Islamic Terrorism

[Deranged Rhino]

And... it worked. No one is talking about the whole aiding and abetting ISIS in Syria today. Nothing to see there.

[B-Man]

His silence speaks volumes.

 

 

 

 

Obama stays silent on Chelsea explosion but talks election

By Daniel Halper

[Dante]

And... it worked. No one is talking about the whole aiding and abetting ISIS in Syria today. Nothing to see there.

Didn't Bill C bomb a entire country once to get the media off his back about Monica?: Look at this shiny new crisis over here!" Bunch of dumb sheep . Anyway, everything we do seems to benefit ISIS. But move along with the whacked out stuff.

[4merper4mer]

 

Even CNN was questioning them on Saturday night when they initially said they weren't sure that it was terrorism related. Isn't Deblasio Italian for Elgato?

 

 

Not really. It's Italian for Wilhelm. Which is German for trepidatio. Which is latin for elgato. So sort of.

Didn't Bill C bomb a entire country once to get the media off his back about Monica?: Look at this shiny new crisis over here!" Bunch of dumb sheep . Anyway, everything we do seems to benefit ISIS. But move along with the whacked out stuff.

 

 

Wait a minute. He called Monica a C? I don't remember that. What country did he say that in?

Edited September 19, 2016 by 4merper4mer

[B-Man]

The Associated PressVerified account ‏@AP 13m13 minutes ago

BREAKING: Obama says investigators focusing on person of interest in NY, NJ bombings but see no connection to Minnesota stabbings.

 

 

 

maybe their religion..?

 

 

Edited September 19, 2016 by B-Man

[Ozymandius]

shitlibs...

 

[B-Man]

Old: Name That Party in which when a politician is caught cheating, the media buries the fact that he is a Democrat.

New: Name That Religion.

In an article named, ironically, "Ahmad Khan Rahami: What we know about the bombing suspect," reporter Catherine E. Shoichet of CNN does not mention what religion Rahami is.

Not until Paragraph 16 does the word "Muslim" even appear, and even then is it in as sympathetic way as possible:

The Rahami family alleged discrimination and harassment in a lawsuit filed against the city and its police department in 2011, arguing that officials conspired against them by subjecting them to citations for allegedly violating a city ordinance on hours of operation. The suit alleged that police officers and city representatives had said "the restaurant presented a danger to the community." It also accused a neighboring business owner of saying, "Muslims make too much trouble in this country" and "Muslims don't belong here." The defendants, including police officers and city officials, denied the allegations.

 

 

The first question about any bombing in the United States is whether the terrorist is a Muslim.

The default answer is yes.

Far from helping end discrimination against Muslims, this feeds it by showing a pro-Muslim bias in the news media.

[Maury Ballstein]

To early for that.

I'm looking for information.

Night crawler over here. Call me the ISIS whisperer.

 

Info ain't coming faster than that.

shitlibs...

 

Holy ****. Amazing stuff.

[B-Man]

The Mulish Stupidity of Clinton-Obama Counterterrorism

by Andrew C McCarthy

 

Hillary Clinton is essentially accusing Donald Trump of treason on the theory that his rhetoric aids and abets ISIS in recruiting Muslims because it affirms their narrative a war between Islam and non-Muslims. This is as stupid as would be a claim that Mrs. Clinton is guilty of treason – as opposed to mere idiocy – because, by refusing to acknowledge the Islamic doctrinal roots of jihadist terror, she and her policymaking cohort blind us to the motivation, objectives, and strategies of our terrorist enemies.

 

As I have previously recounted, when I prosecuted the Blind Sheikh’s terrorist cell in the mid-Nineties, the defense lawyers for the jihadists – who sounded just like today’s anti-anti-terrorist progressives – claimed that their clients had been lured into terrorist activity by U.S. government policy and by the enticements of a government informant who spouted Islam-against-the-world rhetoric. In response to this fatuous contention, we put a very simple question to the jury: “What would it take to turn you into a mass-murderer?” What policy could be so bad, what rhetorical us-against-them flourishes so inspiring, that a person would join the terrorist cause and commit acts of barbarism?

 

When a person with a modicum of common sense considers such a question, he or she knows that there could be no such policy. There is no controversial policy or figure that could cause a person to become a terrorist – not Gitmo, not harsh interrogation tactics, not Bosnia, not Abu Ghaib, not torched Korans, not anti-Muslim videos, not Donald Trump … or George Bush … or Dick Cheney … or Bill Clinton … or Pope John Paul II (the latter two of whom jihadists plotted to kill in the mid-Nineties).

 

Of course, all of these policies and people are exploited pretextually by jihadists in order to justify themselves and to play the West like a fiddle. But it’s all a side show. A person joins the jihad only if the person adopts jihadist ideology. A person is moved to commit mass-murder – an act that requires depraved indifference to the lives and the humanity of his targets – because there is no ideology as powerful as religious ideology, as the notion that God Himself has commanded the aggression because the infidels offend Him by their infidelity.

 

As I argue in today’s column, the roots of this fervor are found in Islamic scripture, which Islamic supremacists construe literally. Jihadists and their recruits care no more about Donald Trump’s bluntness (including his occasional over-the-top offensiveness, like threatening to kill the families of terrorists) than they do about Hillary Clinton’s inane, self-congratulatory nuance. In fact, regardless of which of them wins the presidency, jihadists will want to kill him or her, as they have wanted to kill all American presidents regardless of party. No matter who wins the presidency, jihadists will target America for mass-murder attacks, and will pretextually blame their actions on either Trump policies or Clinton policies, just as they blamed Bill Clinton’s, George Bush’s, and – yes – Barack Obama’s policies.

 

Perhaps the only thing more sadly hilarious than watching the political class tie itself in knots over whether a bomb should be called a “bomb” and whether a terrorist attack should be called a “terrorist attack” is Clinton’s claim that ISIS is rooting for Trump to be elected president. Newsflash: Jihadists don’t give a flying fatwa who wins American elections, or even whether there are American elections.

 

Islamic supremacists and their jihadist front lines are in the business of killing Americans and supplanting our constitutional republic with sharia. To claim that they care about our elections is to exhibit ignorance about who they are, who they think we are, and what they seek to achieve.

 

This is obviously news to Mrs. Clinton, but there is no point in speculating about what causes jihadist terror. As I explain in today’s column, the cause is Islamic supremacist ideology rooted in a fundamentalist, literalist construction of Islamic scripture. We know this not because I’ve figured it out and am letting you all in on the big secret. We know it because our enemies have explained themselves in the bluntest of terms.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

[GG]

And... it worked. No one is talking about the whole aiding and abetting ISIS in Syria today. Nothing to see there.

Hi Greggy, is Syria's bombing of a U.N. convoy another diversion tactic?

[Deranged Rhino]

Hi Greggy, is Syria's bombing of a U.N. convoy another diversion tactic?

Laugh all you want, but we committed a war crime -- and a big one -- and its backpage news at best after the events of the last 48 hours. The cease fire is over, because of this flagrant and intentional bombing of Syrian troops, and now the us has its allies taking responsibility for the attack (like Australia -- who have no A10s or F34s) to soften the blow.

 

We are working with, sharing intelligence with, supporting, funding, and training ISIS and Al Qaueda fronts in Syria because regime change is simply about wishing for better lives for people not about working with monsters.

 

Right? That's how it works in your world view isn't it? Just hope for a better life and magically it appears.

[GG]

Laugh all you want, but we committed a war crime -- and a big one -- and its backpage news at best after the events of the last 48 hours. The cease fire is over, because of this flagrant and intentional bombing of Syrian troops, and now the us has its allies taking responsibility for the attack (like Australia -- who have no A10s or F34s) to soften the blow.

We are working with, sharing intelligence with, supporting, funding, and training ISIS and Al Qaueda fronts in Syria because regime change is simply about wishing for better lives for people not about working with monsters.

Right? That's how it works in your world view isn't it? Just hope for a better life and magically it appears.

How does it feel defending people who murder hundreds of thousands? I honestly want to know.

[Deranged Rhino]

How does it feel defending people who murder hundreds of thousands? I honestly want to know.

 

I'm not defending Assad. The fact that those are the only two options from your perspective shows just how warped and outdated your world view actually is.

 

It's also enlightening that you're not at all fighting the notion that we are supporting and funding ISIS in Syria while simultaneously using their existence to justify shredding the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh amendments. This isn't about Asad. It's about our country and what's really going on in the world on a geopolitical level.

 

When you finally do wake up, it's gonna hurt.

[....lybob]

 

I'm not defending Assad. The fact that those are the only two options from your perspective shows just how warped and outdated your world view actually is.

 

It's also enlightening that you're not at all fighting the notion that we are supporting and funding ISIS in Syria while simultaneously using their existence to justify shredding the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh amendments. This isn't about Asad. It's about our country and what's really going on in the world on a geopolitical level.

 

When you finally do wake up, it's gonna hurt.

Something people should consider when thinking about Saddam, Assad, and Gaddafi, yes there were/are groups against them because they are brutal dictators but they are also opposed by groups who's main complaint is that they are not Islamic enough- they provide education and other rights to women, and show various degrees of tolerance to other religions - in this mix of groups it always seems the fundamentalists becomes the dominate faction, I think that's because they are more willing to both kill and die - the moderates are looking for a better life but it's hard to have a better life if you get yourself killed.

[GG]

 

I'm not defending Assad. The fact that those are the only two options from your perspective shows just how warped and outdated your world view actually is.

 

It's also enlightening that you're not at all fighting the notion that we are supporting and funding ISIS in Syria while simultaneously using their existence to justify shredding the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh amendments. This isn't about Asad. It's about our country and what's really going on in the world on a geopolitical level.

 

When you finally do wake up, it's gonna hurt.

 

You're not defending him, but you were certainly more outraged about the allied forces hitting Syrian troops outside the cease fire zone than you were about Syrian troops destroying a humanitarian convoy delivering needed supplies to a besieged city.

 

But yes, I'm the one who needs to wake up.

[....lybob]

 

You're not defending him, but you were certainly more outraged about the allied forces hitting Syrian troops outside the cease fire zone than you were about Syrian troops destroying a humanitarian convoy delivering needed supplies to a besieged city.

 

But yes, I'm the one who needs to wake up.

Would you be more outraged by your kid robbing and beating an old lady or some other kids robbing, beating and raping an old lady - one is worse but the other is connected to you.

[4merper4mer]

Would you be more outraged by your kid robbing and beating an old lady or some other kids robbing, beating and raping an old lady - one is worse but the other is connected to you.

Did the old lady have Werther's Originals in her purse and will I get them?

 

Wait. How does this analogy make sense again?

[GG]

Would you be more outraged by your kid robbing and beating an old lady or some other kids robbing, beating and raping an old lady - one is worse but the other is connected to you.

 

Weird analogy, especially considering Greggy thinks that the bombings in NYC are taking attention away from the bombing of the Syrian army. Apparently that's more important to him.

[Maury Ballstein]

How many other "rahmini's" are all over Camden and Newark ?

[Ozymandius]

How many other "rahmini's" are all over Camden and Newark ?

 

There were hundreds celebrating in the streets and on rooftops on 9/11.

 

 

 

I'm not defending Assad. The fact that those are the only two options from your perspective shows just how warped and outdated your world view actually is.

 

It's also enlightening that you're not at all fighting the notion that we are supporting and funding ISIS in Syria while simultaneously using their existence to justify shredding the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh amendments. This isn't about Asad. It's about our country and what's really going on in the world on a geopolitical level.

 

When you finally do wake up, it's gonna hurt.

 

You're not nearly as woke as you think you are. But to your great credit, you have a chance to be woke one day because you think outside the box. You will be a future ally of mine.

 

Question: why do you think GG holds the positions he does?