Multiple Fatalities- Ariana Grande Concert

rgambs

Another botched Yemen raid, similar fatality count to this attack, I'm hearing 5 children among the dead.

my2hands

rgambs said:

Another botched Yemen raid, similar fatality count to this attack, I'm hearing 5 children among the dead.

Those kids don't matter

riley540

my2hands said:

rgambs said:

Another botched Yemen raid, similar fatality count to this attack, I'm hearing 5 children among the dead.

Those kids don't matter

Just a post birth abortion. 

FoxyRedLa

I heard Ariana offered to pay for the funerals and just read she announced a benefit concert.

rgambs

riley540 said:

my2hands said:

rgambs said:

Another botched Yemen raid, similar fatality count to this attack, I'm hearing 5 children among the dead.

Those kids don't matter

Just a post birth abortion. 

Oh, absolutely, there's no difference at all!

Good grief that's dense.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

rgambs said:

riley540 said:

my2hands said:

rgambs said:

Another botched Yemen raid, similar fatality count to this attack, I'm hearing 5 children among the dead.

Those kids don't matter

Just a post birth abortion. 

Oh, absolutely, there's no difference at all!

Good grief that's dense.

Yah those guys are making a statement, but they could have made it better.

oftenreading

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Where do you think it fits in?

The story you linked hasn't several holes in it. It says he wasn't ranting and raving about a few things and then fixated on the Muslim women. The article alluded to the possibility of mental illness. The article also said the women left the scene before being questioned? They were likely very rattled by the disturbingly event, but who does that? Two guys get killed and another injured helping you and you just leave? Maybe I read that wrong.

This is an awful story.

* I reread it. Two people killed and another seriously injured. Gross.

dmaradona10

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Reactionary toward innocent people who have nothing to do with terrorism.  The man seemed to have serious mental issues and was ranting.  IMO the biggest issue with humanity and our behavior is not being able to construe individuals vs. the group.  Anyway, wish one of the bystanders was trained and had a concealed carry, would've been a different end to the story. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid

My iPad is making me look like a moron.

Is anyone else's autocorrecting to stupid things? I can't  keep up with the corrections.

OMGkatwoman

FoxyRedLa said:

I heard Ariana offered to pay for the funerals and just read she announced a benefit concert.

Yes, I saw a report that she will be returning to Manchester for the benefit concert

oftenreading

dmaradona10 said:

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Reactionary toward innocent people who have nothing to do with terrorism.  The man seemed to have serious mental issues and was ranting.  IMO the biggest issue with humanity and our behavior is not being able to construe individuals vs. the group.  Anyway, wish one of the bystanders was trained and had a concealed carry, would've been a different end to the story. 

Sure, because shooting people inside a commuter train always ends well. 

Go Beavers

oftenreading said:

dmaradona10 said:

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Reactionary toward innocent people who have nothing to do with terrorism.  The man seemed to have serious mental issues and was ranting.  IMO the biggest issue with humanity and our behavior is not being able to construe individuals vs. the group.  Anyway, wish one of the bystanders was trained and had a concealed carry, would've been a different end to the story. 

Sure, because shooting people inside a commuter train always ends well. 

In vigilante fantasies, every shot hits its target. 

oftenreading

Go Beavers said:

oftenreading said:

dmaradona10 said:

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Reactionary toward innocent people who have nothing to do with terrorism.  The man seemed to have serious mental issues and was ranting.  IMO the biggest issue with humanity and our behavior is not being able to construe individuals vs. the group.  Anyway, wish one of the bystanders was trained and had a concealed carry, would've been a different end to the story. 

Sure, because shooting people inside a commuter train always ends well. 

In vigilante fantasies, every shot hits its target. 

In slow mo. 

oftenreading

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Where do you think it fits in?

The story you linked hasn't several holes in it. It says he wasn't ranting and raving about a few things and then fixated on the Muslim women. The article alluded to the possibility of mental illness. The article also said the women left the scene before being questioned? They were likely very rattled by the disturbingly event, but who does that? Two guys get killed and another injured helping you and you just leave? Maybe I read that wrong.

This is an awful story.

* I reread it. Two people killed and another seriously injured. Gross.

Where do I think it fit in?

Let's take a look at what was reported. A man in Portland was spouting an anti-Muslim diatribe. He targeted two young women who appeared to be Muslim with his rant. Bystanders heroically intervened; two were killed and another injured. Of course the assumption is that it's just some crazy (white) guy, a one-off kind of thing.

Let's flip it around. Say it was a brown Muslim fellow on a train. Say this fellow was spouting an anti-Christian diatribe, maybe with a few "allahu akhbars" thrown in, because it is a common figure of speech, not strictly owned by terrorists. Say he targeted two young North American women, dressed as is common in the US, i.e. not modestly. Say it quickly escalated and he attacked and killed the bystanders. What would be the assumption, both here on AMT and in the wider world? I am confident that the assumption by many would be that it was a terrorist attack perpetrated by "Radical Islam".

A few months back a young Muslim man, a university student with no history of violence or ties to ISIS, killed some people.  The details are lost to me; perhaps it was the young man who ran a car into a crowd, perhaps it was the person on the train in Germany. Whatever the details, I know that, based on the age, the fact that he was a student and the lack of history, I suggested it might have been a first episode of mental illness. I was roundly criticized for being some sort of terrorist denier; because, of course, killings by Muslims have to be assumed to be terrorist acts first, with other explanations a distant second.

Now the media is reporting that this individual in Portland was a white supremacist who had a history of posting disgusting things about Muslims. Maybe not just some random, crazy white guy.

This is what we are talking about regarding about the inherent racism in this discussion on AMT. It isn't about whether "Radical Christians" killed as many people this year or this decade as Muslims. It's about the assumptions made.

And Thirty, you're criticizing the young women for leaving the scene? Really? Someone shouted insults at them and then killed two people and seriously injured another, and you criticize them for getting the hell out of there?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Where do you think it fits in?

The story you linked hasn't several holes in it. It says he wasn't ranting and raving about a few things and then fixated on the Muslim women. The article alluded to the possibility of mental illness. The article also said the women left the scene before being questioned? They were likely very rattled by the disturbingly event, but who does that? Two guys get killed and another injured helping you and you just leave? Maybe I read that wrong.

This is an awful story.

* I reread it. Two people killed and another seriously injured. Gross.

Where do I think it fit in?

Let's take a look at what was reported. A man in Portland was spouting an anti-Muslim diatribe. He targeted two young women who appeared to be Muslim with his rant. Bystanders heroically intervened; two were killed and another injured. Of course the assumption is that it's just some crazy (white) guy, a one-off kind of thing.

Let's flip it around. Say it was a brown Muslim fellow on a train. Say this fellow was spouting an anti-Christian diatribe, maybe with a few "allahu akhbars" thrown in, because it is a common figure of speech, not strictly owned by terrorists. Say he targeted two young North American women, dressed as is common in the US, i.e. not modestly. Say it quickly escalated and he attacked and killed the bystanders. What would be the assumption, both here on AMT and in the wider world? I am confident that the assumption by many would be that it was a terrorist attack perpetrated by "Radical Islam".

A few months back a young Muslim man, a university student with no history of violence or ties to ISIS, killed some people.  The details are lost to me; perhaps it was the young man who ran a car into a crowd, perhaps it was the person on the train in Germany. Whatever the details, I know that, based on the age, the fact that he was a student and the lack of history, I suggested it might have been a first episode of mental illness. I was roundly criticized for being some sort of terrorist denier; because, of course, killings by Muslims have to be assumed to be terrorist acts first, with other explanations a distant second.

Now the media is reporting that this individual in Portland was a white supremacist who had a history of posting disgusting things about Muslims. Maybe not just some random, crazy white guy.

This is what we are talking about regarding about the inherent racism in this discussion on AMT. It isn't about whether "Radical Christians" killed as many people this year or this decade as Muslims. It's about the assumptions made.

And Thirty, you're criticizing the young women for leaving the scene? Really? Someone shouted insults at them and then killed two people and seriously injured another, and you criticize them for getting the hell out of there?

Well...

I guess if my son ever came to your need when you needed him (as I've fought him to do)... and he died in the ensuing struggle... yah... I'd want you to stick around and assist authorities.

You left out the victims in your rant here. 

They're also saying this idiot had history of mental illness. In other cases where people with mental illnesses have killed people... you have typically been sympathetic with them. Yet here... you seem to admonish this tool as I might. That's kind of curious.

But yeah... a traumatic episode for sure... but two guys died coming to your aid. Stick around and assist with the process.

I guess that's asking too much from some people. 

Halifax2TheMax

White privelege?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Halifax2TheMax said:

White privelege?

Huh?

Halifax2TheMax

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

White privelege?

Huh?

You know, white guy commits a crime and he gets a pass.

oftenreading

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Where does this fit in?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/world/hurling+racial+slurs+muslim+women+portland+train+stabs+kills+tried/13401419/story.html

A man in Portland was "hurling racial slurs" at two women who appeared to be Muslim on a train, then killed two bystanders who stood up for the women and injured another.

Where do you think it fits in?

The story you linked hasn't several holes in it. It says he wasn't ranting and raving about a few things and then fixated on the Muslim women. The article alluded to the possibility of mental illness. The article also said the women left the scene before being questioned? They were likely very rattled by the disturbingly event, but who does that? Two guys get killed and another injured helping you and you just leave? Maybe I read that wrong.

This is an awful story.

* I reread it. Two people killed and another seriously injured. Gross.

Where do I think it fit in?

Let's take a look at what was reported. A man in Portland was spouting an anti-Muslim diatribe. He targeted two young women who appeared to be Muslim with his rant. Bystanders heroically intervened; two were killed and another injured. Of course the assumption is that it's just some crazy (white) guy, a one-off kind of thing.

Let's flip it around. Say it was a brown Muslim fellow on a train. Say this fellow was spouting an anti-Christian diatribe, maybe with a few "allahu akhbars" thrown in, because it is a common figure of speech, not strictly owned by terrorists. Say he targeted two young North American women, dressed as is common in the US, i.e. not modestly. Say it quickly escalated and he attacked and killed the bystanders. What would be the assumption, both here on AMT and in the wider world? I am confident that the assumption by many would be that it was a terrorist attack perpetrated by "Radical Islam".

A few months back a young Muslim man, a university student with no history of violence or ties to ISIS, killed some people.  The details are lost to me; perhaps it was the young man who ran a car into a crowd, perhaps it was the person on the train in Germany. Whatever the details, I know that, based on the age, the fact that he was a student and the lack of history, I suggested it might have been a first episode of mental illness. I was roundly criticized for being some sort of terrorist denier; because, of course, killings by Muslims have to be assumed to be terrorist acts first, with other explanations a distant second.

Now the media is reporting that this individual in Portland was a white supremacist who had a history of posting disgusting things about Muslims. Maybe not just some random, crazy white guy.

This is what we are talking about regarding about the inherent racism in this discussion on AMT. It isn't about whether "Radical Christians" killed as many people this year or this decade as Muslims. It's about the assumptions made.

And Thirty, you're criticizing the young women for leaving the scene? Really? Someone shouted insults at them and then killed two people and seriously injured another, and you criticize them for getting the hell out of there?

Well...

I guess if my son ever came to your need when you needed him (as I've fought him to do)... and he died in the ensuing struggle... yah... I'd want you to stick around and assist authorities.

You left out the victims in your rant here. 

They're also saying this idiot had history of mental illness. In other cases where people with mental illnesses have killed people... you have typically been sympathetic with them. Yet here... you seem to admonish this tool as I might. That's kind of curious.

But yeah... a traumatic episode for sure... but two guys died coming to your aid. Stick around and assist with the process.

I guess that's asking too much from some people. 

We have no idea if this man has mental illness or not. I'm not focusing on that. What I'm focusing on is what people on the Train choose to assume about perpetrators based on their race and religion.

Edit - to put it bluntly, I'm not admonishing anyone but some folks on AMT.

Edit #2 - when someone disagrees with you, it's a rant. I guess. And I didn't leave out the victims.