Islamic Terrorism

[FireChan]

Holy crap dude if you're not confident in your ability to argue, just don't argue.

 

I did not assume there had been contact. I purposely went as far as assuming there wasn't any. You took this as my admission that there absolutely wasn't any. Although I would agree that the odds are relatively low, that is not 0% and therefore not:

 

 

It really isn't that hard to understand. I made my arguments into your crap definition using only known factors. That doesn't mean that I "admitted" anything about unknown factors. They were simply not needed to refute you.

 

Now we're limiting the argument to ISIS influenced attacks "in the US". After three major attacks in France and Belgium and a lot of death in the US two weeks ago, we should only take the US attack into account when assessing the danger of ISIS?

 

Unless you live in France, yeah.

[B-Man]

I have yet met anyone who admits to feelings of terror - so how can there be terrorists?

 

 

Bob meet Eva.

 

This what our idiocy has come to.

 

[unbillievable]

It's time for common sense bike tire laws. There is no need to put air in there!

[Maury Ballstein]

Bob meet Eva.

 

This what our idiocy has come to.

 

 

 

What label will Firechan grace the cyclist with ?

[Magox]

 

 

What don't I know?

 

 

I guess I have to spell it out. That:

 

You don't know that it's not an act of for a lack of better terms "Islamic terrorism".

 

Or

 

That you don't subscribe to the theory that Lone wolf Jihadism is a form of Islamic terrorism.

[Nanker]

"It's time for common sense bike tire laws. There is no need to put much air in there!" said Tom Brady.

[4merper4mer]

Unless you live in France, yeah.

They're calling for attacks on "the west"....three attacks hit Western countries and then there is an attack in the US. You are saying the attacks on the other Western countries are meaningless data points.....when the world is basically connected for communications by a thing called the internet? Really?

 

I'm beginning to see the "reasoning" behind your love of Doug Marrone. I had never understood it before.

It's time for common sense bike tire laws. There is no need to put air in there!

 

 

Well Eva feels threatened by guns when bike tires explode so ban guns.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

I guess I have to spell it out. That:

 

You don't know that it's not an act of for a lack of better terms "Islamic terrorism".

 

Or

 

That you don't subscribe to the theory that Lone wolf Jihadism is a form of Islamic terrorism.

 

It's the rush to judgement and the need to attach the label that's alarming. We live in an age where we're instantly connected to information the moment it happens -- sometimes while it's happening -- but the information in the early stages of any crime (especially one as horrific as this) is always suspect. Yet most people arguing this is terrorism made their minds up the moment they read the shooter's name.

 

That's by design. That's conditioning. All I'm asking for (and FireChan too though I won't speak for him) is clarity.

 

The War on Terrorism has been the excuse and the hammer used by Federal Government to launch three wars, spend 3 trillion (and counting) of our national treasure, march 4,000+ american fighting men and women to their graves (and 100s of thousands of enemy and civilian deaths along the way), and turn our country into the most omnipresent police state the world has ever seen. All in just a short 16 year span and all done to fight a very specific (though invisible, and highly fungible) enemy. Terrorism has become both the stick and the carrot to get US citizens to unflinchingly give up their right to privacy, due process, and (I'd argue though I know I'm alone) their democratic republic.

 

So, while it's possible this guy was acting in concert with "terrorists" on behalf of Islamic Extremists, isn't it best to actually let the investigation unfold before we just accept that it was "terrorism"? After all, not thinking about the long term effects is precisely how we wound up getting the Patriot Act shoved down our throats in a time of national mourning and found ourselves embroiled in two simultaneous wars -- one fought under flimsy pretenses at best.

 

And, I'll say it again. It's amazing to me how vociferous many on here are about the left using this event to curtail 2nd amendment rights while simultaneously ignoring the continual assaults on our other constitutional rights which we sacrificed to fight a "war" on terror.

 

The political blinders need to come off and people need to start looking at the whole picture.

[/dev/null]

It's time for common sense bike tire laws. There is no need to put air in there!

I agree, those high capacity tires are dangerous. You don't need that much air for sport riding

[Joe Miner]

 

It's the rush to judgement and the need to attach the label that's alarming. We live in an age where we're instantly connected to information the moment it happens -- sometimes while it's happening -- but the information in the early stages of any crime (especially one as horrific as this) is always suspect. Yet most people arguing this is terrorism made their minds up the moment they read the shooter's name.

 

That's by design. That's conditioning. All I'm asking for (and FireChan too though I won't speak for him) is clarity.

 

The War on Terrorism has been the excuse and the hammer used by Federal Government to launch three wars, spend 3 trillion (and counting) of our national treasure, march 4,000+ american fighting men and women to their graves (and 100s of thousands of enemy and civilian deaths along the way), and turn our country into the most omnipresent police state the world has ever seen. All in just a short 16 year span and all done to fight a very specific (though invisible, and highly fungible) enemy. Terrorism has become both the stick and the carrot to get US citizens to unflinchingly give up their right to privacy, due process, and (I'd argue though I know I'm alone) their democratic republic.

 

So, while it's possible this guy was acting in concert with "terrorists" on behalf of Islamic Extremists, isn't it best to actually let the investigation unfold before we just accept that it was "terrorism"? After all, not thinking about the long term effects is precisely how we wound up getting the Patriot Act shoved down our throats in a time of national mourning and found ourselves embroiled in two simultaneous wars -- one fought under flimsy pretenses at best.

 

And, I'll say it again. It's amazing to me how vociferous many on here are about the left using this event to curtail 2nd amendment rights while simultaneously ignoring the continual assaults on our other constitutional rights which we sacrificed to fight a "war" on terror.

 

The political blinders need to come off and people need to start looking at the whole picture.

Would you trust the government's findings on this issue whether they find its terrorism or not?

 

It's one thing to wait for the report, but does it matter if you can't trust the report?

[keepthefaith]

 

It's the rush to judgement and the need to attach the label that's alarming. We live in an age where we're instantly connected to information the moment it happens -- sometimes while it's happening -- but the information in the early stages of any crime (especially one as horrific as this) is always suspect. Yet most people arguing this is terrorism made their minds up the moment they read the shooter's name.

 

That's by design. That's conditioning. All I'm asking for (and FireChan too though I won't speak for him) is clarity.

 

The War on Terrorism has been the excuse and the hammer used by Federal Government to launch three wars, spend 3 trillion (and counting) of our national treasure, march 4,000+ american fighting men and women to their graves (and 100s of thousands of enemy and civilian deaths along the way), and turn our country into the most omnipresent police state the world has ever seen. All in just a short 16 year span and all done to fight a very specific (though invisible, and highly fungible) enemy. Terrorism has become both the stick and the carrot to get US citizens to unflinchingly give up their right to privacy, due process, and (I'd argue though I know I'm alone) their democratic republic.

 

So, while it's possible this guy was acting in concert with "terrorists" on behalf of Islamic Extremists, isn't it best to actually let the investigation unfold before we just accept that it was "terrorism"? After all, not thinking about the long term effects is precisely how we wound up getting the Patriot Act shoved down our throats in a time of national mourning and found ourselves embroiled in two simultaneous wars -- one fought under flimsy pretenses at best.

 

And, I'll say it again. It's amazing to me how vociferous many on here are about the left using this event to curtail 2nd amendment rights while simultaneously ignoring the continual assaults on our other constitutional rights which we sacrificed to fight a "war" on terror.

 

The political blinders need to come off and people need to start looking at the whole picture.

How much more do you need than the shooter laughing as a teen after 9/11 and telling classmates then that this is what America deserves, plus his facebook posts plus his 911 calls the night of the shooting to be convinced that he is down with the radical islamist cause? That's more than enough for me. The investigation once done and if done correctly and if disclosed will certainly reveal interesting detail but there's no doubting the bottom line here. I still expect that we will get news of an accomplice being involved. He had too much ammo and artillery to simply carry it all in there himself. !@#$ this !@#$ and all others that think like him.

[What a Tuel]

I think to claim that the Orlando attack wasn't terrorism would be ignoring the inspirational and motivational power that ISIS is wielding across the world right now. They don't need direct contact. That's a dangerous tactical error by the US, and the rest of the world. We aren't adapting, we are too busy blaming American culture for anti gay sentiment despite the guy going to a gay bar, and scouting out Disneyland "gay" days. That horribly repressed gay culture, oh dear. Oh, and evil guns.

Edited June 23, 2016 by What a Tuel

[DC Tom]

How much more do you need than the shooter laughing as a teen after 9/11 and telling classmates then that this is what America deserves, plus his facebook posts plus his 911 calls the night of the shooting to be convinced that he is down with the radical islamist cause?

 

Evidence of his behavior being coordinated with an overall body possessing coherent goal-oriented operational philosophy.

[Deranged Rhino]

Evidence of his behavior being coordinated with an overall body possessing coherent goal-oriented operational philosophy.

+1

[/dev/null]

 

Evidence of his behavior being coordinated with an overall body possessing coherent goal-oriented operational philosophy.

You mean the NRA right?

[IDBillzFan]

You mean the NRA right?

 

Or the Tea Party.

[keepthefaith]

 

Evidence of his behavior being coordinated with an overall body possessing coherent goal-oriented operational philosophy.

His father may be part of that. You don't laugh about 9/11 at the age of 14 or 15 without learning that at home. I'm sure the FBI is taking a look at him.

[DC Tom]

You mean the NRA right?

 

 

 

Or the Tea Party.

 

Y'know, just the other night I started writing a paper on defining "terrorism" as opposed to simple "violent crime" - I was going through my library, looking for a coherent definition, and there simply isn't one that I could find. And it's such an overused and ill-defined term in current usage, even in official bodies that should know better (which is seriously problematic - it's hard to fight what you can't even define.) My intent is to form a basis for definition based on historical examples (recent ones...plus others such as the Peninsular Campaign, Civil War era incidents, the Franco-Prussian War, the Symbionese Liberation Army, etc.) Since the NRA and Tea Party have both been called "terroristic," I'll use them too.

 

And yes, this thread both inspired this and has been helpful in framing it. My focus, though, is primarily on major conflicts (just because of my reading bias), so if anyone has any other suggestions of incidents that have been framed as "terrorist" (whether you believe rightly or wrongly), go ahead and suggest away. (Yes, I'm already considering the OKC bombing.)

 

And if it's not published, I'll let you all read it (or those of you that can accept a cogent argument regardless of your agreement with it - you're out, lybob.)

His father may be part of that. You don't laugh about 9/11 at the age of 14 or 15 without learning that at home. I'm sure the FBI is taking a look at him.

 

Dad claimed to be the president of Afghanistan. Dad's stupidity is not "being coordinated with an overall body possessing a coherent goal-oriented operational philosophy." It's just stupidity.

[What a Tuel]

 

Evidence of his behavior being coordinated with an overall body possessing coherent goal-oriented operational philosophy.

 

Why does it have to be coordinated by? Why not just inspired by? I mean ISIS has a crazy amount of propaganda out there for a reason.

[Deranged Rhino]

His father may be part of that. You don't laugh about 9/11 at the age of 14 or 15 without learning that at home. I'm sure the FBI is taking a look at him.

 

The FBI has already looked. More than once.