Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
Since it is your belief clog, it is unassailable. And, so far, no one
can be sure of another person’s true motivation(s). Many don’t even
know their own!
And, regardless of the FBI’s interpretation, it was terrorism, plain
and simple. Of course, he may have been depressed. As I understand it,
he had a history of this ailment. And, being a shrink who dealt
specifically with this type of illness associated with the military,
I’d guess he was ripe for a break. His Imam said he was heartbroken
not being able to find a good wife!
On Nov 6, 6:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
it seems.
Jason
On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> it seems.
> Jason
> On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> Hi y'all - my beliefs are assailable, usually in light of more
> evidence. This was not simply terrorism.
> On Nov 6, 12:50 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Clog & Orn:
> > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > it seems.
> > Jason
> > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
Hi y'all - as more evidence becomes apparent from his colleagues who
are not able to speak openly owing to army regulations, it seems as
though religion played a large part in this.
On Nov 6, 8:17 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 1:59 pm, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - my beliefs are assailable, usually in light of more
> > evidence. This was not simply terrorism.
> > On Nov 6, 12:50 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Clog & Orn:
> > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > it seems.
> > > Jason
> > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
“It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
useof
violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
salt knows this!
> It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> it seems.
> Jason
> On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte... Hide quoted text -
Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> useof
> violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> salt knows this!
> On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Clog & Orn:
> > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > it seems.
> > Jason
> > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte... quoted text -
The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
Muslims (or other groups)?
On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > useof
> > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > salt knows this!
> > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Clog & Orn:
> > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > it seems.
> > > Jason
> > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte... text -
Hi y'all - I don't know how to lessen the killings as long as religion
is rife. IMHO there is a huge difference between the Christian bible
and the Muslim "bible." Muslims who read the Koran are faced with the
requirement to enslave the people of the book and kill or convert
infidels. It is absolutely plain 9.29 I suppose we should encourage
Muslims not to read the Koran and continue to believe (as some do)
that it is a religion of peace. A misguided Muslim is preferable to an
informed one as were the 9/11 group.
On Nov 7, 10:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> Muslims (or other groups)?
> On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > useof
> > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > salt knows this!
> > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > it seems.
> > > > Jason
> > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte... -
“The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
killings? “ – J
Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
History is my evidence.
And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
control types.
On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> Muslims (or other groups)?
> On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > useof
> > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > salt knows this!
> > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > it seems.
> > > > Jason
> > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte... -
Yes, I think that you just need to sit in the lotus position (in
totally selfish, selfless peace) and do absolutely nothing while
innocent people are murdered around you. That is very Buddha of you.
If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.
Jason
On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> killings? “ – J
> Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> History is my evidence.
> And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
> control types.
> On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > > useof
> > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > > salt knows this!
> > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > it seems.
> > > > > Jason
> > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> killings? “ – J
> Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> History is my evidence.
> And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
> control types.
> On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > > useof
> > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > > salt knows this!
> > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > it seems.
> > > > > Jason
> > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
“…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
because:
1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change. (“…culling
the herd,
implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended, that “…
how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be seen
as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
control.
4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should “…sit in
the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
all hyperbole aside.
QED
As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition used:
Argument by Generalization
Argument by Slogan
Argument by Half Truth
Argument by Selective Observation
Argument by Ad Hominem
Argument by Scenario
Moving the Goalposts
Argument by Laziness
Reductive Fallacy
Psychogenetic Fallacy
Argument by Emotive Language
Begging the Question
Bad Analogy
Extended Analogy
Argument from Spurious Similarity
Reifying
False Cause
Causal Reductionism
Tying
Special Pleading
Fallacy of Extension
Weasel Wording
Error of Fact
Pious Fraud
On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> answer.
> Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> worldviews creates tension, period.
> Jason
> On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > killings? “ – J
> > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > History is my evidence.
> > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
> > control types.
> > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > > > useof
> > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > > it seems.
> > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> because:
> 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change. (“…culling
> the herd,
> implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended, that “…
> how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be seen
> as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> control.
> 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should “…sit in
> the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> all hyperbole aside.
> QED
> As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition used:
> Argument by Generalization
> Argument by Slogan
> Argument by Half Truth
> Argument by Selective Observation
> Argument by Ad Hominem
> Argument by Scenario
> Moving the Goalposts
> Argument by Laziness
> Reductive Fallacy
> Psychogenetic Fallacy
> Argument by Emotive Language
> Begging the Question
> Bad Analogy
> Extended Analogy
> Argument from Spurious Similarity
> Reifying
> False Cause
> Causal Reductionism
> Tying
> Special Pleading
> Fallacy of Extension
> Weasel Wording
> Error of Fact
> Pious Fraud
> On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Orn,
> > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > answer.
> > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > Jason
> > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > killings? “ – J
> > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > History is my evidence.
> > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
> > > control types.
> > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > > > > useof
> > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > > > it seems.
> > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> Hi y'all - to accuse someone of "Pious Fraud" is to probe the depths
> of depravity!
> On Nov 7, 7:01 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> > Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> > intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> > least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> > fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> > I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> > because:
> > 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change. (“…culling
> > the herd,
> > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> > 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended, that “…
> > how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> > possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> > 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be seen
> > as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> > control.
> > 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should “…sit in
> > the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> > absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> > all hyperbole aside.
> > QED
> > As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> > worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> > possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> > all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition used:
> > Argument by Generalization
> > Argument by Slogan
> > Argument by Half Truth
> > Argument by Selective Observation
> > Argument by Ad Hominem
> > Argument by Scenario
> > Moving the Goalposts
> > Argument by Laziness
> > Reductive Fallacy
> > Psychogenetic Fallacy
> > Argument by Emotive Language
> > Begging the Question
> > Bad Analogy
> > Extended Analogy
> > Argument from Spurious Similarity
> > Reifying
> > False Cause
> > Causal Reductionism
> > Tying
> > Special Pleading
> > Fallacy of Extension
> > Weasel Wording
> > Error of Fact
> > Pious Fraud
> > On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Orn,
> > > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > > answer.
> > > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > > Jason
> > > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > killings? “ – J
> > > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > > History is my evidence.
> > > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> > > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
> > > > control types.
> > > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> > > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > > > > > useof
> > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > > > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > > > > it seems.
> > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> because:
> 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change. (“…culling
> the herd,
> implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended, that “…
> how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be seen
> as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> control.
> 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should “…sit in
> the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> all hyperbole aside.
> QED
> As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition used:
> Argument by Generalization
> Argument by Slogan
> Argument by Half Truth
> Argument by Selective Observation
> Argument by Ad Hominem
> Argument by Scenario
> Moving the Goalposts
> Argument by Laziness
> Reductive Fallacy
> Psychogenetic Fallacy
> Argument by Emotive Language
> Begging the Question
> Bad Analogy
> Extended Analogy
> Argument from Spurious Similarity
> Reifying
> False Cause
> Causal Reductionism
> Tying
> Special Pleading
> Fallacy of Extension
> Weasel Wording
> Error of Fact
> Pious Fraud
> On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Orn,
> > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > answer.
> > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > Jason
> > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > killings? “ – J
> > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > History is my evidence.
> > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier to
> > > control types.
> > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings between
> > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to a
> > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose the
> > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept under the
> > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will become
> > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the
> > > > > > useof
> > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might be valid
> > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the term
> > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood that
> > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even less as
> > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term that is
> > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and motivations
> > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth their
> > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is "the useof
> > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim in a
> > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim and
> > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of terrorism than
> > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in California
> > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago. People often
> > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially when the
> > > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed in some
> > > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism, there
> > > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing him for
> > > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may surface).
> > > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our military as
> > > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition, I hope
> > > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that support
> > > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic verses
> > > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what pushed him
> > > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations quickly
> > > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic organization
> > > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or praised
> > > > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is more
> > > > > > > important than humanity or American even for "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > > > it seems.
> > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military shooting today
> > > > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's military
> > > > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of the
> > > > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he shouted in
> > > > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together with his
> > > > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead to my
> > > > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please correct me.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
We can never know the full mix of motives and causes including depression,
death of his father, being picked on, etc., but I think that I think there
is a part of the modern Islam that contains a meme bent on self-immolation
and that to some unknown extent this Major picked up on it and verbalized
it.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Orn,
> That is a fair enough response. Thanks.
> Jason
> On Nov 7, 7:01 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> > Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> > intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> > least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> > fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> > I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> > because:
> > 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change.
> (“…culling
> > the herd,
> > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> > 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended, that
> “…
> > how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> > possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> > 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be seen
> > as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> > control.
> > 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should “…sit in
> > the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> > absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> > all hyperbole aside.
> > QED
> > As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> > worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> > possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> > all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition used:
> > Argument by Generalization
> > Argument by Slogan
> > Argument by Half Truth
> > Argument by Selective Observation
> > Argument by Ad Hominem
> > Argument by Scenario
> > Moving the Goalposts
> > Argument by Laziness
> > Reductive Fallacy
> > Psychogenetic Fallacy
> > Argument by Emotive Language
> > Begging the Question
> > Bad Analogy
> > Extended Analogy
> > Argument from Spurious Similarity
> > Reifying
> > False Cause
> > Causal Reductionism
> > Tying
> > Special Pleading
> > Fallacy of Extension
> > Weasel Wording
> > Error of Fact
> > Pious Fraud
> > On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Orn,
> > > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > > answer.
> > > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > > Jason
> > > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > killings? “ – J
> > > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > > History is my evidence.
> > > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> > > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier
> to
> > > > control types.
> > > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings
> between
> > > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to
> a
> > > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose
> the
> > > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept
> under the
> > > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will
> become
> > > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is
> "the
> > > > > > > useof
> > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might
> be valid
> > > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the
> term
> > > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood
> that
> > > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even
> less as
> > > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term
> that is
> > > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and
> motivations
> > > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth
> their
> > > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is
> "the useof
> > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim
> in a
> > > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim
> and
> > > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of
> terrorism than
> > > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in
> California
> > > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago.
> People often
> > > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially
> when the
> > > > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed
> in some
> > > > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism,
> there
> > > > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing
> him for
> > > > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may
> surface).
> > > > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our
> military as
> > > > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition,
> I hope
> > > > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that
> support
> > > > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic
> verses
> > > > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what
> pushed him
> > > > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations
> quickly
> > > > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic
> organization
> > > > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or
> praised
> > > > > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is
> more
> > > > > > > > important than humanity or American even for
> "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > > > > it seems.
> > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military
> shooting today
> > > > > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's
> military
> > > > > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of
> the
> > > > > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he
> shouted in
> > > > > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together
> with his
> > > > > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead
> to my
> > > > > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please
> correct me.
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> We can never know the full mix of motives and causes including depression,
> death of his father, being picked on, etc., but I think that I think there
> is a part of the modern Islam that contains a meme bent on self-immolation
> and that to some unknown extent this Major picked up on it and verbalized
> it.
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Orn,
> > That is a fair enough response. Thanks.
> > Jason
> > On Nov 7, 7:01 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> > > Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> > > intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> > > least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> > > fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> > > I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> > > because:
> > > 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change.
> > (“…culling
> > > the herd,
> > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> > > 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended, that
> > “…
> > > how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> > > possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> > > 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be seen
> > > as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> > > control.
> > > 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should “…sit in
> > > the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> > > absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> > > all hyperbole aside.
> > > QED
> > > As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> > > worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> > > possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> > > all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition used:
> > > Argument by Generalization
> > > Argument by Slogan
> > > Argument by Half Truth
> > > Argument by Selective Observation
> > > Argument by Ad Hominem
> > > Argument by Scenario
> > > Moving the Goalposts
> > > Argument by Laziness
> > > Reductive Fallacy
> > > Psychogenetic Fallacy
> > > Argument by Emotive Language
> > > Begging the Question
> > > Bad Analogy
> > > Extended Analogy
> > > Argument from Spurious Similarity
> > > Reifying
> > > False Cause
> > > Causal Reductionism
> > > Tying
> > > Special Pleading
> > > Fallacy of Extension
> > > Weasel Wording
> > > Error of Fact
> > > Pious Fraud
> > > On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Orn,
> > > > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > > > answer.
> > > > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > > > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > > > Jason
> > > > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > > killings? “ – J
> > > > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the herd,
> > > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > > > History is my evidence.
> > > > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I would
> > > > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and easier
> > to
> > > > > control types.
> > > > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds of
> > > > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings
> > between
> > > > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them to
> > > > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with the
> > > > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming to
> > a
> > > > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He chose
> > the
> > > > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept
> > under the
> > > > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will
> > become
> > > > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is
> > "the
> > > > > > > > useof
> > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion might
> > be valid
> > > > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source while
> > > > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used, the
> > term
> > > > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally understood
> > that
> > > > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use even
> > less as
> > > > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy term
> > that is
> > > > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and
> > motivations
> > > > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth worth
> > their
> > > > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism is
> > "the useof
> > > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a Muslim
> > in a
> > > > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a Muslim
> > and
> > > > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of
> > terrorism than
> > > > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in
> > California
> > > > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago.
> > People often
> > > > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them especially
> > when the
> > > > > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is placed
> > in some
> > > > > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be terrorism,
> > there
> > > > > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group) backing
> > him for
> > > > > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may
> > surface).
> > > > > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible religious
> > > > > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our
> > military as
> > > > > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In addition,
> > I hope
> > > > > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran that
> > support
> > > > > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle Koranic
> > verses
> > > > > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what
> > pushed him
> > > > > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic organizations
> > quickly
> > > > > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic
> > organization
> > > > > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the United States military or
> > praised
> > > > > > > > > any Muslim's soldier's sacrifice for this country. Islam is
> > more
> > > > > > > > > important than humanity or American even for
> > "American-Muslims"--or so
> > > > > > > > > it seems.
> > > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:59 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I find it hard to believe that the military
> > shooting today
> > > > > > > > > > was not motivated by religion. Although the perpetrator's
> > military
> > > > > > > > > > record shows "no religious preference," on the morning of
> > the
> > > > > > > > > > incident, he was apparently dressed in Muslim attire and he
> > shouted in
> > > > > > > > > > Arabic "God is Great" before he opened fire. This, together
> > with his
> > > > > > > > > > declared aversion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, lead
> > to my
> > > > > > > > > > feelings that the crime is based on religion. Please
> > correct me.
> >http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/06/2009-11-06_suspte...
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
From a review:
*She profiles fundamentalism, which she views as a mostly 20th-century
response to the "painful transformation" of modernity. *
The really sad thing is this really will make it very had for Arab Americans
in general to participate or have a career in the US military. Every
"enemy" ethnic group has had to deal with a backlash in the US - German
Americans and esp the Japanese in WWII.
I thought it was interesting that this guy was going to a Mosque and
according to the religious leader there, he couldn't find a woman who was
religiously conservative enough, praying 5 times a day and so forth. I
don't think that would have been a problem in a lot of places, even Britian.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi y'all - is there a "modern" Islam? The meme you refer to is 9.29
> On Nov 8, 1:12 pm, Tom <ssoitg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We can never know the full mix of motives and causes including
> depression,
> > death of his father, being picked on, etc., but I think that I think
> there
> > is a part of the modern Islam that contains a meme bent on
> self-immolation
> > and that to some unknown extent this Major picked up on it and verbalized
> > it.
> > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Orn,
> > > That is a fair enough response. Thanks.
> > > Jason
> > > On Nov 7, 7:01 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> > > > Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> > > > intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> > > > least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> > > > fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> > > > I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> > > > because:
> > > > 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change.
> > > (“…culling
> > > > the herd,
> > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> > > > 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended,
> that
> > > “…
> > > > how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> > > > possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> > > > 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be
> seen
> > > > as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> > > > control.
> > > > 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should
> “…sit in
> > > > the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> > > > absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> > > > all hyperbole aside.
> > > > QED
> > > > As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> > > > worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> > > > possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> > > > all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition
> used:
> > > > Argument by Generalization
> > > > Argument by Slogan
> > > > Argument by Half Truth
> > > > Argument by Selective Observation
> > > > Argument by Ad Hominem
> > > > Argument by Scenario
> > > > Moving the Goalposts
> > > > Argument by Laziness
> > > > Reductive Fallacy
> > > > Psychogenetic Fallacy
> > > > Argument by Emotive Language
> > > > Begging the Question
> > > > Bad Analogy
> > > > Extended Analogy
> > > > Argument from Spurious Similarity
> > > > Reifying
> > > > False Cause
> > > > Causal Reductionism
> > > > Tying
> > > > Special Pleading
> > > > Fallacy of Extension
> > > > Weasel Wording
> > > > Error of Fact
> > > > Pious Fraud
> > > > On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Orn,
> > > > > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > > > > answer.
> > > > > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > > > > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > > > > Jason
> > > > > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds
> of
> > > > > > killings? “ – J
> > > > > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the
> herd,
> > > > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would
> work)
> > > > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > > > > History is my evidence.
> > > > > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I
> would
> > > > > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and
> easier
> > > to
> > > > > > control types.
> > > > > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds
> of
> > > > > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings
> > > between
> > > > > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them
> to
> > > > > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with
> the
> > > > > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming
> to
> > > a
> > > > > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He
> chose
> > > the
> > > > > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept
> > > under the
> > > > > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will
> > > become
> > > > > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > > > > On Nov 7, 1:37 am, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism
> is
> > > "the
> > > > > > > > > useof
> > > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion
> might
> > > be valid
> > > > > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source
> while
> > > > > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used,
> the
> > > term
> > > > > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally
> understood
> > > that
> > > > > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use
> even
> > > less as
> > > > > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy
> term
> > > that is
> > > > > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and
> > > motivations
> > > > > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth
> worth
> > > their
> > > > > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism
> is
> > > "the useof
> > > > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a
> Muslim
> > > in a
> > > > > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a
> Muslim
> > > and
> > > > > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of
> > > terrorism than
> > > > > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in
> > > California
> > > > > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago.
> > > People often
> > > > > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them
> especially
> > > when the
> > > > > > > > > > shooter watches them bleed to death (or, the person is
> placed
> > > in some
> > > > > > > > > > other really stressful situation). For this to be
> terrorism,
> > > there
> > > > > > > > > > needs to be some organization (or even small group)
> backing
> > > him for
> > > > > > > > > > coercive, intimidation, or political purposes (which may
> > > surface).
> > > > > > > > > > Otherwise, it is a criminal act with some possible
> religious
> > > > > > > > > > motivation. I sincerely hope that Muslims fight in our
> > > military as
> > > > > > > > > > Americans for America (or, even for humanity). In
> addition,
> > > I hope
> > > > > > > > > > that this brings forth some of the verses in the Koran
> that
> > > support
> > > > > > > > > > some of this violent behavior. Those calls to battle
> Koranic
> > > verses
> > > > > > > > > > in combination with the stressful situation may be what
> > > pushed him
> > > > > > > > > > over the edge. I also noticed that the Islamic
> organizations
> > > quickly
> > > > > > > > > > denounced the act of violence but no, not a one, Islamic
> > > organization
> > > > > > > > > > praised Muslims for serving in the
Hi y'all - I haven't read her book, but I believe there are two forms
of Islam. Those who have read the Koran and those who haven't. Those
who have read the Koran and adhere to their faith are by definition
"fundamental" because the Koran is quite clear. There is some excuse
for those who have not read the Koran as they can be coerced by their
Imam's into believing whatever the current politically correct flavor
is.
I saw a Christian on TV who was shocked at the fact that Muslims place
their God on a higher pedestal than their country and thus should not
be allowed in the military. I believe this Christian (as all the ex
Occam's Christians) would confirm that the 10 Commandments are more
important than the Constitution. The ultimate hypocrisy. The pot is
warming up!
On Nov 8, 10:15 pm, Tom <ssoitg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From a review:
> *She profiles fundamentalism, which she views as a mostly 20th-century
> response to the "painful transformation" of modernity. *
> The really sad thing is this really will make it very had for Arab Americans
> in general to participate or have a career in the US military. Every
> "enemy" ethnic group has had to deal with a backlash in the US - German
> Americans and esp the Japanese in WWII.
> I thought it was interesting that this guy was going to a Mosque and
> according to the religious leader there, he couldn't find a woman who was
> religiously conservative enough, praying 5 times a day and so forth. I
> don't think that would have been a problem in a lot of places, even Britian.
> Tom
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi y'all - is there a "modern" Islam? The meme you refer to is 9.29
> > On Nov 8, 1:12 pm, Tom <ssoitg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > We can never know the full mix of motives and causes including
> > depression,
> > > death of his father, being picked on, etc., but I think that I think
> > there
> > > is a part of the modern Islam that contains a meme bent on
> > self-immolation
> > > and that to some unknown extent this Major picked up on it and verbalized
> > > it.
> > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Orn,
> > > > That is a fair enough response. Thanks.
> > > > Jason
> > > > On Nov 7, 7:01 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > “…If I am wrong about your general philosophy, tell me how.” – J
> > > > > Jason, normally I do not respond to intentionally provocative and
> > > > > intentionally misleading requests. In this one instance, since you at
> > > > > least admitted to using hyperbole at the very least if not numerous
> > > > > fallacies, I’ll give a short response.
> > > > > I can only guess that you either didn’t read my post or misread it
> > > > > because:
> > > > > 1. I gave specific required actions to bring about change.
> > > > (“…culling
> > > > > the herd,
> > > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would work)
> > > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s)…)
> > > > > 2. I pointed to all of history as evidence of what I contended,
> > that
> > > > “…
> > > > > how can we minimize the number of these kinds of killings?...” – J is
> > > > > possible only with the changes/actions mentioned in #1 above.
> > > > > 3. I then went on to suggest that other types of killing can be
> > seen
> > > > > as being even more important to address based on quantity and ease of
> > > > > control.
> > > > > 4. None of this implies in any way that I nor anyone should
> > “…sit in
> > > > > the lotus position (in totally selfish, selfless peace) and do
> > > > > absolutely nothing while innocent people are murdered around you.”,
> > > > > all hyperbole aside.
> > > > > QED
> > > > > As to your comment that “…having people in a group with different
> > > > > worldviews creates tension, period.” I would agree that this is a
> > > > > possibility, albeit not an absolute any more than the conclusion that
> > > > > all atheists hold the same beliefs is if you had not in addition
> > used:
> > > > > Argument by Generalization
> > > > > Argument by Slogan
> > > > > Argument by Half Truth
> > > > > Argument by Selective Observation
> > > > > Argument by Ad Hominem
> > > > > Argument by Scenario
> > > > > Moving the Goalposts
> > > > > Argument by Laziness
> > > > > Reductive Fallacy
> > > > > Psychogenetic Fallacy
> > > > > Argument by Emotive Language
> > > > > Begging the Question
> > > > > Bad Analogy
> > > > > Extended Analogy
> > > > > Argument from Spurious Similarity
> > > > > Reifying
> > > > > False Cause
> > > > > Causal Reductionism
> > > > > Tying
> > > > > Special Pleading
> > > > > Fallacy of Extension
> > > > > Weasel Wording
> > > > > Error of Fact
> > > > > Pious Fraud
> > > > > On Nov 7, 2:08 pm, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Orn,
> > > > > > By the way, I am partly trying to rile you but also get a clear
> > > > > > answer.
> > > > > > Remember that simply having people in a group with different
> > > > > > worldviews creates tension, period.
> > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > On Nov 7, 3:30 pm, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > “The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds
> > of
> > > > > > > killings? “ – J
> > > > > > > Personally I do not think this is possible without culling the
> > herd,
> > > > > > > implementing global totalitarianism, (not sure even this would
> > work)
> > > > > > > or using some other type of draconian measure(s).
> > > > > > > History is my evidence.
> > > > > > > And, IIF one is interested in minimizing killings in general, I
> > would
> > > > > > > suggest starting out by dealing with more prolific types and
> > easier
> > > > to
> > > > > > > control types.
> > > > > > > On Nov 7, 8:42 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > The question is: how can we minimize the number of these kinds
> > of
> > > > > > > > killings? Christians had similar kinds of killing with the
> > > > > > > > abortionist doctor recently; England had a number of killings
> > > > between
> > > > > > > > the Catholics and the Protestants. What was effective for them
> > to
> > > > > > > > reduce the body count? And can some of those methods work with
> > the
> > > > > > > > Muslims (or other groups)?
> > > > > > > > On Nov 7, 8:54 am, Clogtowner <clogtow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - As I see and hear more about this guy, I am coming
> > to
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > > conclusion that he became faced with an ultimate choice. He
> > chose
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood. I believe it will be swept
> > > > under the
> > > > > > > > > table and a less controversial reason given. Nevertheless,
> > > > > > > > > unfortunately, I prophecy (go on then) that these acts will
> > > > become
> > > > > > > > > more prevalent here, as they have in Europe.
> > > > > > > > > > “It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism
> > is
> > > > "the
> > > > > > > > > > useof
> > > > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com)….” – J
> > > > > > > > > > Yes Jason, I understand your opinion. And, your opinion
> > might
> > > > be valid
> > > > > > > > > > IIF one cherry picks one of many definitions at a source
> > while
> > > > > > > > > > ignoring the abbreviation ‘esp.’.
> > > > > > > > > > When the rest of the definitions are addressed and used,
> > the
> > > > term
> > > > > > > > > > terrorist can be perceived as being quite accurate.
> > > > > > > > > > However, I won’t belabor it because it is generally
> > understood
> > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > there is no global agreement on the meaning of the term!
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
> > > > > > > > > > Personally I don’t normally use the term and like its use
> > even
> > > > less as
> > > > > > > > > > it is presented in current day parlance. It is a snappy
> > term
> > > > that is
> > > > > > > > > > evocative and easy to assign any number of attributes and
> > > > motivations
> > > > > > > > > > to…for any occasion. Any member of the Ministry of Truth
> > worth
> > > > their
> > > > > > > > > > salt knows this!
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 6, 10:50 am, Jason <jason_gros...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Clog & Orn:
> > > > > > > > > > > It was not an act of terrorism in my opinion. Terrorism
> > is
> > > > "the useof
> > > > > > > > > > > violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
> > > > > > > > > > > politicalpurposes" (dictionary.com). This man was a
> > Muslim
> > > > in a
> > > > > > > > > > > desperate situation who had been harassed for being a
> > Muslim
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > feared being deployed. This act is no more an act of
> > > > terrorism than
> > > > > > > > > > > the combat marine who blow away some police officers in
> > > > California
> > > > > > > > > > > when he wasordered to re-deploy to Iraq a few years ago.
> > > > People often
> > > > > > > > > > > get religious when someone blasts a hole in them
> > especially
> > > > when the
> > > > > > > > > > > shooter
|
