Ye Greate US Mass Shooting thread

[mauricio]

Well... considering I've yet to quote PR, I think you might just be jumping the gun there.

Also, you know what would be an example of "racism" (which I have yet to accuse any one of... more correctly would be xenophobia and bigotry)? A line that said, regardless of the person's actions, the fact that they had a foreign name OBVIOUSLY confirms that they are terrorists and how could anyone think otherwise? That would be a "racist" (xenophobic) comment. One that was posted.

Let me try that with a more realistic scenario...

"The guy's name was Bobby Smith, he was from Kentucky, he met his wife in Alabama and they moved to South Dakota. If he isn't a terrorist I don't know what is."

How far do you think that would fly? Not very. Yet statistically far more likely, as the VAST majority of terrorism in the United States is committed by white hate groups. So why is that wrong to say, but when you put a Muslim name there then, "Well OBVIOUSLY that makes sense, regardless of statistics or reality!"?



"What the fuck".

Yes... I agree... "What the fuck" are you even on about?

I'M NOT THE ONE WHO CLAIMED IT WAS TERRORISM. I am the one who said, "If it was an act of terrorism... it should be what they did that make it obvious it was terrorism... not the colour of their skin or their name.".

Again... I AM NOT THE ONE WHO CLAIMED IT WAS OBVIOUSLY TERRORISM... and I brought that situation up because that is a far better indicator of if it was terrorism or wasn't.

And yet here we are... you are attacking me for saying the exact same thing... do you even read anything posted or do you just instantly go on the attack without having any clue about what you are talking about?

Again... I was quoting someone who said it OBVIOUSLY HAD TO BE TERRORISM because his name was Islamic. Maybe you should get pissy with him rather than me yeah?

I was not entirely sure who you were addressing but i was sure it was either PR or joseph and I do not agree with joseph in that it is obvious, but it does seems likely if he was indeed an islamist type of muslim which the newer information of him traveling to marry in saudi arabia makes it a real possibility. But we just don't have enough data yet to know if he was indeed and islamist and then if he actually did this due to jihad.
My main point was that your racebaiting was bullshit since no one said anything suggesting race was the cause but rather about ideological adherence, deal with it. On the scenario of "three men in masks with body armour and rifles shooting up a public event" without any further information. you made an argument of incredulity with the implied conclusion that since the other possibilities are incredible then it must have been terror. Nope, that just makes it a planned massacre, we need actual direct indication of ideological motivation to jump into the terrorism zone. I may have very well misread your message and interpreted that implication from my own bias, if then I have no further argument there.

[Shiranu]

...since no one said anything suggesting race was the cause...

Quoted for truth since still no one has.

...but it does seems likely if he was indeed an islamist type of muslim which the newer information of him traveling to marry in saudi arabia makes it likely.

I haven't seen any information about that... and frankly it is irrelevant because that isn't what he was found OBVIOUSLY guilty of terrorism for; it was because his last name was "farouq" and not because he had a Radical Islamist background.

Also... 99.9999999 etc. percent of Muslims in the United States who have gone to Saudi Arabia for any reason have come back perfectly fine... law abiding... citizens. This is where I am having the hang-up; statistically Mr. Smith from Georgia is far more likely to be a terrorist... but if I said "Well he was from the South so OBVIOUSLY he was a terrorist" people would jump on my shit left and right. But if you say something with a lower statistical probability is OBVIOUSLY a terrorist then suddenly that sentence makes perfect sense... that shit don't make sense yo.

you made an argument of incredulity with the implied conclusion that since the other possibilities are incredible then it must have been terror.

*Sigh*

I will repeat this one more time... if it doesn't go through then I cant help but think you are being intentionally dense.

If we are making the assumption that this was an act of terrorism (as Jason was) then we need to look at the elements that make it a likely terrorist attack. Given that... the fact that they were prepared and had high quality gear is highly more indicative of their agenda than their name. That was the point; that their actions were a better way to gauge on if "they were terrorists" than their names. Because yet again... Smith... Wood... Cole... Yates... Philips are all more common terrorist names but I can't just start instantly assuming people with those names are proven terrorists simply because they have a "white" last name.

I can think of several reasons you would come prepared like this for non-terrorist related reasons... but in this context where it is assumed it was an act of terror... then again what they did and why they did it should be the determining factor of their guilt of terrorism and not their last name.

[mauricio]

Quoted for truth since still no one has.

I haven't seen any information about that... and frankly it is irrelevant because that isn't what he was found OBVIOUSLY guilty of terrorism for; it was because his last name was "farouq" and not because he had a Radical Islamist background.

Also... 99.9999999 etc. percent of Muslims in the United States who have gone to Saudi Arabia for any reason have come back perfectly fine... law abiding... citizens. This is where I am having the hang-up; statistically Mr. Smith from Georgia is far more likely to be a terrorist... but if I said "Well he was from the South so OBVIOUSLY he was a terrorist" people would jump on my shit left and right. But if you say something with a lower statistical probability is OBVIOUSLY a terrorist then suddenly that sentence makes perfect sense... that shit don't make sense yo.

*Sigh*

I will repeat this one more time... if it doesn't go through then I cant help but think you are being intentionally dense.

If we are making the assumption that this was an act of terrorism (as Jason was) then we need to look at the elements that make it a likely terrorist attack. Given that... the fact that they were prepared and had high quality gear is highly more indicative of their agenda than their name. That was the point; that their actions were a better way to gauge on if "they were terrorists" than their names. Because yet again... Smith... Wood... Cole... Yates... Philips are all more common terrorist names but I can't just start instantly assuming people with those names are proven terrorists simply because they have a "white" last name.

I can think of several reasons you would come prepared like this for non-terrorist related reasons... but in this context where it is assumed it was an act of terror... then again what they did and why they did it should be the determining factor of their guilt of terrorism and not their last name.

Agreed, it is obviously not obvious =p and yes their actions will tell you much more than their names. I think i misunderstood your points since you did not start by specifying with a quote or otherwise what statement in the thread you were criticizing. So I just operated from a vague sense of what some people were saying in the previous pages rather than from a solid and specific statement. Though i think you do a disservice to josephpalazzo by saying his reasoning was only based on the name since he did mention the marrying in saudi arabia and the pipebombs (and PR quoted his father calling him basically devout muslim), which still does not make it obviously terrorism though but is a relevant hint that maybe Islamism was behind this. Kind of like the planned parenthood shooter and his comment about the baby parts. I still need further evidence on both cases and I still consider them pretty irrelevant for demonizing your average pro lifer or Muslim.

[pr126]

How many more times you have to be told that none of this has to do anything with Islam.
They were justifiably peeved by not being invited to the party.

Or climate change .
Or lack of jobs
Or poverty
Or injustice, oppression
Or colonialism
Or foreign policy
The list is endless.

But NEVER EVER even think that Islam has anything to do with it.

This post was brought to you by the Ministry of Truth.

[mauricio]

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/12/03/mainstream-media-fooled-by-troll-who-blamed-san-bernardino-shooting-on-gamergate/

Surprise to no one. CNN and other mainstream media sucks at fact checking and vetting before they publish trolls on TV or print. The troll did not even deliver dank memes on air, what a total waste.

[Baruch]

Instant news analysis?  Not a good idea ... leave it to the journalism professionals ;-))

The causes don't have to be either/or ... it can be either/and.  And like Oswald, we will probably never know.  People like the shooters are crazy fucks ... even they probably don't know why they did what they did.  But simple people like simple explanations ... and make good voters ;-(

[pr126]

@ Baruch

What I was saying in my previous post that some, actually quite a few people who are unable to handle reality, will look for any other explanation than the obvious one.

To say that Islam the ideology is the cause for all the death and devastation is unacceptable.
That simply cannot be said in public.

People like the shooters are crazy fucks ... even they probably don't know why they did what they did.

Nope, not crazy, and they are knowing fully that they are only carrying out what their ideology prescribes.
It depends how devout  they are.
Deny it all you want.

They are constantly telling us, shouthing from the rooftops that it is the will of Allah they are following.

Here one Muslim is explaining on TV in detail, quoting the Quran.
Yet David Cameron said within an hour that it had nothing to do with Islam.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9DbRMIlQ5A

[Baruch]

Or maybe cause/effect is ... primitive.  Do you know why I post this particular post?  Maybe not, unless you can read my mind.  But if you think ... in analogy, that there is a war of civilizations between you and say other posters here ... then you are probably over the top ... as opposed to the more probable explanation that ... you don't like a particular poster or particular idea.

On the other hand ... blaming ancient books for your troubles (fear of terrorists) is pretty lame.  Because without that Quran, there would be just pagan Arabs trying to kill Europe, rather than Muslim Arabs trying to kill Europe ... and then you could blame paganism instead.

[pr126]

Baruch wrote:

Because without that Quran, there would be just pagan Arabs trying to kill Europe, rather than Muslim Arabs trying to kill Europe

I don't think so.

There are still - (but not for long) - a number of Christians Arabs in the ME, 10 million  Copts in Egypt alone. Then the Maronites, Druzes, Mandeans, etc.
We don't hear about those running around the planet machine gunning people and blowing shit up.
In fact, they have a hard time just staying alive among the murdering Muslims.

Try something else.

blaming ancient books for your troubles (fear of terrorists) is pretty lame

The evidence world wide says otherwise.

That "ancient book" in particular the Quran,  is a license to kill.

[spoiler][/spoiler]

[josephpalazzo]

Ha, the smoking gun:

After the couple was killed by police four hours later but less than two miles from the initial attack, police found even more ammunition along with a dozen homemade explosive devices, similar to ones described in an early al Qaeda instructional magazine article.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/potential-terror-probe-widens-san-bernardino-shooting/story?id=35574473

[pr126]

Ha, the smoking gun:



http://abcnews.go.com/US/potential-terror-probe-widens-san-bernardino-shooting/story?id=35574473

It has nothing to do with Islam, or old ancient books. Get with the program!

[FaithIsFilth]

the sad part is they think they are winning as well.

Are they not winning though? They are winning the way I see it. ISIS is both an enemy and ally of the US at the same time. The US probably had something to do with that shot down Russian fighter jet. Radical Muslims kill a bunch of people in the US, and who does that help? It helps both sides. The Americans and the Muslim terrorists in Syria. Now Obama can go into Syria to protect the Sunni terrorists from Assad and the Russians with a no fly zone. His excuse will be that Syria is giving ISIS a base to operate out of. To 'destroy' ISIS, the US will protect ISIS from the Russians. Yeah... we're going to destroy ISIS by protecting them and groups like them and helping them get into power in Syria.

Is this why these Muslims in particular attacked inside of the US? I don't know, but that would make sense. Either they did it for that reason, or they were pissed at the minor air strikes the US does on ISIS. The US has no interest in defeating ISIS, but still, they do bomb women and children and hospitals, so it would make sense that some Muslims would be legitimately pissed about that and strike the US as a form of vengeance.

[pr126]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1BLgXCaK5w

[josephpalazzo]

OK, case closed. FBI is treating it as a terrorist attack:

WASHINGTON â€" The woman who, with her husband, killed 14 people in San Bernardino pledged allegiance to the Islamic State in a Facebook post the day of the attack, officials said Friday, and the F.B.I. announced it was treating the massacre as an act of terrorism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/us/tashfeen-malik-islamic-state.html?_r=0

[mauricio]

OK, case closed. FBI is treating it as a terrorist attack:


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/us/tashfeen-malik-islamic-state.html?_r=0

“so far we have no indication that these killers are part of an organized larger group, or form part of a cell. There’s no indication that they are part of a network.”

“At this point we believe they were more self-radicalized and inspired by the group than actually told to do the shooting,”


Yep this was pretty much my theory, this did not seem like a big operation by a terrorist cell (like in paris) rather inspired and radicalized shooters maybe with some communication with terrorist communities but no strong material connections. This is why the war of ideas is so important, bad ideas spread like a virus. And so the international jihadist insurgency wages on...