Reply With Quote
Are you saying we should ignore reality? Forget that we live in a free society and such a thing is nearly impossible . . . isn't it better to face reality and try to prevent something like this happening again?
Automatic screening for being a Muslim has been advocated on this board.
Are you saying we should ignore reality? Forget that we live in a free society and such a thing is nearly impossible . . . isn't it better to face reality and try to prevent something like this happening again?
Your wanting to label it a terrorist attack.
I agree what you posted was stupid. You should think things through next time.Stupid.
OK, you're a ing idiot. I'm done with you.
Promises, promises.
damnit .....keep a light hand on that spool.they'll break off you keep monkeying around like this.
so granting the jihadists a morale victory is ok? Considering we don't know all of the facts surrounding the case? isn't that irresponsible?
Thanks for posting about me again.
Shouldn't we have tried to stop the dude in Cleveland, too? What difference does it make what his motivations were or where they came from?
I also don't get the urgency to call this a terrorist attack followed by the concern that it having been a successful terrorist attack will boost the morale of jihadists everywhere. They'll take from it what they want. But we certainly would add fuel to their fire by calling what might well have been the equivalent of the Columbine shooters a successful terrorist attack.
Ultimately, I don't get what happens next if this was a terrorist attack as opposed to a mass murder. Again, are we going to rid the military of Muslims? Invade Killeen? Intern all Muslims? Nuke Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran? Promote greater su ion of all Muslims in general?
Someone please explain it to me: what are the consequences for the nation going forward if this is characterized as a terror attack as opposed to a mass murder?
no worries mate...what ya got in the old bait can today.Did you bring sun screen?
Thanks for posting about me again.
some people will sleep better at night I suppose
Two pints of ice cream, if memory serves.
I was right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh
His last meal was two pints of mint chocolate chip ice cream.
It's not about labeling this particular event. It's about the RELUCTANCE to investigate muslims engaged in su ious activity because those investigating may appear to be racially insensitive.
I don't think there's a concern about investigating. I think there's a concern -- an understandable one, at that -- to rush to conclusions based on assumptions rather than investigation.
I have yet to see anything to suggest that investigation into the Fort Hood shooter was somehow belayed by the fact that he was a Muslim. Instead, from what I understand, there was some investigation into curious writings, despite the fact that he is a Muslim, and that investigation concluded that the writing were consistent with his job and the performance of that job, and not with an intent to commit terrorism.
And ultimately, are you suggesting that Muslims should be under heightened scrutiny compared to others in our society simply because of their religious beliefs? If so, I must have missed the reports that McVeigh, the Unibomber, and the Columbine shooters (terrorists, all) were Muslims.
I'd agree that we should be investigating, to the extent possible and cons utional, su ious people who engage in su ious behavior. I don't think that investigatory concern should somehow be more readily pointed at Muslims than anyone else. That's not political correctness; it's fact-based practicality, I think.
Yes well that's all very good........ but No I refuse to look at that, it can't be,NO there is some other explanation...there must be ....No you're wrong ......doooooonnnnn't make me look. wether or not he is or a terrorist is not the point to even contemplate such things are VERBOTEN, to whisper them is a hate crime to, to ponder them is to risk your mortal soul from being cast into the eternal damnation of POLITICALLY CORRECT lakes of fire.
So this is the conclusion to which you have jumped. We understand.
Seriously, that isnt a good enough reason for me. If Fuqwad Ali Muhommed in bum- Tazburkistan gets his jollies from violence in other countries, then he has no shortage of "porn" to mentally masturbate to.
Every time a Muslim does something illegal, it isnt terrorism, even if its religiously motivated. Are we going to start guessing the Moral Victory Meter of fundamentalist Christians whenever some nutjob whacks an abortion clinic?
Do you see the absurdity in this? Exactly whose thumb is being licked and placed into the wind to gauge such an important aspect of all violent crime in our country?
Absurd, one way or the other, its all absurd. Guy flipped out, political, religious or otherwise. He killed people. He did it alone and without any logistical support. I dont care if you eventually find him singing OBL praises, it doesnt make what he did terrorism. Or should I say, it shouldnt.
Loathe be the day when terrorism starts getting easier and easier to recognize and categorize. By then, we'll all be terrorists as the meaning expands to include those who dissent vehemently with established government.
I'm pretty sure the "politically correct" angle was the Army not having the balls to terminate ANY of their medical doctors, esp a Major, for incompetence or mental illness, rather than because he Muslim.
The xenophobe racists here never fail to jerk their knees in unison.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 11-13-2009 at 06:11 AM.
Then you aren't looking very hard.
How boutons_deux prepares for a post on the political forum.
Concern about an investigation violating his Cons utional rights (both to free speech and free exercise) is the same as a concern for targeting him for being Muslim?
Are Muslims not en led to Cons utional protections?
where's the part where he bites the head off the chihuahua.
So what then makes Mc Viegh a terrorist.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
