Jump to content

OT: Explosions at the Boston Marathon


spndnchz

Recommended Posts

Posted

Good point. When I think true democracy, I think direct democracy.

 

right, I guess we'd really be arguing about the definition of the word "true" which is just one step above arguing the definition of the word "is"

Posted

right, I guess we'd really be arguing about the definition of the word "true" which is just one step above arguing the definition of the word "is"

 

Who doesn't love a good "what is, is?" debate? :lol:

Posted

I've been reading this thread with curiosity, just to see where things end up. It seems that a lot of people want it to be some kind of religious extremism tied to known terrorist groups that have sworn the United States as an enemy. I'm not sure why anyone would want that to be the case, but it surely seems that some people want to jump to that conclusion. I can't say that I want that. I'd much rather that there be no connection or one based solely on misguided personal influence than some agenda of a terrorist organization.

 

I think people, in general, want things to fit into their world-view to confirm they know what's going on. I don't mean this in a negative way, just that people want reality to line up with what the believe and expect will happen. Large scale the desire that this be the work of an organized group that the powers that be can quantify and develop a strategy for is a comforting thought. The alternative is that two more or less American teens/20s cooked this up is more disturbing, since it'll undoubtedly be used as a good reason for the government to intrude into our lives more. Note that this has nothing to do with the party in charge, both of them would do it equally blatantly.

 

Also, I kinda can't believe those kids were as poorly planned after the event as they were. I mean, wouldn't you withdraw some cash from the ATM ahead of time so you didn't need to knock-off a 7-11? Kids these days.

 

As for self-radicalization, let's put this into a SabreSpace light: some guy is a Sabres fan, but not hardcore. He thinks Darcy sucks, but Lindy is great and Afinogenov could really skate. He signs up to Sabrespace during the 2007 run and starts reading the generally well-thought out posts, both negative and positive. The negative posts about Darcy strike a nerve. If the Darcy posts make sense, maybe the others by those authors do too. He keeps reading and reading and over time becomes a full-on Stormcloud. No one targetted him or pushed him directly, but his view has changed. (Obvs, I'm not actually equating the two groups, it just had to go one way or another). I'm guessing this is what happened to this kid. Gets angry about something US-related (Obama not helping the Chechnya rebels, etc.) and it spirals. It doesn't seem far-fetched to me at all.

Posted

Who doesn't love a good "what is, is?" debate? :lol:

 

Is, is what it is. No debate.

 

:P

 

I think people, in general, want things to fit into their world-view to confirm they know what's going on. I don't mean this in a negative way, just that people want reality to line up with what the believe and expect will happen. Large scale the desire that this be the work of an organized group that the powers that be can quantify and develop a strategy for is a comforting thought. The alternative is that two more or less American teens/20s cooked this up is more disturbing, since it'll undoubtedly be used as a good reason for the government to intrude into our lives more. Note that this has nothing to do with the party in charge, both of them would do it equally blatantly.

 

Also, I kinda can't believe those kids were as poorly planned after the event as they were. I mean, wouldn't you withdraw some cash from the ATM ahead of time so you didn't need to knock-off a 7-11? Kids these days.

 

As for self-radicalization, let's put this into a SabreSpace light: some guy is a Sabres fan, but not hardcore. He thinks Darcy sucks, but Lindy is great and Afinogenov could really skate. He signs up to Sabrespace during the 2007 run and starts reading the generally well-thought out posts, both negative and positive. The negative posts about Darcy strike a nerve. If the Darcy posts make sense, maybe the others by those authors do too. He keeps reading and reading and over time becomes a full-on Stormcloud. No one targetted him or pushed him directly, but his view has changed. (Obvs, I'm not actually equating the two groups, it just had to go one way or another). I'm guessing this is what happened to this kid. Gets angry about something US-related (Obama not helping the Chechnya rebels, etc.) and it spirals. It doesn't seem far-fetched to me at all.

 

An excellent post, MattPie.

 

The bold and underlined is what I think it was all about too. Much more than a "Militant Islamist" thing.

 

I hope I don't re-open a can of worms.

Posted

I think people, in general, want things to fit into their world-view to confirm they know what's going on. I don't mean this in a negative way, just that people want reality to line up with what the believe and expect will happen. Large scale the desire that this be the work of an organized group that the powers that be can quantify and develop a strategy for is a comforting thought. The alternative is that two more or less American teens/20s cooked this up is more disturbing, since it'll undoubtedly be used as a good reason for the government to intrude into our lives more. Note that this has nothing to do with the party in charge, both of them would do it equally blatantly.

 

Also, I kinda can't believe those kids were as poorly planned after the event as they were. I mean, wouldn't you withdraw some cash from the ATM ahead of time so you didn't need to knock-off a 7-11? Kids these days.

 

As for self-radicalization, let's put this into a SabreSpace light: some guy is a Sabres fan, but not hardcore. He thinks Darcy sucks, but Lindy is great and Afinogenov could really skate. He signs up to Sabrespace during the 2007 run and starts reading the generally well-thought out posts, both negative and positive. The negative posts about Darcy strike a nerve. If the Darcy posts make sense, maybe the others by those authors do too. He keeps reading and reading and over time becomes a full-on Stormcloud. No one targetted him or pushed him directly, but his view has changed. (Obvs, I'm not actually equating the two groups, it just had to go one way or another). I'm guessing this is what happened to this kid. Gets angry about something US-related (Obama not helping the Chechnya rebels, etc.) and it spirals. It doesn't seem far-fetched to me at all.

 

They didn't rob the 7-11.....

 

And if Darcy dies......I will be sure to have a rock solid alibi........

Posted

I've been reading this thread with curiosity, just to see where things end up. It seems that a lot of people want it to be some kind of religious extremism tied to known terrorist groups that have sworn the United States as an enemy. I'm not sure why anyone would want that to be the case, but it surely seems that some people want to jump to that conclusion. I can't say that I want that. I'd much rather that there be no connection or one based solely on misguided personal influence than some agenda of a terrorist organization.

 

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I don't want -- and I haven't read any posts in this thread that make me think anyone here wants -- any outcome in particular. It certainly doesn't make me feel any safer to know that we now have homegrown bloodthirsty Islamic militants living among us.

 

What I think is really important, though, is that people shouldn't kid themselves about who did this and why they did it. And saying "there's too many factors, it's too complex" or "maybe it was CTE" or "all religions have extremists" is just kidding oneself.

 

There are many ways in which wars are lost. One way to guarantee failure is to pretend that the war doesn't exist.

Posted

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I don't want -- and I haven't read any posts in this thread that make me think anyone here wants -- any outcome in particular. It certainly doesn't make me feel any safer to know that we now have homegrown bloodthirsty Islamic militants living among us.

 

What I think is really important, though, is that people shouldn't kid themselves about who did this and why they did it. And saying "there's too many factors, it's too complex" or "maybe it was CTE" or "all religions have extremists" is just kidding oneself.

 

There are many ways in which wars are lost. One way to guarantee failure is to pretend that the war doesn't exist.

 

freeman, again, we still don't know if this was done for religious reasons, nationalistic reasons, or other.

 

It troubles me that a very smart man is jumping to conclusions. And you may end up right, but you are too smart to not have a mind that is open to other possibilities.

Posted

freeman, again, we still don't know if this was done for religious reasons, nationalistic reasons, or other.

 

It troubles me that a very smart man is jumping to conclusions. And you may end up right, but you are too smart to not have a mind that is open to other possibilities.

 

No Eleven....Brian Williams led with the story they did this because of US involvement overseas and considered it an attack on Islam.

 

That's NBC/Universal/GE/Comcast/FederalGvtBailoutCronies saying it.......not Fox.....

Posted

No Eleven....Brian Williams led with the story they did this because of US involvement overseas and considered it an attack on Islam.

 

That's NBC/Universal/GE/Comcast/FederalGvtBailoutCronies saying it.......not Fox.....

 

Someone fill me in, because (as usual), I didn't watch TV news.

 

EDIT: Even google isn't giving me anything.

Posted

 

 

freeman, again, we still don't know if this was done for religious reasons, nationalistic reasons, or other.

 

It troubles me that a very smart man is jumping to conclusions. And you may end up right, but you are too smart to not have a mind that is open to other possibilities.

 

What, the AP article I linked to hours ago not good enough for you?

 

The tactic of claiming someone "smart" is somehow making an error in judgment is old. If you really thought he was smart, wouldn't you reevaluate your position instead?

Posted

What, the AP article I linked to hours ago not good enough for you?

 

The tactic of claiming someone "smart" is somehow making an error in judgment is old. If you really thought he was smart, wouldn't you reevaluate your position instead?

 

I'm currently reading/watching/listening to the link from CNN above. I don't have time to track every post here, and I must have missed your AP link.

 

Your remark ignores the respect that I have for nfreeman.

 

 

Yep, it's there.

 

I pray for the day when the guys with the guns aren't in charge of that religion anymore.

Posted

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I don't want -- and I haven't read any posts in this thread that make me think anyone here wants -- any outcome in particular. It certainly doesn't make me feel any safer to know that we now have homegrown bloodthirsty Islamic militants living among us.

 

What I think is really important, though, is that people shouldn't kid themselves about who did this and why they did it. And saying "there's too many factors, it's too complex" or "maybe it was CTE" or "all religions have extremists" is just kidding oneself.

 

There are many ways in which wars are lost. One way to guarantee failure is to pretend that the war doesn't exist.

 

Islam is at war with America + these boys were Muslim => These boys attacked America... is way too simplified.

 

The headline needs to be Islamic Terrorism strikes again. You are correct, it is important to relate this attack to all the others.

 

The investigation needs to go through all the factors that led to these boys deciding to act violently as opposed to the other 2.7 million American Muslims. Everything. It's not "too complex" but it sure as hell is more complex than the equation above. And if we want to stop more American Citizens from joining this evil, we need to know as much as possible.

 

We're past the headlines here, in this conversation. I can only speak for me, but I'm not denying the element that is our enemy. I want to know what factors create recruits for these people. I can't kill all the bad guys, so I'd like to know how they grow their ranks, so I can starve them off.

Posted

 

 

freeman, again, we still don't know if this was done for religious reasons, nationalistic reasons, or other.

 

It troubles me that a very smart man is jumping to conclusions. And you may end up right, but you are too smart to not have a mind that is open to other possibilities.

 

Well, the younger one told the Feds today that it was religiously motivated:

http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/a/SB10001424127887324235304578440843633991044?mg=reno64-wsj

 

Frankly, though, even before that news came out, it was pretty apparent. The older one went to a jihadi training camp. He posted martyrdom glorification videos on YouTube. He was ejected from his mosque for radicalism (among other things, he yelled at the imam for glorifying MLK because MLK was not a Muslim). He was named after a Muslim conqueror who built pyramids out of his victims' skulls.

 

It's also worth noting that Islamism effectively conflates religion and nationalism.

 

BTW, here's the lefty Andrew Sullivan's response to the piece you posted from the Guardian (and to your general view on whether this was religiously motivated): http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/04/22/yes-of-course-it-was-jihad/

 

In the abstract you are certainly right that jumping to conclusions is unwise and in this context perhaps dangerous. But I think there were more than enough dots here that connecting them was justified.

 

Posted

Well, the younger one told the Feds today that it was religiously motivated:

http://m.us.wsj.com/...4?mg=reno64-wsj

 

Frankly, though, even before that news came out, it was pretty apparent. The older one went to a jihadi training camp. He posted martyrdom glorification videos on YouTube. He was ejected from his mosque for radicalism (among other things, he yelled at the imam for glorifying MLK because MLK was not a Muslim). He was named after a Muslim conqueror who built pyramids out of his victims' skulls.

 

It's also worth noting that Islamism effectively conflates religion and nationalism.

 

BTW, here's the lefty Andrew Sullivan's response to the piece you posted from the Guardian (and to your general view on whether this was religiously motivated): http://dish.andrewsu...e-it-was-jihad/

 

In the abstract you are certainly right that jumping to conclusions is unwise and in this context perhaps dangerous. But I think there were more than enough dots here that connecting them was justified.

 

see above...

Posted

You guys do know that Al Qaeda has access to this message board right. Just saying.

 

I always figured that Toddkaz dude was involved in subversive activities.

Posted

Well, the younger one told the Feds today that it was religiously motivated:

http://m.us.wsj.com/...4?mg=reno64-wsj

 

Frankly, though, even before that news came out, it was pretty apparent. The older one went to a jihadi training camp. He posted martyrdom glorification videos on YouTube. He was ejected from his mosque for radicalism (among other things, he yelled at the imam for glorifying MLK because MLK was not a Muslim). He was named after a Muslim conqueror who built pyramids out of his victims' skulls.

 

It's also worth noting that Islamism effectively conflates religion and nationalism.

 

BTW, here's the lefty Andrew Sullivan's response to the piece you posted from the Guardian (and to your general view on whether this was religiously motivated): http://dish.andrewsu...e-it-was-jihad/

 

In the abstract you are certainly right that jumping to conclusions is unwise and in this context perhaps dangerous. But I think there were more than enough dots here that connecting them was justified.

 

I don't think the ultra-PC crowd and Islamic apologists will ever accept enough dots to make such an obvious connection.

 

The bottom line here is that the religion of Islam is most definitely not one of peace. Muhammad, through the Quran, made it quite clear that any non-believers were to be converted by the sword. These so-called "Islamic extremists" are just the ones with the balls to practice what is preached in their so-called "holy book."

 

As an atheist, I find all religions to be nutty. But as an objective observer of world affairs, it is apparent that one is currently far more dangerous than the others. The solution is quite complicated and nuanced and shouldn't involve invading every Muslim-majority country around the globe. But to deny or even downplay the actual problem - that Islam and Sharia law is a threat to Western civilization (Europe much more so than the US) - is foolish.

Posted

I don't think the ultra-PC crowd and Islamic apologists will ever accept enough dots to make such an obvious connection.

 

The bottom line here is that the religion of Islam is most definitely not one of peace. Muhammad, through the Quran, made it quite clear that any non-believers were to be converted by the sword. These so-called "Islamic extremists" are just the ones with the balls to practice what is preached in their so-called "holy book."

 

As an atheist, I find all religions to be nutty. But as an objective observer of world affairs, it is apparent that one is currently far more dangerous than the others. The solution is quite complicated and nuanced and shouldn't involve invading every Muslim-majority country around the globe. But to deny or even downplay the actual problem - that Islam and Sharia law is a threat to Western civilization (Europe much more so than the US) - is foolish.

Actually, the solution isn't nuanced or complicated at all, but it is Final. You guys can use all perty words you want, but this is what you are talking about.

Posted

 

Actually, the solution isn't nuanced or complicated at all, but it is Final. You guys can use all perty words you want, but this is what you are talking about.

 

Ridiculous.

Posted

CNN has a story up right now quoting the uncle about some Armenian friend in the area up here who was a bad influence on the brothers. Watertown has a large Armenian population, there's even an Armenian museum right across the street from me. I know everything right now says they did it alone, but maybe they were seeking out that guy and that's what put them in Watertown.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...