Shiva.Viciousss said: »
What would the protocol be if they were an Atheist from Afghanistan?
Random Politics & Religion #00
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
One way trip to Mars, obviously.
[+]
Leviathan.Chaosx said: » That must be some propaganda though to convince women and assuming they're relatively aware of what's going on, or at least heard of ISIS in the news. They were all around 15 so I wouldn't count on them knowing what's going on Bismarck.Dracondria said: » They were all around 15 I'm still trying to figure out how they would get to older women though, like how this new story supposedly went. Reuters has the same story just about, more about her father and the workplace was of the husbands. So her radicalization was due to her upbringing and did not involved a job in the U.S.
Quote: U.S. investigators were evaluating evidence that Malik, a Pakistani native who had been living in Saudi Arabia when she married Farook, had pledged allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, two U.S. government sources said. They said the finding, if confirmed, could be a "game changer" in the probe. CNN reported that one U.S. official said Malik had made the pledge to al-Baghdadi in a posting on Facebook on Wednesday, the day of the attack, under an account that used a different name. Though large information gaps remain, it appeared to be the strongest evidence so far that the attack may have been inspired by Islamic State. But U.S. government sources said there was no sign that it had been directed by the militant group, which has seized swathes of Syria and Iraq and claimed the deadly Nov. 13 attacks in Paris. FATHER BECAME "CONSERVATIVE AND HARDLINE" Two Pakistani officials said Malik was from Karor Lal Esan, a city on the west coast of the Indus River in southern Punjab province. She moved to Saudi Arabia with her father, an engineer, 25 years ago, they said. She returned home five or six years ago to study at Bahauddin Zakariya University in Multan to become a pharmacist, they said. The area in Punjab where she spent her early years and later went to university is a “recruitment ground” and stronghold of Islamist groups with ties to al Qaeda, said Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to the United States. Among the militant groups with a presence there is Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has been blamed for the November 2008 killing spree in the Indian financial capital of Mumbai. "Our brother changed a lot since he went to Saudi," Malik's uncle, Javed Rabbani, said of Malik's father. "When relatives visited him, they would come back and tell us how conservative and hardline he had become," he said in an interview with Reuters. ... Just hours before the couple opened fire on Farook’s co-workers in a government building in San Bernardino, they had dropped off their daughter at his mother’s house, telling her they had a doctor’s appointment. So was she instructed to do what she did? Probably not. Is IS/IS/IL responsible? If she acted on behalf of them, but without being in contact with them at all, no. Do they get to claim credit? Yes, in terms of ideology/theology. Is Islam responsible for her actions? No. So based on this, I would say they could claim responsibility for her radicalization, but as for the shooting itself, she probably did it to gain their acceptance rather than being instructed to do so. The big question though, has IS/IS/IL been able to infiltrate the U.S. and carry out an attack? Yes, but this instance was not an ordered attack. However, they have just shown their ability to carry out an attack without having to smuggle members across the borders (like hidden with some refugees, for example). Instead all they have to do in convince anyone who believes in their cause to do whatever they want them to do with very little assistance. Solution: Continue on with your lives like you normally would. Police state, terrorists win. Monitoring of Muslims, terrorists win. Bomb Saudi Arabia, terrorists win. Bomb Pakistan, terrorists win. Calling this incident workplace violence or not related to IS/IS/IL... is being ignorant of the situation. The only workable and long term solution is to remove conditions in which terrorist groups have a reason, an excuse, or a situation in which their cause, ideology, or theology is seen as the method to follow. Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Don't worry the kids will be safe now: Quote:  It's come to this. We've now had so many mass shootings that entrepreneurs see space in the market for a bulletproof blanket, made specifically to shield small children from gunfire. The Bodyguard Blanket, made by a company called ProTecht, is a bulletproof 5/16-inch pad, made from the same materials used by our military, except it's for kids. They even come in different sizes. If mass shootings weren't such an integrated part of our culture, you'd think this was an SNL skit or an Onion article. Kids are being gunned down in their 1st grade classrooms, but what can we do? No we're not talking about gun laws, just arm your children with these bulletproof shields, you'll sleep easier at night. It will be just as effective. Bahamut.Milamber said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Don't worry the kids will be safe now: Quote: It's come to this. We've now had so many mass shootings that entrepreneurs see space in the market for a bulletproof blanket, made specifically to shield small children from gunfire. The Bodyguard Blanket, made by a company called ProTecht, is a bulletproof 5/16-inch pad, made from the same materials used by our military, except it's for kids. They even come in different sizes. If mass shootings weren't such an integrated part of our culture, you'd think this was an SNL skit or an Onion article. Kids are being gunned down in their 1st grade classrooms, but what can we do? No we're not talking about gun laws, just arm your children with these bulletproof shields, you'll sleep easier at night. It will be just as effective. Speaking of overreacting the NY times never does that:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/end-the-gun-epidemic-in-america.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-top-region®ion=opinion-c-col-top-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-top-region TLDR: I'm outraged come be outraged with me ! Hit by terrorism and the left still wants everyone to give up their guns. Sounds like a good strategy for the 2016 election.
2016: Let the terrorists win.
[+]
Garuda.Chanti said: » fonewear said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » US investigators believe that one of the shooters pledged to ISIS. I wonder if that's true or just to place the terrorism label on this event. Seeing as the attack was targeted to his workplace I don't think it can be called terrorism. Of course this won't stop pundits and politicians from labeling it just that. If a Muslim does it its terrorism. If a Christian does it it isn't. As there has yet to be a mass shooting committed by a Jew we will have to wait and see on that. Garuda.Chanti said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » fonewear said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » US investigators believe that one of the shooters pledged to ISIS. I wonder if that's true or just to place the terrorism label on this event. Seeing as the attack was targeted to his workplace I don't think it can be called terrorism. Of course this won't stop pundits and politicians from labeling it just that. If a Muslim does it its terrorism. If a Christian does it it isn't. As there has yet to be a mass shooting committed by a Jew we will have to wait and see on that. Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't? Christians don't do terrorism cause they are lazy !
Terrorism requires a highly motivated person. Most Christians just say: "Hey it's Christmas again!" Then a day later back to cheating on your wife ! Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't?
[+]
Garuda.Chanti said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't? Well in his defense he only killed like 3 people. The other shooting was 14 ! In Math's defense numbers have a clear liberal bias ! Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » fonewear said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » US investigators believe that one of the shooters pledged to ISIS. I wonder if that's true or just to place the terrorism label on this event. Seeing as the attack was targeted to his workplace I don't think it can be called terrorism. Of course this won't stop pundits and politicians from labeling it just that. If a Muslim does it its terrorism. If a Christian does it it isn't. As there has yet to be a mass shooting committed by a Jew we will have to wait and see on that. Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't? fonewear said: » http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/end-the-gun-epidemic-in-america.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-top-region®ion=opinion-c-col-top-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-top-region But motives do not matter to the dead in California, nor did they in Colorado, Oregon, South Carolina, Virginia, Connecticut and far too many other places. The attention and anger of Americans should also be directed at the elected leaders whose job is to keep us safe but who place a higher premium on the money and political power of an industry dedicated to profiting from the unfettered spread of ever more powerful firearms.
[+]
So according to nausi, in order for a mass shooting to be an act of teror, it has to be in the name of religion. Otherwise, its not terrorism, its just..something else.
Killing 3 people really doesn't seem like a "mass shooting". I mean Virginia Tech Columbine etc that seems to be the standard these days.
We need to hold these "terrorists" accountable for piss poor accuracy when killing people. Ramyrez said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » This story just gets weirder the more an attempt is made to make any sense out of it. It may be that ISIS has a feminist branch that recruits or at least inspires women to join. Who knows? Well we know there's some level of that. They've been suckering in "ISIS brides" for a while. Wouldn't surprise me that they recruit women or sucker their own female children to the cause and get them to use their own strong rhetoric + *** to lure disenfranchised young men to the cause. So it's probably for breeding-stock reasons that ISIS recruits women... Also probably for recruiting guys like you said. In order for it to be terrorism there had to be some type of political goal and a systematic use of violent acts to frighten the people into coercion.
[+]
Yea the planned parenthood act was terrorism but I don't think "religion" was the motivation. More like I don't like abortions therefore I'm get em !
The guy lived in a shack that is motivation enough to kill people ! Leviathan.Chaosx said: » In order for it to be terrorism there had to be some type of political goal and a systematic use of violent acts to frighten the people into coercion. By this defintion, the shooting in Colorado was an act or terror, and the shooting in California was not. I don't know why it matters so much to conservatives, the dead don't care. fonewear said: » We need to hold these "terrorists" accountable for piss poor accuracy when killing people. >Barrage of fire >Never hits the hero
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » fonewear said: » Garuda.Chanti said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » US investigators believe that one of the shooters pledged to ISIS. I wonder if that's true or just to place the terrorism label on this event. Seeing as the attack was targeted to his workplace I don't think it can be called terrorism. Of course this won't stop pundits and politicians from labeling it just that. If a Muslim does it its terrorism. If a Christian does it it isn't. As there has yet to be a mass shooting committed by a Jew we will have to wait and see on that. Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't? Why should we? Every person who goes on a shooting spree like these is expressing a very strong frustration and almost always a lot of revenge for wrongs they feel. I don't see how whether they pray before they kill a dozen people or just recite the list of wrongs is irrelevant. Garuda.Chanti said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't? Again, if I went to blow up the abortion clinic because I'm a devout christian and my interpretation of Christianity tells me that abortion is so wrong and therefore I should go shoot up the place, then yeah you could call me a christian terrorist. Is there evidence of that? I mean one can be a christian, know that shooting up a place is wrong in the eyes of god and still choose to shoot it up and not be a christian terrorist. Meanwhile we all know the terrorists yesterday pledged their alligence to ISIS during the attack, we can at least agree that that action is validation of a terrorism motive right? The thing with Islam is that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who buy into the interpretation that infidels are subhuman and Allah doesn't give two shits about what you do to them. Bury them up top their necks and stone them for adultery, throw them off of buildings for being gay, or sacrifice yourself and blow a few thousand of them up for whatever, that's a-ok. That's a pretty big "problem" and one that is unique to the "religion of peace". But back to Christianity. Even if there are "christian terrorists", the moral equivalency game everyone on the left plays is nothing more than stroking their massive PC ***. Islamic terrorism is a HUGE problem in the world today. Refusing to acknowledge it's danger by pointing your finger at everything else is quite literally the most dangerous and worst kind of denial mechanism we could ever exhibit as a society. Especially when it pokes your head in your backyard.
[+]
Shiva.Viciousss said: » By this defintion, the shooting in Colorado was an act or terror, and the shooting in California was not. CO = stopping abortion CA = ??? If you can find out what the political goal was if there was one concerning the shooting in CA, then it can be considered terrorism. Until then, it was just senseless violence in the name of IS/IS/IL. Shiva.Viciousss said: » I don't know why it matters so much to conservatives, the dead don't care. If people feel the need to only use violence and terrorism to achieve their political goals, then it will slowly become the norm. In theory this results into a society where government policy is created and implemented through force only, rather than voting, etc. Competing political parties and their policies are carried out through more violence and killing. It only seems like an effective system if you need to wipe out large swarms of people during any type of political process. Religious or secular makes no difference. Terrorism is an ideology that seeks to make people fearful regardless of the motives. They were domestic terrorists. So was the Aurora shooter, the guy that shot up PP, McVey, kasinski, the Columbine kids, etc.
Stop trying to pretend that being a Christian or Muslim or Buddhist or even FSM has any relation to murdering random people. Isis is a political entity, to support them in their war on the west is to support terrorism.
Single whackos like the guy in Colorado may have political motives (and may be terrorists), but the distinction is in the numbers. One guy here and there vs millions (?) of radicalized Muslims who wage war in the name of their god.
[+]
Garuda.Chanti said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Are we really refusing to see the distinction between people who kill in the name of their religion and people who don't? If Christ said don't kill or fight against even your enemies and someone goes and kills in christs name, you think said person is acting in Christs name? Why does the false label even apply?
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Isis is a political entity, to support them in their war on the west is to support terrorism. Single whackos like the guy in Colorado may have political motives (and may be terrorists), but the distinction is in the numbers. One guy here and there vs millions (?) of radicalized Muslims who wage war in the name of their god. Millions? Best estimates put active ISIS members under 20K. Just a heads up, too, their god is your god, they just see him a little different through a different prophet. charlo999 said: » If Christ said don't kill or fight against even your enemies and someone goes and kills in christs name, you think said person is acting in Christs name? Why does the false label even apply? In the same vein, Christians pull a lot of their dogma from the Torah, which is a pretty bloody book, even compared to the Qur'an. If those tools aren't Christians, ISIS aren't Muslims.
[+]
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.