Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Report: NYPD's Surveillance of Muslims 'Harmful'

Islam

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 Orpheus

Orpheus

    I'm not the boss of you!

  • Administrator
  • 17,715 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 03:39 AM

I'll fail? How? Let's start with the FBI report on "Terrorism in the US" in the  4 years after 9/11 -- and the results of the "Terrorism in the US" reports have been similar EVERY year of the last 30 years (when the FBI started the reports) *except* 2001

"Terrorism 2002-2005" [FBI website]

And that report explicitly excludes domestic bombings, lynchings, assaults, etc.,  that were prosecuted as *crimes* (such as hate crimes)

Now tell me how many Muslim citizens were involved in all that domestic terrorism you are so worried about -- numerically -- since you claim a Muslim citizen is "infinitely more likely" to commit one than "most citizens"?

Why don't YOU cite some solid official source backing your claims? If you're correct, it should be "infinitely easy".

#22 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 11:41 AM

I'm familiar with the National Counterterrorism Center's 2008 Report on Terrorism. These people provide information to the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System (WITS). Here's a few tidbits from their study:

•According to open source reports, the Taliban, more than any other group, claimed credit for the largest number of attacks and the highest fatality totals.

•In contrast, al-Shabaab al-Islamiya [Muslim Youth Movement] was the group with the seventh highest total of claimed attacks but was the second deadliest group.

•Attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan accounted for about 55 percent of all attacks cataloged in WITS.


And a visual aid:
Posted Image

OK...so that should be that. But I suspect the argument will be that Muslims residing in America shouldn't be lumped in with radicals overseas. The problem is, radical Islam knows no boundaries and we've documented an uptick in U.S. citizens joining the cause.

Quote

Between September 11, 2001, and the end of 2009, the U.S. government reported forty-six incidents of "domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism" that involved at least 125 people, according to a May 2010 Rand Corporation report (PDF). Half the cases involve single individuals, while the rest represent "tiny conspiracies" (PDF), according to congressional testimony by Brian Michael Jenkins, author of the Rand report.

About one-quarter of the plots identified have links to major international jihadist groups like al-Qaeda, according to the Rand report. But a March 2010 Bipartisan Policy Center paper points out an increasing number of Americans are playing high-level operational roles in al-Qaeda and aligned groups (PDF), as well as a larger numbers of Americans who are attaching themselves to these groups.
OK THAT should be that.(yeah...I know it won't be :( )
**********************************

btw your FBI report is woefully incomplete. It's no wonder that early on they advise going to the WITS for more complete listings of worldwide  terrorist incidents. Using 2005 as an example: the FBI recorded five terrorist incidents, three terrorism preventions, a ONE act of international terrorism. The NCTC report for 2008 terror attacks lists ONLY mass fatality events(of 10 or more)and they count over 200. With all the depressing details included.

Orph why would I post "You will fail should you try", if I didn't already know the game was rigged? It's not even a contest. "Infinitely easy" to demonstrate, as advertised. Factoring in the actual death tolls makes even the FBI report damning. Every non-Muslim terrorist in the world would need to join forces and embark on daily mass killing sprees to keep pace with radical Islam. And the dark irony of the NCTC report is the greatest threat to a Muslim is apparently another Muslim. But don't worry. Knowing full well what being the proverbial "messenger" entails on this subject, I'm wearing Kevlar.  :(

Edited by scherzo, 21 April 2013 - 11:47 AM.

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#23 Orpheus

Orpheus

    I'm not the boss of you!

  • Administrator
  • 17,715 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 01:42 PM

No need for kevlar. We have often been on the same *and* opposite sides of an issue. We're just having a spirited discussion. That's what OT is for.

View Postscherzo, on 21 April 2013 - 11:41 AM, said:

OK...so that should be that. But I suspect the argument will be that Muslims residing in America shouldn't be lumped in with radicals overseas. The problem is, radical Islam knows no boundaries and we've documented an uptick in U.S. citizens joining the cause.

Quote

Between September 11, 2001, and the end of 2009, the U.S. government reported forty-six incidents of "domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism" that involved at least 125 people, according to a May 2010 Rand Corporation report (PDF). Half the cases involve single individuals, while the rest represent "tiny conspiracies" (PDF), according to congressional testimony by Brian Michael Jenkins, author of the Rand report.

I don't know why you raise overseas terrorism. You yourself see why it isn't relevant to US monitoring domestic citizen *or* your comparison to "most [US] citizens". In the eight year span you cite, you "damning" evidence is of forty-six cases of recruitment? That's not terrorism. Terrorism is the use of violence and threats of violence to create an atmosphere of fear to achieve one's agenda. "Oh but it's recruitment by 'terrorist' organizations"? Yeah, still not terrorism. A KKK recruitment picnic isn't terrorism, a church burning is.

You say the game is stacked but the books still aren't cooked nearly enough. Let's take some classes of clear terrorism that are specifically excluded from the "terrorism statistics" because they don't suit this specific fervor:

Bombings, arson, assaults, "anthrax letters", and property damage against abortion clinics (or women's health facilities  falsely believed to perform abortions) are common -- and were far more common than your "six recruitments per year" before anyone cared about Al Qaeda. Mail and phone threats intended to terrify the target are weekly occurrence. So called "anthrax letters" (a generic term, which would include the "ricin letter" after the Marathon bombing -- which, last I heard turned out to be from a non-Muslim [but immediate info is always shaky]) have been a common anti-abortionist technique since 1998. Heck, after the Sept 2001 "Arab terrorist" anthrax scares, one anti-abotionist alone (Clayton Waagner) sent 280 anthrax letters to Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide in October and 554 such letters to a broader range of similar clinics in November.

But that's not terrorism. If it was part of a radical Muslim agenda it would be, but radical Christian? Not counted.

Organized crime is likewise famous for the use of violence and threats to achieve control. (Their effective extortionist control of entire business sectors in some areas) That's not ounted as terror, but try to get someone [even an outsider] to testify and see how much terror isn't involved. The number of violent crimes committed by organized crime nationally in a month dwarfs the "48 recruitments" in your 8 years. Heck a single prosperous loan shark probably is responsible for more terror and violence than that. Shall we, in Boston, start monitoring those of Italian and Irish descent? They are more likely to be connected to their respective "mob" organizations than "most citizens"

Drug cartels? More annual US deaths than your 8-year tally. But "not terrorism". Nah, they don't operate by terror, threats and violence.

Street gangs? Nope, no violence, threats, intimidation there. No inner city neighborhoods living in terror, afraid to speak out, afraid to let their kids on the street because they might be randomly killed. THAT violence and intimidation, actual physical harm, couldn't possibly happen every single week. Nope, nope.

Church and synogogue burnings or vandalism? A "hate crime". Gay lynchings or beatings? Ditto. The existence of a group or (a "microconspiracy" as in your report), a planned action of surprise violence that inspires fear in the target group doesn't qualify.

Before I move on, let me say, straight up, that I don't consider every act of every loon "terrorism". I restrict it to the *organized intimidation toward an agenda*. I'm willing to include individual or "micro-conspiracies" but only with the caveat that it's an awfully slippery slope. When a loon engages in a microconspiracy is it just a bunch of punks? Is the violence "terrorism for a cause" or primarily because he's a loon? Religious and other obsessive ideation is a common symptom of mental disease.

Were Aurora Co or Newtown CT terrorist attacks? I don't consider them such, but I'm sure you'll vigorously agree that they are certainly lumped in with terrorism when it suits certain social/political agendas -- sometimes directly and sometimes by clear insinuation. You might not so readily agree that "terrorism" is selectively defined by many people as "Muslim terrorism" while other bombings, bioterror, arsons, murders and threats to create a climate of fear in support of an explicit agenda are mentally excluded by various groups all over the political landscape.

Was the Oak Creek WI attack (6 dead), two weeks after Aurora, an act of anti-Sikh terrorism. I personally say yes, but someone else might just dismiss it as an act of bigotry -- Christian bigotry, not Muslim, and hence not terrorism ("the anti-Sikhs ain't after *me*, so I don't feel no terror").  Was the Laplace LA incident (two police killed, one injured while investigating an earlier attack on another policeman)  "terrorist"? Well, it was tied to a radical "sovereign citizen" groups, which I carefully distinguish from White Supremacists, despite the frequent overlap, but however radicalized I see that shootout, however deplorable to be defensive (they didn't want to be caught) than a planned act of terror). Others may not make that distinction -- as with the post-bombing part of the Boston incident. Was the gunman assault on the Family Research Council in Washington DC (1 guard shot while subduing gunman), the day after Laplace LA a terrorist act? Well,it was a  planned, politically motivated surprise attack, designed to inspire fear -- but I didn't see it cited as a "terrorist attack" in the media, did you?

The point of my first post --yes, "wordy", but you know that's just me. and it doesn't make me any more wrong than usual-- was to illustrate the vast range of things that were or should be considered terrorism, but aren't in today's dialogue (Heck, the US revolution was the *original* modern unconventional warfare, violating all the established laws and practices of 'civilized armies', sniping from behind trees because we couldn't win a fixed battle of "box infantries". But while the British were outraged, and would've called it "terrorism", had that term been current, it was hardly new to "do whatever you can to win")

If you define terrorism in a restrictive way -- as so many do, by defining some groups as terror groups, but not other groups doing the same thing on a much larger scale for similar purposes--  you're going to get whatever answer you started with. It's just a tautology

#24 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 02:12 PM

View PostOrpheus, on 21 April 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:



If you define terrorism in a restrictive way -- as so many do, by defining some groups as terror groups, but not other groups doing the same thing on a much larger scale for similar purposes--  you're going to get whatever answer you started with. It's just a tautology

Yup.
Posted Image

#25 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 02:14 PM

Ah..Orpheus, your point on calling these guys Russian is very well taken.  I honestly wasn't even thinking along those lines but yes, you're right.  Apologies.
Posted Image

#26 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 02:42 PM

Belarus is White Russia.
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#27 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 02:59 PM

Quote

You say the game is stacked but the books still aren't cooked nearly enough. Let's take some classes of clear terrorism that are specifically excluded from the "terrorism statistics" because they don't suit this specific fervor:
So now we're disavowing terrorism statistics?(relegating it to the dreaded "quote" brackets even) You were the one who introduced an FBI report to the mix, then requested *I* cite a solid official source. Neither source seemed to be operating with any particular anti-Muslim "fervor" either. Long suffering Jets fans call this moving the goalposts.

Quote

I don't know why you raise overseas terrorism. You yourself see why it isn't relevant to US monitoring domestic citizen *or* your comparison to "most [US] citizens".
Faisal Shahzad is a Pakistani born US citizen. Before unsuccessfully attempting to set off a car bomb in Time Square, he received 5 months of terrorist training from the Taliban in Waziristan. This case illustrates the international nature of Islamic terrorism, and that it's reach isn't magically cut off at our borders. Any analysis of the terror threat posed by Muslims domestically must necessarily calculate the scope of the jihad movement worldwide. Fancy way of saying...hell yeah overseas terrorism is relevant.

Quote

In the eight year span you cite, you "damning" evidence is of forty-six cases of recruitment? That's not terrorism. Terrorism is the use of violence and threats of violence to create an atmosphere of fear to achieve one's agenda. "Oh but it's recruitment by 'terrorist' organizations"? Yeah, still not terrorism.
It's one hell of a good argument for profiling though. btw "damning" was a specific reference to the death toll of attacks cited in your FBI link.

As for that list of other types of crime, like drug cartels and gangsters etc? Who's arguing that different kinds of crime shouldn't be wiped out? Start a thread on drug gangs or the mob and I'd be happy to tell you what horrors should be rained on them. Even call it terrorism if you want to.  This thread I just happened to be focused on the best way to protect us from Muslim terrorist nutjobs.

Edited by scherzo, 21 April 2013 - 03:03 PM.

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#28 Orpheus

Orpheus

    I'm not the boss of you!

  • Administrator
  • 17,715 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 04:42 PM

Actually, I welcomed your statistics, and welcome more. I was referring to your remark that you wouldn't have said I'd fail if the it wasn't stacked against me, and elaborating on one way they are stacked that doesn't make sense except as a self-supporting argument (the govt's not yours)

I'm completely at a loss how you found the results of the FBI report "damning". A death toll of 2 from international terrorism in four years? Every week of that span some single drunk driver in the US killed more citizens than International terrorists in all 4 years. As summarized in the second paragraph of the Introduction:

Terrorism 2002-2005 said:

"In keeping with a longstanding trend, domestic extremists carried out the majority of terrorist incidents during this period. Twenty three of the 24 recorded terrorist incidents were perpetrated by domestic terrorists. With the exception of a white supremacist’s firebombing of a synagogue in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, all of the domestic terrorist incidents were committed by special interest extremists active in the animal rights and environmental movements. The acts committed by these extremists typically targeted materials and facilities rather than persons. The sole international terrorist incident in the United States recorded for this period involved an attack at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport, which claimed the lives of two victims." [Emphasis mine]

I'm all for monitoring for cause, just not purely on the basis of ethnicity. As I said, we don't monitor all Italians for possible links to the Mafia (or here in Boston, all Irish descent for links to the Irish mob). I'm told --but not by an authoritative source-- that "evident" Russians (thick accents, especially new arrivals) were viewed with suspicion by the NYPD for a while due to the Russian mob.

One does tend to find what one looks for, and not find what one isn't looking for, which is one reason why (for example) my Swiss friends very gently noted that "foreigners" (like me) were responsible for 90% of all crime there. They even had a special police force, the Fremdpolizei to keep an eye on us. It never bothered me (they were always scrupulous polite, as the Swiss often are -- unlike my experiences in the USSR, East Germany, Albania, Romania, etc), but the fact that this even came out in conversation (several times) revealed the depth to which this message had been repeated to them by their govt and media. I rather doubt that 90% was actually committed by foreigners (the total crime rate was very low, and the Swiss are not saints), but I can believe that 90% of all reported and prosecuted crime was. If you have a Fremdpolizei, they're going to find more foreign crime than if you don't. If you have a DHS, they're going to find more threats to the Homeland than if you don't -- in all good will, politics and funding aside.

#29 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 12:20 PM

Quote

In a Nutshell

By  Mark Steyn

Further to my weekend column, if nothing else, the Boston bombing has usefully distilled the media template for such stories to its absolute essence.
Stage One:


Let’s Hope The Boston Marathon Bomber Is A White American

Stage Two:


The Boston Bombers Were Muslim: So?


Cut-out-and-keep these two headlines, and you too can be on top of the conventional wisdom within moments of the next atrocity.
You have to be mentally ill to compose the essays Steyn links to here. When your politics becomes your religion, it steadily erodes logic and reason until there's nothing left but the articles of your "faith". Facts become completely meaningless. It's frightening to behold.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#30 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 12:26 PM

Case in point:

Quote

Professor: We Used 'Too Much Force' Capturing Boston Bombers

Now we have captured the two terrorists from Chechnya who come from the troubled region that is Muslim, but we cannot understand their motives, not yet.  And Obama encourages us to refrain.


This said, the mortuary pictures of the older brother of the two are extremely disturbing, raising questions as to whether the Boston Police Department captured him with too much force. I understand the explanation offered by Katharine Q. Seelye, William H. Rashbaum, and Michael Cooper.  Yet, it does not ring true.  A picture is worth a thousand words that will keep our ears ringing as we recoil from this photo.  Images have a way of searing themselves into our memory in a way that can’t be undone.  We have an emotional memory, not just a rational one that is exemplified by words.


While terrorism is about causing fear — again an emotion — we do have to account for our conduct in these extreme times when adrenaline is running high.

At my home, to at least offset this, we turn off all media.  I couldn’t believe my sons’ explanation when they got home about one brother running over the other one.  So I found a place to read about this, and I recoiled after seeing the picture.


"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#31 offworlder

offworlder

    pls don't kick offworlders, we can find a place too

  • Islander
  • 5,363 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:23 PM

well I agree and also disagree, depending on which point- first let me say that a lot of this is op ed commentary and not news, and fox put it in nation not news; and that fear lady; well first things first; I agree(what?!) with your thing on what is too much force? in a gunbattle with guys heavily armed who show they do not want to give up, and explosives with guns, and shooting everywhere, and cop safety in the face of explosives, just what is too much force? this is not even a discussion it's just one professor lady who saw morgue photos she should not see and then expound on it, and her kids excited chat on the action with the brothers and the suv; in a gun battle with explosive terrorists shooting and exploding it's a very high level line to draw for too much force! .....................................then the fear lady, she writes on her impressions and it's not news and it's just some blog and why should I care what she is saying, nothing to me, nothing in my life or the news of the real event;..................... then the megan garber on labels: I agree with Megan in the Atlantic, these guys are far more than a couple labels and we should not profile on the labels or just the word Mooslem* these guys are whole people not just some quippy profily label , she said it right ................... didnt have time to read the salon thing and i dont read their op ed comments anyway .............................. * again I spell it the old Brit way to get people away from pronouncing muhhhslim like uuhhhhhh with a lid.
"(Do you read what they say online?) I check out all these scandalous rumours about me and Elijah Wood having beautiful sex with each other ... (are they true?) About Elijah and me being boyfriend and boyfriend? Absolutely true. We've been together for about nine years. I wooed him. No I just like a lot of stuff - I like that someone says one thing and it becomes fact. It's kind of fun." --Dominic Monaghan in a phone interview with Newsweek while buying DVDs at the store. :D

#32 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:34 PM

View Postscherzo, on 19 April 2013 - 09:14 PM, said:

Report: NYPD's Surveillance of Muslims 'Harmful'
This story appeared back in March. But with the less than shocking revelation that Muslim radicals were responsible for the Boston murders, it's at the forefront of my mind today.
Posted Image

Clearly the vast majority of Muslims believe the onerous is on everyone ELSE to insure their religious faith is never called to account. Organizations like CAIR are more concerned about backlash against Muslims, than the toxic strain of evil in their ranks. I don't doubt that terrorists and their sympathizers are in the minority. But just 1% would represent an enormous number of highly motivated would-be mass murders.(and it's clearly more than 1%) My question is, will the religion of political correctness demand we ignore the most consistent thread in terrorist attacks on American people and interests?

It's been reported that one of the bombers was known to the FBI, but was not detained even after posting jihad videos online. This harkens back to Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan, whose Muslim extremism was also well documented. In both cases, had common sense trumped political correctness, loss of life(and limb)would have been prevented. It seems to me we're well overdue to stop treating "profiling" like anything other than the most logical response to a clear and present danger.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#33 Balderdash

Balderdash
  • Islander
  • 5,729 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:45 PM

View Postscherzo, on 22 April 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Quote

In a Nutshell

By  Mark Steyn

Further to my weekend column, if nothing else, the Boston bombing has usefully distilled the media template for such stories to its absolute essence.
Stage One:


Let’s Hope The Boston Marathon Bomber Is A White American

Stage Two:



The Boston Bombers Were Muslim: So?


Cut-out-and-keep these two headlines, and you too can be on top of the conventional wisdom within moments of the next atrocity.
You have to be mentally ill to compose the essays Steyn links to here. When your politics becomes your religion, it steadily erodes logic and reason until there's nothing left but the articles of your "faith". Facts become completely meaningless. It's frightening to behold.

So, are you painting all Muslims and all liberals with the same brush, sure looks like it to me.  Whatever, that's why anything that you post gets put in the hubris pile almost always, you've got no realistic middle ground.  All liberals are as deranged as the most deranged liberal that you can find.  And even though there are at least a billion Muslims in the world, you want to paint ALL of them as potential terrorists.

Another Democrat leaning Independent that has to search for truth because it can't be found on Fox News OR MSNBC.



"Being gay is not a Western invention, it is a human reality"  by HRC


#34 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:46 PM

View Postscherzo, on 19 April 2013 - 10:05 PM, said:

Quote

yes, but you'd have to profile and harass(and get sued) a million Islam followers and other 'well they looked Mooslem to me' people, and oh heck any brown person you think might be related to Pakistan, Chetchnya, Dagostan, Libya, or any one of other thirty countries: just to catch up to the small private doings of any like these two young... typing typing...no rez...more random typiness..."prolly"...blah blah blah...
Actually reading my post would reveal that one of these bombers(who didn't necessarily "look Mooslem") managed to get on the FBI's radar without any of those muddled cliches occurring offworlder. Taking down Nidal Hasan wouldn't have involved much in the way of "harassment" either for that matter. But you're probably not alone in the belief that sarcasm is infinitely preferable to violating politically correct dogma. Let's see what blows up next...

Scherzo, a minimum of research would have told you that the Russians brought the older brother to our attention, and that the FBI monitored him for as long as they legally could (including wiretapping and questioning the older brother). After a certain point, with no hard evidence, they were required by law to stop their activities. The bombers were, after all, US citizens (just like Timothy McVeigh).Hatred apparently knows no religious boundaries.

Your constant assertions that Muslims must be potential terrorists is, quite frankly, bigoted. People like these brothers no more represent true Islam than the odious inbred Phelps family represents true Christianity.

You might consider reading the Quaran, which doesn't really espouse this kind of violence (this is from Wiki, but having read both the Quaran and extensively about Saladin and the crusades, I find this information to be accurate:

Quote

During his life, Muhammad gave various injunctions to his forces and adopted practices toward the conduct of war. The most important of these were summarized by Muhammad's companion, Abu Bakr, in the form of ten rules for the Muslim army:


Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock, save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone.
—Abu Bakr, [47]

These injunctions were honored by the second Caliph, Umar, during whose reign (634–644) important Muslim conquests took place.[48] These principles were also honoured during the Crusades, as exemplified by sultans such as Saladin and al-Kamil. For example, after al-Kamil defeated the Franks during the Crusades, Oliverus Scholasticus praised the Islamic laws of war, commenting on how al-Kamil supplied the defeated Frankish army with food:[49]

There's a lot more having to do with those who attack you, and it too would show you that Island is not violent.

It's a terrible mistake to assume that the actions of a few are representative of the beliefs of millions of people worldwide. They're simpy not.

Edited by Rhea, 22 April 2013 - 02:15 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#35 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:01 PM

Quote

A minimum of research would have told you that the Russians brought the older brother to our attention, and that the FBI monitored them for as long as they legally could
You wouldn't have to do any research at all...to just read my posts on this thread before jumping in snark first. I said the feds were tipped off about our bomber friend.

But on your second point: How long are the FBI allowed to "legally" monitor a terror suspect?
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#36 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:04 PM

I'd also like to point out that the idea of 'too much force' in a running gun battle between a terrorist and law enforcement seems on the face of it to be absurd. 'Enough force' is however much force is required to bring the terrorist down while endangering the fewest innocents, and doing the least amount of damage to allied assets.

Anything else feels like arm-chair gunfighting to me.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#37 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:12 PM

Quote

So, are you painting all Muslims and all liberals with the same brush, sure looks like it to me.

No they are not the same thing at all.

Quote

Whatever, that's why anything that you post gets put in the hubris pile almost always, you've got no realistic middle ground.  All liberals are as deranged as the most deranged liberal that you can find.
There are liberals who aren't complete drones and allow common sense to impact their world view. Mark Steyn points to 2 examples of liberals who have gone over the edge. If the shoe doesn't fit etc. etc.

Quote

And even though there are at least a billion Muslims in the world, you want to paint ALL of them as potential terrorists.
I think law enforcement needs to focus on Muslims to thwart the terrorist elements in their ranks. The fact that Muslim organizations like CAIR don't consider stopping terrorism nearly as important as whining about negative press, makes it all the more imperative.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#38 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:23 PM

View Postscherzo, on 22 April 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

Quote

A minimum of research would have told you that the Russians brought the older brother to our attention, and that the FBI monitored them for as long as they legally could
You wouldn't have to do any research at all...to just read my posts on this thread before jumping in snark first. I said the feds were tipped off about our bomber friend.

But on your second point: How long are the FBI allowed to "legally" monitor a terror suspect?

Here's a quote from the FBI:

Quote

The two individuals believed to be responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings on Monday have been positively identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, now deceased, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, now in custody. These individuals are brothers and residents of Massachusetts. Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a legal permanent resident and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Charges have not yet been filed against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and he is presumed innocent.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was previously designated as Suspect 1, wearing a black hat. Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, age 19, was designated as Suspect 2, wearing a white hat. Both were born in Kyrgyzstan.
Once the FBI learned the identities of the two brothers today, the FBI reviewed its records and determined that in early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.
In response to this 2011 request, the FBI checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history. The FBI also interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members. The FBI did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign, and those results were provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011. The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.

Edited by Rhea, 22 April 2013 - 02:25 PM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#39 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:24 PM

Sorry...I posted before the edit

Quote

Your constant assertions that Muslims must be potential terrorists is, quite frankly, bigoted.
I assert that ignoring Islam as a prevailing factor in terrorism, when literally not a day goes by without murder being committed somewhere in it's name...would be stupid. The End.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#40 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 02:29 PM

View PostRhea, on 22 April 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

View Postscherzo, on 22 April 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

Quote

A minimum of research would have told you that the Russians brought the older brother to our attention, and that the FBI monitored them for as long as they legally could
You wouldn't have to do any research at all...to just read my posts on this thread before jumping in snark first. I said the feds were tipped off about our bomber friend.

But on your second point: How long are the FBI allowed to "legally" monitor a terror suspect?

Here's a quote from the FBI:

Quote

The two individuals believed to be responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings on Monday have been positively identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, now deceased, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, now in custody. These individuals are brothers and residents of Massachusetts. Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a legal permanent resident and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Charges have not yet been filed against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and he is presumed innocent.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was previously designated as Suspect 1, wearing a black hat. Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, age 19, was designated as Suspect 2, wearing a white hat. Both were born in Kyrgyzstan.
Once the FBI learned the identities of the two brothers today, the FBI reviewed its records and determined that in early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.
In response to this 2011 request, the FBI checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history. The FBI also interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members. The FBI did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign, and those results were provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011. The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.
You said they were required by law to stop their investigation. The FBI statement doesn't say that.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Islam

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users