What I find curious is all of these truthers have jumped immediately into the spotlight to claim its a hoax and all made up by the Illuminati/lizards/US administration.
All because there were heightened numbers of police in the crowd for “some” reason. Its like they’re trying to be the first to say “OH OH OH ITS THEM!”
I wonder how they’d react if they came face to face with the victims families.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
One thing seems a bit off to me: we haven’t heard anything from the terrorists themselves about why they did this. Terrorists pretty much always use their atrocities to get publicity for their ‘cause.’ ‘Martyrdom’ videos are a fairly standard thing. It’s hard to believe they were dumb enough to believe that they’d just get away with this… I wonder if we’ll see something released online at some point, or a video arriving at some network like with the V-Tech killer…[/quote]
Perhaps because they weren’t ‘terrorists’ but run of the mill mass shooters with some loose screws.
[/quote]
The label “Islamic terrorist” does seem to fit these guys pretty well. Sounds like the older one got pretty religious over the past few years, went to Russia, attracted the attention of Russian intelligence for Islamic extremism, and eventually did his thing in the US. Seems natural to me to fit this into some sort of jihad narrative.
Also, the mother sounds like a piece of work. Someone who knows her even suggested she might have had prior knowledge: The Tsarnaevs and me | Salon.com
[/quote]
The suspect is intubated and sedated. Why would there be answers at this point in time?
Deb,
Anyone who shoots up/blows up innocent people is a terrorist regardless of origin.
[/quote]
How is he any different to Adam Lanza and James Holmes, both of whom killed more people? I asked this very same question in the PWI equivalent thread within the context of Lindsey Graham and John McCain wanting to trial this guy as an “enemy combatant.” Unfortunately, my inquisition wasn’t answered, maybe someone here can provide some insight. [/quote]
Because whether we want to admit it or not, major parts of Islam are at war with the West and these guys killed people in the context of that war.
edit: these guys=Boston bombers
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
One thing seems a bit off to me: we haven’t heard anything from the terrorists themselves about why they did this. Terrorists pretty much always use their atrocities to get publicity for their ‘cause.’ ‘Martyrdom’ videos are a fairly standard thing. It’s hard to believe they were dumb enough to believe that they’d just get away with this… I wonder if we’ll see something released online at some point, or a video arriving at some network like with the V-Tech killer…[/quote]
Perhaps because they weren’t ‘terrorists’ but run of the mill mass shooters with some loose screws.
[/quote]
Been a while since I did “root cause” failure analysis in Engineering, but I think people are muddling “immediate cause” with “root cause.”
The “immediate cause” is probably one of many things:
It could be any of those things, or something completely different.
But the “root cause” is political Islam, which underlies all of those immediate causes.
Again, as noted upthread, political Islam is not just a religion in the Judeo/Christian sense. It is an entire system of of laws, social mores, government structure, judicairy, etc.
This will cause the average person (mine included) head to explode, but the real question is “is political Islam OK” to exist in the USA and the West, in general?
I am a firm believer in the First Amendment, but it was designed around Judeo/Christian idea of the seperation of Church and State with a secular state.
There have been times when certain political movements (e.g., Nazism) are not permitted to exist in the West. Is it time to state that political Islam — the Islam that seeks dominance over all others — is not OK here, and the practitioners of such not welcome?
I am not advocating this, and am DEEPLY troubled by the slippery slope it might create, but it is fair time to discuss this.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
edit: these guys=Boston bombers
[/quote]
On the radio, they are referring to them as the “COEXIST Bombers” because the car they hikacked had the COEXIST bumper sticker.
The irony of that is very high.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
One thing seems a bit off to me: we haven’t heard anything from the terrorists themselves about why they did this. Terrorists pretty much always use their atrocities to get publicity for their ‘cause.’ ‘Martyrdom’ videos are a fairly standard thing. It’s hard to believe they were dumb enough to believe that they’d just get away with this… I wonder if we’ll see something released online at some point, or a video arriving at some network like with the V-Tech killer…[/quote]
Perhaps because they weren’t ‘terrorists’ but run of the mill mass shooters with some loose screws.
[/quote]
The label “Islamic terrorist” does seem to fit these guys pretty well. Sounds like the older one got pretty religious over the past few years, went to Russia, attracted the attention of Russian intelligence for Islamic extremism, and eventually did his thing in the US. Seems natural to me to fit this into some sort of jihad narrative.
Also, the mother sounds like a piece of work. Someone who knows her even suggested she might have had prior knowledge: The Tsarnaevs and me | Salon.com
[/quote]
The suspect is intubated and sedated. Why would there be answers at this point in time?
Deb,
Anyone who shoots up/blows up innocent people is a terrorist regardless of origin.
[/quote]
How is he any different to Adam Lanza and James Holmes, both of whom killed more people? I asked this very same question in the PWI equivalent thread within the context of Lindsey Graham and John McCain wanting to trial this guy as an “enemy combatant.” Unfortunately, my inquisition wasn’t answered, maybe someone here can provide some insight. [/quote]
Adam Lanza and James Holmes were not part of a larger organized agenda, but two guys who were mentally unhinged from reality completely.
[/quote]
And you’re obviously ready to make the assessment that the brothers were part of an unnamed terrorist organization? A link to a Youtube video is hardly concrete evidence…
[/quote]
If their motivation is based from a radical ideology represented by a larger group or organization, then yes I would be concerned of others that follow that same ideology.
The same way Adam Lanza and James Holmes went off their rockers, we should also be concerned with those who show the same mental instabilities who also have guns in their possession.
Not all Muslims shoot people, and not all mentally unstable people shoot people, but we must be aware of those who show signs of extreme behavior, and that goes for everyone with a gun.
The suspect will NOT be labeled an enemy combatant, and will be tried in civilian court.
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
One thing seems a bit off to me: we haven’t heard anything from the terrorists themselves about why they did this. Terrorists pretty much always use their atrocities to get publicity for their ‘cause.’ ‘Martyrdom’ videos are a fairly standard thing. It’s hard to believe they were dumb enough to believe that they’d just get away with this… I wonder if we’ll see something released online at some point, or a video arriving at some network like with the V-Tech killer…[/quote]
Perhaps because they weren’t ‘terrorists’ but run of the mill mass shooters with some loose screws.
[/quote]
The label “Islamic terrorist” does seem to fit these guys pretty well. Sounds like the older one got pretty religious over the past few years, went to Russia, attracted the attention of Russian intelligence for Islamic extremism, and eventually did his thing in the US. Seems natural to me to fit this into some sort of jihad narrative.
Also, the mother sounds like a piece of work. Someone who knows her even suggested she might have had prior knowledge: The Tsarnaevs and me | Salon.com
[/quote]
The suspect is intubated and sedated. Why would there be answers at this point in time?
Deb,
Anyone who shoots up/blows up innocent people is a terrorist regardless of origin.
[/quote]
No. The word terrorist has a meaning. It requires political motivation and a larger organization. Using it incorrectly has negative societal consequences.
[/quote]
But based on what we know so far, it does seem reasonable to assume that both of those things were at work in this case. Also, “larger organisation” should be taken fairly loosely - recall that al Qaeda started putting out that “Inspire” magazine online some years ago. The idea was that anyone, anywhere could learn bomb-making, and carry out attacks independently, without having any actual contact with al Qaeda itself. Even if the trip to Russia turns out to have been insignificant (which is unlikely), this could still properly be called terrorism.
terrorist wrestling…
(accompanying music NSFW)
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.
[quote]OBoile wrote:
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.[/quote]
Because we aren’t a country full of pussies who wants a nanny government to wipe our ass.
I’m making a rash judgement and saying the older brother, Tamerlan, was the “brains” and gush behind the majority of the plot and the younger man still alive was the loyal brother playing the role of the following side-kick. I think the early and publicly available information supports this contention or something similar that places the older brother as the leader.
Tamerlan was the one who had some kind of indirect affiliation to a Jihadist cell in Chechnya (or some cleric in Australia – I’m not 100% updated on developments), he was arrested (but not charged) with assault on a former GF, he was the one described as being more idealogical (the surviving brother is being painted as curious and malleable), and now he’s apparently being connected to some unsolved triple-murder. He also apparently stated he didn’t feel conformed to American life and that he didn’t have any American friends.
These are some of the circumstantial facts that point to Tamerlan as the lead conspirator, OUTSIDE of the sibling dynamic, which would further implicate the older brother as someone having control over or propagandising the younger surviving brother.
By all accounts, the surviving brother and one being charged seems to have been a perfectly normal American citizen. He was friendly with his neighbours, classmates, teachers and other people, and was the recipient of awards for his wrestling. He also went to college full-time, unlike his brother who wan’t even close to getting a degree at a community college (he dropped out), which indicates he was invested in some kind of future.
I think the younger brother’s defence will build an argument that he wasn’t a radical and just controlled by his brother. The thing is, if they actually build a defence like this, it’d mean the younger brother would be willing to use his brother’s death in vein to save his own ass. If the prosecution can’t prove the younger brother actually physically assembled the bombs, assuming it was only a two-man job, they will have to make the case about association and that he helped plant the bombs.
The actually planting of the explosives by itself seems like the only thing that matters in putting him behind bars, but I think he avoids the death penalty. He’ll probably get sentenced to life but win an appeal 20-30 years down the road for parole.
Or maybe the younger brother will turn out to be the silent, psychopathic Keyser Soze mastermind.
[quote]OBoile wrote:
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.[/quote]
If by interesting read you mean: laughable hack job hit peice so laced with partisian bullshit it was hard to stomach the whole thing, I agree.
God that was a waste of my time to read.
I don’t pretend to understand European culture, I just wish they would offer us the same respect…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.[/quote]
If by interesting read you mean: laughable hack job hit peice so laced with partisian bullshit it was hard to stomach the whole thing, I agree.
God that was a waste of my time to read.
I don’t pretend to understand European culture, I just wish they would offer us the same respect…[/quote]
We’re not all like that. The Guardian is very left wing.
[quote]Yonatan wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.[/quote]
If by interesting read you mean: laughable hack job hit peice so laced with partisian bullshit it was hard to stomach the whole thing, I agree.
God that was a waste of my time to read.
I don’t pretend to understand European culture, I just wish they would offer us the same respect…[/quote]
We’re not all like that. The Guardian is very left wing.[/quote]
Yea but that is a common sentiment throughout Europe.
I have been to the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, and there is a definite snobbish attitude towards America.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]nrt wrote:
One thing seems a bit off to me: we haven’t heard anything from the terrorists themselves about why they did this. Terrorists pretty much always use their atrocities to get publicity for their ‘cause.’ ‘Martyrdom’ videos are a fairly standard thing. It’s hard to believe they were dumb enough to believe that they’d just get away with this… I wonder if we’ll see something released online at some point, or a video arriving at some network like with the V-Tech killer…[/quote]
Perhaps because they weren’t ‘terrorists’ but run of the mill mass shooters with some loose screws.
[/quote]
Been a while since I did “root cause” failure analysis in Engineering, but I think people are muddling “immediate cause” with “root cause.”
The “immediate cause” is probably one of many things:
It could be any of those things, or something completely different.
But the “root cause” is political Islam, which underlies all of those immediate causes.
Again, as noted upthread, political Islam is not just a religion in the Judeo/Christian sense. It is an entire system of of laws, social mores, government structure, judicairy, etc.
This will cause the average person (mine included) head to explode, but the real question is “is political Islam OK” to exist in the USA and the West, in general?
I am a firm believer in the First Amendment, but it was designed around Judeo/Christian idea of the seperation of Church and State with a secular state.
There have been times when certain political movements (e.g., Nazism) are not permitted to exist in the West. Is it time to state that political Islam — the Islam that seeks dominance over all others — is not OK here, and the practitioners of such not welcome?
I am not advocating this, and am DEEPLY troubled by the slippery slope it might create, but it is fair time to discuss this.
[/quote]
I think the immediate cause is a failure on the immigrant’s part to integrate themselves in our society without isolating themselves.
Which, ultimately, is probably because of their origin in an Islamic society BUT it cannot be the sole cause. There are also plenty of Muslims who immigrate here every year in search of a better life and they do find it. They also do not try to blow us up.
And I also think political Islam is a non-issue for Americanized Muslims - especially those born and raised here in the states.
I think the discussion should shift to our screening process for political asylum.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]Yonatan wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.[/quote]
If by interesting read you mean: laughable hack job hit peice so laced with partisian bullshit it was hard to stomach the whole thing, I agree.
God that was a waste of my time to read.
I don’t pretend to understand European culture, I just wish they would offer us the same respect…[/quote]
We’re not all like that. The Guardian is very left wing.[/quote]
Yea but that is a common sentiment throughout Europe.
I have been to the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, and there is a definite snobbish attitude towards America.
[/quote]
They sure do like our greenbacks. I was in Germany a couple of years ago, and a foreign lady owned a hotel in a small town. They loved my wife and I. They were really nice. Once we paid that changed.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I am a firm believer in the First Amendment, but it was designed around Judeo/Christian idea of the seperation of Church and State with a secular state.
[/quote]
What exactly is the J/C idea of the separation of church and state? The Catholic Church has a long history of trying to keep that from happening. I’m no Bible expert but it seems like the Jews were following God’s laws in most of those books.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I am a firm believer in the First Amendment, but it was designed around Judeo/Christian idea of the seperation of Church and State with a secular state.
[/quote]
What exactly is the J/C idea of the separation of church and state? The Catholic Church has a long history of trying to keep that from happening. I’m no Bible expert but it seems like the Jews were following God’s laws in most of those books. [/quote]
Judaism sets up the government seperate from the priesthood (in contrast to the Eqyptian and even Roman model where the leader purported to be diety).
This model was followed by Christianity in the Western world and then combined with Greek Democracy and Roman Republicanism.
The closest the West got to the Islamic “Religion and State Combined Model” was, indeed, the Papal States, but that was really a hang over from Roman Rule, and even then there was a clear distinction (Kings and a Pope).
The substantive links on the two approaches were previously linked on this very thread.
Try being Israeli.
That said, of course they are snotty. They are either the elite from which your ancestors fled or peasants whom said elite told stories about crass and crude Americans to keep them from leaving, too.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]Yonatan wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
An interesting read on how America reacts far more strongly to terrorism than other, more substantial threats to public safety.[/quote]
If by interesting read you mean: laughable hack job hit peice so laced with partisian bullshit it was hard to stomach the whole thing, I agree.
God that was a waste of my time to read.
I don’t pretend to understand European culture, I just wish they would offer us the same respect…[/quote]
We’re not all like that. The Guardian is very left wing.[/quote]
Yea but that is a common sentiment throughout Europe.
I have been to the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, and there is a definite snobbish attitude towards America.
[/quote]
They sure do like our greenbacks. I was in Germany a couple of years ago, and a foreign lady owned a hotel in a small town. They loved my wife and I. They were really nice. Once we paid that changed.[/quote]
I can see that, North America tends to be a very easy nation to stereotype, Europe has it’s strong diversities between even bordering countries, but you talk to a European about Alabama or Mississippi and we all know what’s coming. I know for sure that perceived ignorance about Europe is a major factor, in much the same way as taking a trip to Thailand and not being able to speak a smidgen of Thai. It almost feels like with America, being so far away from Europe for so long has afforded it a lack of cultural relations, you’re out there doing your own thing and we’re over here doing ours. Britain gets away with it because it’s close enough for (European) cultural diversity to hit it no matter what, but most of us here think that America knows America and it doesn’t spread itself much further out from there. Almost with an air of superiority, like it’s the “Big I Am”, plus, who really likes the American accents?