Thank the lord this guy was borderline incompetent. He stuck one bomb in a dumpster which contained the explosion. His other bombs did not completely detonate and police were able to identify him thru cell phones used as detonators. And the one bomb that would have been successful was foiled by a race being delayed. Another set of bombs was foiled be a couple of homeless people.
I'm still waiting to find out if he accidentally shot himself.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
when's the last time a white guy set off a pipe bomb? atlanta olympics 96?
So was this bomber born here or did he come here in the last two yrs and got thru the vetting process ..
Your point? I've said on numerous posts on this board that proper assimilation is needed, otherwise you get what they have in Europe with the second and third generations still keeping their loyalty with Syria, Afghanistan or wherever when something doesn't go their way. Those who argue that this is the second generation so it isn't an immigration issue don't understand how the second generation got here and how important it is to make sure the infrastructure is there for them to succeed in the USA or Europe (as it should be for someone coming from any country except that those coming from Mexico aren't setting off pipe bombs).
So was this bomber born here or did he come here in the last two yrs and got thru the vetting process ..
Your point? I've said on numerous posts on this board that proper assimilation is needed, otherwise you get what they have in Europe with the second and third generations still keeping their loyalty with Syria, Afghanistan or wherever when something doesn't go their way. Those who argue that this is the second generation so it isn't an immigration issue don't understand how the second generation got here and how important it is to make sure the infrastructure is there for them to succeed in the USA or Europe (as it should be for someone coming from any country except that those coming from Mexico aren't setting off pipe bombs).
I agree with this, and it's refreshing to hear that cohesive immigrant reform including social and economic government-subsidized resettling efforts are the right approach, rather than closing the borders to immigrants from X society.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
Seriously?
We went through this the last time Islamic extremists blew a bunch of people up. I asked you to cite some examples and you offered a few 'one offs' over the span of a few decades (abortion clinic type stuff).
It's not even close, man. Not even in the same galaxy.
So was this bomber born here or did he come here in the last two yrs and got thru the vetting process ..
Your point? I've said on numerous posts on this board that proper assimilation is needed, otherwise you get what they have in Europe with the second and third generations still keeping their loyalty with Syria, Afghanistan or wherever when something doesn't go their way. Those who argue that this is the second generation so it isn't an immigration issue don't understand how the second generation got here and how important it is to make sure the infrastructure is there for them to succeed in the USA or Europe (as it should be for someone coming from any country except that those coming from Mexico aren't setting off pipe bombs).
I asked was he born here or got here in the last two yrs I guess you know , my point being that because of this incident we can't just start expelling Muslims from this country or prevent all Muslims from coming here !!
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
And that's the narrative. White terrorism is put into a different sub category of crime, rather than terrorism. Terrorism with a capital T is much more scary, and of course, they have dark skin. White supremacist groups are discounted as freaky-fringe, and Christians who kill doctors are labelled 'crazy'.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
We will care about solving the issue of white supremacist when they start setting off random bombs, strapping bombs to themselves and when they are willing to die in order to kill and maim the maximum amount of people.
Plus we are allowed to shame them so they are contained as freaky-fringe.
Am I the only one who is pumped to see that they got this guy alive? hopefully through "questioning" he can police some useful information. so are nyc, elizabeth and seaside the work of one guy?
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
If they were tied to a specific unified organization and were blowing people up on a regular basis with the intent of terrorizing in the name of that said organization, then I would say hunt the fuckers down and moniter every step of those linked to them. The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
And that's the narrative. White terrorism is put into a different sub category of crime, rather than terrorism. Terrorism with a capital T is much more scary, and of course, they have dark skin. White supremacist groups are discounted as freaky-fringe, and Christians who kill doctors are labelled 'crazy'.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
Nothing at all is digestible.
This has nothing to do with minimizing some crimes because they are committed by white people and sensationalizing crimes committed by dark skinned people. This has everything to do with calling it for what it is: brainwashed Islamic idiots seem to think it's cool blowing innocent people up while they are doing their daily things as they lash out against western society. Terrorism seems about right, but if you wish to call it something else... do so.
What do you want to call this long sequence of similar events committed by the same demographic of people? What would you be comfortable with?
"My brain's a good brain!"
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
And that's the narrative. White terrorism is put into a different sub category of crime, rather than terrorism. Terrorism with a capital T is much more scary, and of course, they have dark skin. White supremacist groups are discounted as freaky-fringe, and Christians who kill doctors are labelled 'crazy'.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
I'm confused by what you mean about the narrative. Total terrorists = Islamic extremists + non-Islamic extremist terrorist. Percentage of total terrorist attacks = (Terrorist attacks by Group X)/(Total terrorists). In what way would aggregating all terrorist attacks and breaking them down by group support any narrative? Is your argument that the total number doesn't include White supremacists or Christian terrorism? If so, find out what those fatalities are labelled as (mental illness-related, etc), and add them to the total, then check the percentages. This isn't overly complicated to prove or disprove. Either way, it doesn't change the fact that, were 100% of terrorist attacks done by Islamic extremists, unless 100% of Muslims were radicalized into Islamic extremists, it would still be inappropriate to collectively punish all Muslims for those actions.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
And that's the narrative. White terrorism is put into a different sub category of crime, rather than terrorism. Terrorism with a capital T is much more scary, and of course, they have dark skin. White supremacist groups are discounted as freaky-fringe, and Christians who kill doctors are labelled 'crazy'.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
Nothing at all is digestible.
This has nothing to do with minimizing some crimes because they are committed by white people and sensationalizing crimes committed by dark skinned people. This has everything to do with calling it for what it is: brainwashed Islamic idiots seem to think it's cool blowing innocent people up while they are doing their daily things as they lash out against western society. Terrorism seems about right, but if you wish to call it something else... do so.
What do you want to call this long sequence of similar events committed by the same demographic of people? What would you be comfortable with?
I'm not weighing one against the other, I'm saying don't let religion and race drive the dialogue, which is what's happening. When a white supremacist runs a black guy over, it gets thought of as an individual criminal act. When a brown muslim kills one, or multiple people, it's terrorism by way of the individual being influenced by the group. If anything, I'm just asking for consistency of our response and digestion of events.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
If they were tied to a specific unified organization and were blowing people up on a regular basis with the intent of terrorizing in the name of that said organization, then I would say hunt the fuckers down and moniter every step of those linked to them. The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
Do you think it's funny to mock the way people praise their deity? This is not an expression used exclusively by Islamic extremists - it's used by billions of good people who wouldn't harm an ant, on a regular basis. I think it's just plain pathetic.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
If they were tied to a specific unified organization and were blowing people up on a regular basis with the intent of terrorizing in the name of that said organization, then I would say hunt the fuckers down and moniter every step of those linked to them. The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
Do you think it's funny to mock the way people praise their deity? This is not an expression used exclusively by Islamic extremists - it's used by billions of good people who wouldn't harm an ant, on a regular basis. I think it's just plain pathetic.
Which highlights my point. Pjpower's comment is a result of the manipulation that can happen when religion is blamed, and the audience is ignorant about the religion. Christianity is rarely blamed for terrorism,because Americans are familiar with it.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
And that's the narrative. White terrorism is put into a different sub category of crime, rather than terrorism. Terrorism with a capital T is much more scary, and of course, they have dark skin. White supremacist groups are discounted as freaky-fringe, and Christians who kill doctors are labelled 'crazy'.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
You didn't say "white", you said "Christian". There is a big difference. Every race kills each other in domestic disputes, due to tempers, during crime, and mental illness, but at the moment only one group is killing in the name of their religion.
You can try to equate someone killing one abortion doctor to Muslim extremism, but that would be silly. Even though you say numbers don't matter, they actually do. So if 1 out of 200 million Christians in the USA kills an abortion doctor, then we do say that person is crazy. But if 200,000 out of 200 million Muslims is extremist, then that is more than "crazy".
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
If they were tied to a specific unified organization and were blowing people up on a regular basis with the intent of terrorizing in the name of that said organization, then I would say hunt the fuckers down and moniter every step of those linked to them. The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
Do you think it's funny to mock the way people praise their deity? This is not an expression used exclusively by Islamic extremists - it's used by billions of good people who wouldn't harm an ant, on a regular basis. I think it's just plain pathetic.
And I'm sure that those billions of good people would rather these asshats not use the words that they use to praise their diety while committing these deplorable crimes. I have no reason to directly quote them and hope they enjoy their tax payer funded prison snack bar.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
I agree with this. Most modern terrorist acts in this part of the world are at the hands of radicalized Islamic extremists. That does not mean that I think that most Muslims are terrorists by any stretch, nor that all Muslims should suffer restrictions because of radicalized Islamic extremists. It means I can extrapolate highly likely scenarios when there's enough data to suggest a recurrence. That being said, I don't think mcgruff10 was being serious (but he/she can correct me if I'm mistaken).
No, I think McGruff10 was joking about some earlier comments in the thread.
I just wonder about people who don't want to accept the problem. People that think Christian extremists are a problem compared to Islamic extremists. One side holds inappropriate signs up a funerals and the other chops peoples' heads off and burns people alive. There is no comparison, but this politically correct brainwashing forces them to rationalize one set of deplorable behavior with other behavior that is not even remotely as bad.
So when Christian extremists kill in the name of God, what do you call it?
What are some recent examples of Christian extremists killing people? You are going to need a lot more than four or 5 in the last 10 years to remotely come closer to making this a real argument.
And that's the narrative. White terrorism is put into a different sub category of crime, rather than terrorism. Terrorism with a capital T is much more scary, and of course, they have dark skin. White supremacist groups are discounted as freaky-fringe, and Christians who kill doctors are labelled 'crazy'.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
You didn't say "white", you said "Christian". There is a big difference. Every race kills each other in domestic disputes, due to tempers, during crime, and mental illness, but at the moment only one group is killing in the name of their religion.
Christians also kill in the name of their religion. My point is, when they do, other reasons are sought outside of Christianity. This is why you think "only one group is killing in the name of their religion".
Just as long as you guys agree to do that at the next shooting and don't immediately call for ar15 bans.
That has nothing to do with waiting g for an investigation.
I waited. 20 year old Somali that asked the victims if they were Muslim prior to stabbing at least one. Shot dead by someone who was concealed carry. Hero. I'll be armed everywhere I go thankyouverymuch.
Ok, I thought this was a thread about the explosions in new York. If you need to bring up the stabbings in minnesota, that's fine, just has no relevance here. And it wasn't just a plain citizen with a concealed weapons permit. It was an off duty police officer. Makes a difference. Because my point about all of you CWP people is that when shit hits the fan, most of you would run and hide, not point and shoot.
.........? you haven't any idea how to handle this situation emotionally do you ? if you think this is the first thread to branch off in RELATED other directions then maybe you've lost count (understandable, there are soooo many)
muslim radicals' ? I'd bet on it....probably just the that "small percentage" of immigrants. I have to call it like I see it and this is just too common to be called a "coincidence" everybody thinks it but are afraid to say it.
Godfather.
or....not an immigrant at all. Someone who was born here.
sorry about that....."a small percentage of muslim immigrants who give birth to little terrorist" they blow up so fast ! hahahhahahahahah a little humor for Monday morning.
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
If they were tied to a specific unified organization and were blowing people up on a regular basis with the intent of terrorizing in the name of that said organization, then I would say hunt the fuckers down and moniter every step of those linked to them. The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
Do you think it's funny to mock the way people praise their deity? This is not an expression used exclusively by Islamic extremists - it's used by billions of good people who wouldn't harm an ant, on a regular basis. I think it's just plain pathetic.
Which highlights my point. Pjpower's comment is a result of the manipulation that can happen when religion is blamed, and the audience is ignorant about the religion. Christianity is rarely blamed for terrorism,because Americans are familiar with it.
I am quite familiar with and have done a fair amount of studying of both religions thank you very much. At times throughout history, Christian extremists were most definitely to blame for terrorists acts...right now, that's not the case. It is Islamic fundamentalists, self proclaimed Muslims with a skewed idea of right and wrong that are drilling holes in children's heads and burning "non-believers" alive while yelling "God is greater". What am I missing?
are we still thinking this attack was by an ex boyfriend?
I don't understand how people can be so brainwashed or whatever to not 99% know right away this was a terrorist act by someone of middle eastern descent. That doesn't mean that you think all middle eastern people are terrorist if you think that. It just means you are being realistic and not looking on with politically correct blinders.
What's more brainwashed, assuming you know the motive and that there was terrorist influence involved, or holding judgment until there's more information? You're following a narrative that you're being fed. It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness. When a white guy sets off a pipe bomb, what's your reaction?
If they were tied to a specific unified organization and were blowing people up on a regular basis with the intent of terrorizing in the name of that said organization, then I would say hunt the fuckers down and moniter every step of those linked to them. The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
Do you think it's funny to mock the way people praise their deity? This is not an expression used exclusively by Islamic extremists - it's used by billions of good people who wouldn't harm an ant, on a regular basis. I think it's just plain pathetic.
Which highlights my point. Pjpower's comment is a result of the manipulation that can happen when religion is blamed, and the audience is ignorant about the religion. Christianity is rarely blamed for terrorism,because Americans are familiar with it.
I am quite familiar with and have done a fair amount of studying of both religions thank you very much. At times throughout history, Christian extremists were most definitely to blame for terrorists acts...right now, that's not the case. It is Islamic fundamentalists with a skewed idea of right and wrong that are drilling holes in children's heads and burning "non-believers" alive.
So when someone kills in the name of Christianity, what do you call it?
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Comments
I'm still waiting to find out if he accidentally shot himself.
businessinsider.com/how-new-jersey-terrorist-got-caught-2016-9
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
We went through this the last time Islamic extremists blew a bunch of people up. I asked you to cite some examples and you offered a few 'one offs' over the span of a few decades (abortion clinic type stuff).
It's not even close, man. Not even in the same galaxy.
Whenever I make this point, people want to argue numbers. It's understandable, but to me that seems like a way to maintain the narrative and make things digestible.
Plus we are allowed to shame them so they are contained as freaky-fringe.
The reason people draw preemptive conclusions when these events happen is because they are a trademark of these specific unified organizations that are almost always tied to a specific religion. The lowest common denominator during the current state of affairs with ISIS cheerleaders hyping up the baseline. That's not to say that sometimes other "lone wolves" do not do this shit. It just means that Radical Islamists are "most likely" the culprits based on their methodology. Makes them pretty easy to single out. Once "white guys" (some Muslims are white guys too, just saying) start randomly screaming aloha snack-bar while killing on a regular basis, we can then start broadening our preemptive conclusions.
This has nothing to do with minimizing some crimes because they are committed by white people and sensationalizing crimes committed by dark skinned people. This has everything to do with calling it for what it is: brainwashed Islamic idiots seem to think it's cool blowing innocent people up while they are doing their daily things as they lash out against western society. Terrorism seems about right, but if you wish to call it something else... do so.
What do you want to call this long sequence of similar events committed by the same demographic of people? What would you be comfortable with?
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
You can try to equate someone killing one abortion doctor to Muslim extremism, but that would be silly. Even though you say numbers don't matter, they actually do. So if 1 out of 200 million Christians in the USA kills an abortion doctor, then we do say that person is crazy. But if 200,000 out of 200 million Muslims is extremist, then that is more than "crazy".
Godfather.
I'd quit importing it (the middle east) as well.