this. In the current climate in America, you don't have to say anything wrong to be assaulted on the internet. All you have to do is say something that people disagree with. What Charles said was that the Pastor opposed carry in churches, which is a fact, and some of the dead could be alive if carry had been allowed in the church, which is also a fact.

What is not a fact is that Charles blamed the victims for their deaths. That is a blatant misrepresentation of what he said. It's not surprising. It happens on both sides of the political aisle by people who don't care about truth but only care about promoting their own agendas.

What is really unfortunate about the quote is the timing of it - not what the grieving pastor's family and other victims' families needed to hear now. I don't think the comment was malicious but maybe thoughtless and tacky. Charles must have thought this and hence the removal.

Thoughtless and tacky? When did the truth become thoughtless and tacky? Another church in SC was attacked by a shotgun wielding cretin. The difference is, nobody was killed, because the church members, one of whom had a CHL and was armed, took him down when he entered the church.

There is absolutely no doubt that not all nine of those people would have died if even ONE of them had been armed. The cretin reloaded FIVE times. After the first shot, I'm plugging that guy right between the eyes.

Beiruty wrote:I am start hating O'rielly on Fox. He is an idiot, he is publically calling for Federal Registration AND limiting what and how many firearms one can own. Each day he reveals his true anti-gun self a bit and bit.

Welcome to the club. I can't stand O'Rierlly, and I find most TV "talk" shows a complete waste of time. How you can ever hope to accomplish anything with two people talking at the same time is beyond me.

CoffeeNut wrote:Well the forum has made it to the New York Times

Hello new members and howdy to Shannon who must refresh this website about a thousand times a day.

Not surprisingly Shannon Watts lied to the NY Times. (And yes, Shannon, we know you're watching, and we know you lie constantly.)

Ms. Watts said in a telephone interview that Mr. Cotton had “a habit of posting these incendiary comments and then removing them.”

I've been on this forum for a while now, and I can attest that Charles has no such habit. On a very few occasions he has removed a post that he thought was offensive to members (not to the lying Shannons of the world!), but this is the first time I am aware that he has ever removed a post because the internet ninjas went into overdrive and spread lies about what he said. And Shannon is at the dead center of that campaign of lies.

And shame on the New York Times for not fact checking a known liar. But then it's not like fact checking is the New York Times' strong suit.

EHooper02 wrote:I really only have one question:

If what he said wasn't wrong, why has it been deleted and you have been left to defend his statement?

Understand your board is probably under a lot of fire right now, and I'm certainly not trying to add to that. Just something to think about, I feel.

Only Charles can answer your question, but I can tell you this. In the current climate in America, you don't have to say anything wrong to be assaulted on the internet. All you have to do is say something that people disagree with. What Charles said was that the Pastor opposed carry in churches, which is a fact, and some of the dead could be alive if carry had been allowed in the church, which is also a fact.

What is not a fact is that Charles blamed the victims for their deaths. That is a blatant misrepresentation of what he said. It's not surprising. It happens on both sides of the political aisle by people who don't care about truth but only care about promoting their own agendas.

I am stunned by the graciousness of the families of the victims in Charleston. They are better Christians than I am. No way could I forgive this cretin just two days after he murdered a family member. Maybe some day, but not now. It would be a long time before I could forgive him.

Middle Age Russ wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote:This hurts.



Dylann Roof Reportedly Almost Didn't Go Through With Church Shooting Because 'Everyone Was So Nice To Him'


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/1 ... mg00000067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The comments are ...... Scary

Indeed, the comments are scary. The feeling there seems to be so based on gut reaction that only the trolls are able to call up actual facts to support a reasoned debate. History is not just being re-written, but re-invented. Fox News has become Satan himself, and anyone who has ever held a view expressed there is a minor demon to be eradicated. "Foaming at the mouth" is an appropriate description of many of those making comments. I do believe the Progressive Ministry of Dis-Information has been far more effective than I could ever be comfortable with.

I find those comments quite normal and routine for left wing sites. You can put your head in the sand and ignore it. Or you can see it for what it is, and reject it.

More information coming out. The cretin wanted to start a race war.

ShepherdTX wrote:

jmra wrote:It's pretty funny that a new member shows up defending Mike right after Mike gets booted. Lots of trolls today or maybe just one.

This might explain all that

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Welcome Shannon Watts and her merry moms to the Forum.

They won't last long on this forum. Decorum and civility are not their long suits. Neither is truth.

tomtexan wrote:You can thank Shannon Watts for this.

She is relentless.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/nra-boa ... -churches/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I should point out that the headline is an outright lie. What Charles said was that the Pastor, by his political position, denied his parishioners the right to defend themselves. He never blamed the Pastor for their deaths. Those are obviously the responsibility of the drugged-up 21-year-old.

jmra wrote:

carlson1 wrote:How about just wickedness.

1 Peter 5:8
Be of sober spirit, be on the alert Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

This young man has been devoured.

For those of you so inclined, do a study on the Greek work pharmacopeia in the NT. It is closely associated with evil spirits.

tomtexan wrote:You can thank Shannon Watts for this.

She is relentless.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/nra-boa ... -churches/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Look at the bright side. Charles is reaching an audience that would never visit this forum or consider his positions in other venues. While many will be offended, because they don't think, some will consider his words and possibly even change their minds.

The only thing we have to do is ensure that they don't misrepresent what he says. Meanwhile, logic is winning the argument over emotion, and the left is getting more and more frustrated.