BubberMiley Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Of the 67 incidents listed. 50 of them are directly related to Muslim terrorists. Agreed. Religion is a very bad thing. Drugs are better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Religion is a very bad thing. Yes, it can be a very bad thing. Especially a certain group. You'll notice them from the list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Here's a list of 2010 terrorist attack world wide. List Of the 67 incidents listed. 50 of them are directly related to Muslim terrorists. Now, take a closer look Shady. The majority are in muslim nations. And a great deal are in areas where the war on terror is being fought. Not to mention areas where it has been known to be troublesome like the Kashmir region between India and Pakistan. The only two I see in NA in your list is the Royal Bank firebombing a few months ago. And the other failed attempt at a car bomb in NYC. I would also like to point out that this list does not know or say Muslim extremists. It does say Al-queda, a group known for ... wait for it .. terrorism. But out of 50 Shady, only two were in NA, and the majority are in regions where the war on terror is being fought. But even if I go with your notion about they are mostly muslims attacking ... they are attacking other muslims more than western people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 No its not "bull" Trevor. Heres the classic definition... Thats a common tactic used by modern nation states, as well as paramilitary organizations. One of the most common forms of modern terrorism is the use of "shock and awe" shows of military force that have the objective of frightening the civilian population into ending its support for a regime you are trying to "change". There has almost never been a side in ANY war that didnt use Terrorism. Like I said... that leaves you having to redefine the word to make your statement true. Like punked, you talk about terrorism from the safety of your comfy chair. You know nothing about what it's like to have a bomb go off next to you. You know SFA about terrorism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Like punked, you talk about terrorism from the safety of your comfy chair. You know nothing about what it's like to have a bomb go off next to you. You know SFA about terrorism. No Cory its YOU thats knows sweet fuck all. Thats why youre left having to completely ignore the real definition of the word. Like I said you believe in the contemporary GWOT definition which is essentially any paramilitary group that opposes the west. The problem being that isnt what the term really means. Your definition is an arbitrarily defined vehicle of convenience. The word itself is ENTIRELY SUBJECTIVE and has no real meaning. Its defined on an ad hoc basis for utility and convenience... for example since 911 countries all over the world have jumped on the bandwagon and declared their own domestic insurgent groups, and groups seaking independence as "terrorists". The reason for that is obvious... in todays world framing a dispute in those terms justifies literally anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 (edited) winnie the pooh: No Cory its YOU thats knows sweet fuck all. Thats why youre left having to completely ignore the real definition of the word. Like I said you believe in the contemporary GWOT definition which is essentially any paramilitary group that opposes the west. The problem being that isnt what the term really means. Your definition is an arbitrarily defined vehicle of convenience.The word itself is ENTIRELY SUBJECTIVE and has no real meaning. Its defined on an ad hoc basis for utility and convenience... for example since 911 countries all over the world have jumped on the bandwagon and declared their own domestic insurgent groups, and groups seaking independence as "terrorists". The reason for that is obvious... in todays world framing a dispute in those terms justifies literally anything. Would you like some milk and cookies while you preach to us about terrorism? Edited August 5, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Would you like some milk and cookies while you preach to us about terrorism? Its impossible to even be sure what you mean by "milk and cookies" because you invent your own definitions for words at your own convenience driven by political expediency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Would you like some milk and cookies while you preach to us about terrorism? I'll take the milk and cookies while listening to you preach to us about terrorism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 I'll take the milk and cookies while listening to you preach to us about terrorism. I love the rhetoric that Cory and Trevor use regarding our comfy computer chairs... and the fact theyre sitting in their comfy computer chairs while they deliver it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Like punked, you talk about terrorism from the safety of your comfy chair. You know nothing about what it's like to have a bomb go off next to you. You know SFA about terrorism. Well, here's what I know about terrorism -- most people have an illogical approach to risk assessment, so the fear of a terrorist attack can stampede them into doing stupid things like: supporting inflammatory rightwing xenophobes for leadership, and making the whole world a more dangerous place; freely giving away their civil rights to state authorities; dismissing war crimes of their own governments; and let's not forget, doing the wrong thing to protect themselves from terrorist attack i.e. driving to a faraway destination instead of flying -- two separate studies after 9/11 showed that highway accident deaths in the months after 9/11 made a dramatic spike, indicating that there were likely twice as many people died on U.S. highways as were killed in the 9/11 hijackings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Here's a list of 2010 terrorist attack world wide. List Of the 67 incidents listed. 50 of them are directly related to Muslim terrorists. Do you happen to have a list of instigators of foreign wars for the purpose of occupation and/or control of natural resources? How do the Muslim/Christian numbers stack up for that list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Have another twinky boys. Gosthacked...see my PM to follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Final note, could one of the agitators tell us what building an Islamic cultural center in N.Y. by a Sufi cleric has to do with terrorism? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Have another twinky boys. Gosthacked...see my PM to follow. I expect it to be about as wordy as this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 I expect it to be about as wordy as this post. I really don't include you with these other wastes of skin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 I really don't include you with these other wastes of skin. That's good to know. I guess that is a compliment. But calling them a waste of skin won't help your arguments either. It does not lead to people being more receptive to your ideas, many here are guilty of that. Even me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Do you happen to have a list of instigators of foreign wars for the purpose of occupation and/or control of natural resources? How do the Muslim/Christian numbers stack up for that list? He doesnt have to worry about that. He can simply redefine the word to include only the groups he wants. The word is a brilliant rhetorical tool. For example during the cold war the west reffered to the Russians as the "red terror", and they classified Binladen and the Mujahadeen as "freedom fighters". But now that the cold war is over, and the same bunch of people that wanted to kick the Soviets out of the middle east now wants to kick the US out of the middle east the word is arbitrarily redefined and the "freedom fighters" are now "terrorists". The word is subjective and arbitrary and its definition evolves based on utility and convenience, and political expediency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 He doesnt have to worry about that. He can simply redefine the word to include only the groups he wants. The word is a brilliant rhetorical tool. For example during the cold war the west reffered to the Russians as the "red terror", and they classified Binladen and the Mujahadeen as "freedom fighters". But now that the cold war is over, and the same bunch of people that wanted to kick the Soviets out of the middle east now wants to kick the US out of the middle east the word is arbitrarily redefined and the "freedom fighters" are now "terrorists". There is this unsettling coincidence that the War On Terror came along just in time to save the Military Industrial Complex, which was threatened with base closures and cutbacks on new arms procurements after the end of the Cold War (that was actually a large part of Bill Clinton's success in balancing the budget). The Cold War forced the U.S. into building a large permanent armed forces for the first time in its history, and if the build-up was justified, it still created an economy dependent on new weapons and continual wars...at least small wars, to use and test the weapons. The corporations who build heatseeking missiles can't afford to have peace break out everywhere. The word is subjective and arbitrary and its definition evolves based on utility and convenience, and political expediency. Back when the "war on terror" started, that was one of the few objections said out loud to Bush & Co.: who are we at war with, and how do we know when this war will be over? Dick Cheney's answer was that it was essentially endless war without end....and that from a chickenhawk, who got deferments when he was young, and it was his turn to do the fighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Here's a list of 2010 terrorist attack world wide. List Of the 67 incidents listed. 50 of them are directly related to Muslim terrorists. Your list sucks. Unless you don't think a man flying a plane into the IRS and killing 10 people isn't terrorism. It clearly is incomplete and shitty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 But even if I go with your notion about they are mostly muslims attacking ... they are attacking other muslims more than western people. And that makes it better? The point remains, the group responsible for most of these attacks (whether their targets are Westerners or not) is clearly identifiable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Your list sucks. Unless you don't think a man flying a plane into the IRS and killing 10 people isn't terrorism. It clearly is incomplete and shitty. Ten? Where are you getting that number from? He killed one other person besides himself. An angry, suicidal software engineer and part-time musician, apparently distraught over a decades-long tax dispute, crashed his plane into IRS offices, killing one other person.... link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 And that makes it better? The point remains, the group responsible for most of these attacks (whether their targets are Westerners or not) is clearly identifiable. Why separate those acts from other acts of violence that use fear and intimidation as tactics? If you include ALL of those violent acts youll find that the perpetrators are a much more diverse group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Ten? Where are you getting that number from? He killed one other person besides himself. An angry, suicidal software engineer and part-time musician, apparently distraught over a decades-long tax dispute, crashed his plane into IRS offices, killing one other person.... link I am sorry I meant injured. 2007 October 26: A pair of improvised explosive devices were thrown at the Mexican Consulate in New York City. The fake grenades were filled with black powder and detonated by fuses causing very minor damage. Police were investigating the connection between this and a similar attack against the British Consulate in New York in 2005.[38] 2008 February: In the first reported incident of animal-rights extremists physically assaulting the family members of animal researchers, six masked activists attempted to force their way into the home of a University of California, Santa Cruz, researcher and injured the researcher's husband.[39][40] 2008 March 3: Four multimillion-dollar show homes place in Woodinville, Washington are torched. The Earth Liberation Front is suspected in the fires.[41] 2008 May 4 Multiple nail laden pipe bombs exploded at a Federal Courthouse in San Diego at 1:40 AM causing "considerable damage" to the entrance and lobby and sending shrapnel two blocks away. The F.B.I. is investigating links between this attack and an April 25 explosion at the FedEx building also in San Diego.[42][43] 2008 July 27 Jim D. Adkisson opened fire in the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee killing two and injuring seven before being tackled to the ground by congregation members. A note found in his SUV indicated this was intended as a suicide attack and said the church was apparently targeted because of its support of liberal social policies.[44] 2008 August 2, August 3 University of California-Santa Cruz molecular biologist David Feldheim's home was firebombed. A car belonging to another researcher from that University was destroyed by a firebomb in what is presumed to be related. FBI is investigating incidents as domestic terrorism related to animal rights groups.[45][46] 2009 April 8: According to a report in the Wall Street Journal intruders have left malware in power grids, water and sewage systems that could be activated at a later date. While the attacks which have occurred over a period of time seem to have originated in China and Russia it is unknown if they are state sponsored.[47] 2009 May 31: Assassination of George Tiller. Dr. George Tiller, a doctor who provided late term abortions was shot to death in a Wichita, Kansas church. Tiller was shot previously in 1993 and his abortion clinic had been bombed in 1985. Alleged assassin Scott Roeder, who believes in justifiable homicide of abortion providers, has been arrested for the killing.[48][49] 2009 May 25: Crude bomb explodes in a Starbucks in Manhattan's Upper East Side. On July 14 Kyle Shaw age 17 is arrested and pleaded not guilty. He is being held pending $300,000 bond or $100,000 cash bail. Police allege his motive was to emulate "Project Mayhem" a series of assaults on corporate America portrayed in the movie Fight Club.[50] 2009 June 1: Arkansas recruiting office shooting One military recruiter was killed and another critically injured by gunshot at a Little Rock, Arkansas Army/Navy Career Center. The suspect Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad said he was upset over U.S. killing of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.[51] 2009 June 10: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum shooting. 88 year old James Wenneker von Brunn walked into the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C. and shot a guard who later died. von Brunn was critically wounded when security guards immediately returned fire .[52] On January 6, 2010 von Brunn died of natural causes at a hospital near where he was imprisoned.[53] von Brunn was a self-described white supremacist and neo-Nazi.[54] 2009 July 4: A denial of service attack of unusual length and sophistication affected United States and South Korean government websites as well as websites for the Washington Post and NASDAQ. Websites for several U.S. government agencies were shut down for up to 3 days. A sophisticated organization or nation was suspected according to the National Intelligence Service.[55][56] 2010 February 18: Joseph Stack flew a small plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas, believed to be in retaliation to the U.S. Government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TrueMetis Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Probably not. Because Christians and Jews weren't responsible for the attacks on 911. Neither are the people building this Mosque, and in the end they all believe in the same psychopathic god. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Especially a certain group. You'll notice them from the list. Actually your certain group is actually two groups: Sunni and Shi'ite. Do you make a distinction, or does that require too much insight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.