- 2,239
- caswellhouse
Boston Bombing, Boston Marathon April 15th
- Thread starter Spagetti69
- 1,061 comments
- 53,700 views
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
The vast majority of terrorism in the world is committed by Muslim extremists. I think if you are going to solve a problem like this it's important to call a spade a spade, and not pretend it's just generic terrorism which it isn't
If he turns out to be a vegetarian and committed these cats in the name of veganism, then yes, it's highly appropriate to call him a Vegan terrorist. From what has been reported in the media in this case so far, he committed these acts because he's a Muslim and felt that Islam was being attacked, Iraq, Afghanistan...blah blah blah. As far a I know his eating habits played no role in this.
- 17,865
- 509
And neither do you. Insisting on being accurate only in regards to the religious identity is, more or less, bigotry in my mind. Or will you refer to every Christian terrorist as such in various other threads?
His religion is irrelevant in my mind.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
If I have used any inaccuracies in any regard to this Muslim terrorist feel free to point them out. He is a Muslim terrorist is he not? How is it bigoted to call him what he is? Explain how, according to his brother as reported in the media, his primary motivation for this is rooted in him Muslim faith, how that can be irrelevant? You are just burying your head in the sand if you really believe that.
- 17,865
- 509
What I am asking is why you feel the need to repeat it endlessly, to the point of redundancy. It would be on par with me stating saying "the black murder" every time I mentioned OJ Simpson way back in the day.
You saying his motivation is tied to Islam is on par with saying the KKK is tied to Christianity, but you aren't bothering to add in the part about it being extremist or a minority in the culture. If you'd like to be accurate while endless reminding everyone he was Muslim, bother to add in the extremist part as well, since you seem to have no worries adding half a second to something you're typing.
- 2,239
- caswellhouse
Carlos Arredondo ( cowboy hat hero ) visits Jeff Bauman ( guy in picture).
http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/...cowboy-hat-hero-reunites-with-bombing-victim/
http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/...cowboy-hat-hero-reunites-with-bombing-victim/
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I guess I'll have to be more clear about what I said. OJ Simpson was acquitted by the way but he's the example you used so I'll run with it. The colour of OJ's skin was not germaine to the crime. If indeed he committed the murders, he didn't do it because he was black or in the name of a black cause. So whether he was black or white or olive skinned, or Muslim or Christian is irrelevant in terms of the crime he committed. You see where I'm going with this or do I need to explain why their being Muslim was germaine to this particular act of terrorism?
But you do have a point, I will call the Boston bombers, Muslim extremist terrorists from now on. At least we can agree on that:tup:
Air breathing, two-legged, male, Caucasian, Chechnyan, Russian-trained Terrorists?
Which, obviously, is not as important as being "Muslims".
Oh, yeah. Muslim is easier to (stereo)type.
See above for logic.
- 44,184
- Blackburn
- Furinkazen_54
In response I am taking my post from the Islam thread and putting it here.
FurinkazenI believe this would be the most fitting thread for this. Just yesterday we had the tragic bombings in Boston, and I was having a discussion on facebook with a number of friends about this, and they (being muslims) where disgusted how #muslims was being used on twitter in relation to the bombings. Also I had discussed in the past with a few friends of mine at college (student and adult alike) how they believed there was no such thing as a terrorist... I have struggled for a while to think of how to put it but I think If found a way... this is (with a couple edits) something I wrote on my facebook yesterday after a somewhat heated debate.
"Terrorists" do exist. Sorry to anyone who takes offence but they do - the meaning of a terrorist as a word is to "cause terror" - NOTHING is mentioned in any dictionary or definition about a particular sect, cult, or religion. So when my muslim friends turn around and say "terrorists don't exist" I think that they really mean something else - because if you are a muslim following your religion, you won't do any of these terrible things and you won't be a terrorist - to a normal muslim, it seems that a terrorist is not representing their religion and faith, which is right.
If I went into a church and planted a bomb claiming to be Christian then all christian people afterwards would be saying "he's not a christian". I think sometimes there has to be a distinguishing barrier - we know there are terrorists, and THEY believe they are muslims, and they are following the religion which justifies there actions, when most muslims, the proper people who I have learnt a lot about from many people over the past few years, will actually stand up and say "no, this is not us, despite what they say, we do not believe these people - the are not us".
What i've said here isn't intended to cause any offence, apologies if it does, for me this is what I understand from talking to people. It's an ultimately difficult picture to put together, skewed even more by how the media portray groups of people at times... but surely I hope what I say makes some sense to you all...
As an additional expansion on that point - I read on some news afterwards that an airport alert happened soon after the Boston Bombs as passengers where alarmed that a couple passengers where speaking arabic (source here)... If someone speaking there own language causes a security alert, everyone must be in a jumpy mood. But such things and specific call-outs and mentions from people and the media are just going to make people's attitudes towards people worse.
Ultimately, I find it quite sad when something like this happens, everyone in a group (muslims in this case) end up getting tarred with the same brush. Though at same time in a modern climate like now, it's somewhat expected.
Furi.
- 17,865
- 509
It is very poor logic because you are adamant about Islam being the cause here when, as you've said, we don't have all the information. Islam doesn't push people to acts of terrorism, extremism and perversion of it does. Failing to draw a distinction in this till called on it is poor form, and between this and elsewhere, I've drawn the conclusion that you have some anti-Muslim sentiments.
But at least you are labeling them extremist, so yay for that, though I feel you are missing the actual point I and others are trying to make for you.
- 44,184
- Blackburn
- Furinkazen_54
Azuremen
Agreed totally.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 17,865
- 509
I haven't jumped to any conclusions, just logically drawn them from your wording and attitude. The only logic you've used is that, due to suspicion of attackers faith, you make a point of labeling them with it EVERY single time you mention it.
Honestly, I didn't realize they had Fox News in Canada.
- 23,800
- Philippines
Indeed.
If they were displaced by the war and unrest in Europe, then radicalized in Russia, then I'd say their being Male and sort of Caucasian (Okay, Checnya isn't the Caucasus) are just as possible prime reasons for them being involved in the attack.
-
Labelling them "Muslim" Terrorists is inciteful and unnecessary. Just as labelling the Westboro trolls "Christian" is unnecessary. Though both groups purport to do these things in the name of "God", we all know that the intent of their leadership is something else, entirely.
If they were displaced by the war and unrest in Europe, then radicalized in Russia, then I'd say their being Male and sort of Caucasian (Okay, Checnya isn't the Caucasus) are just as possible prime reasons for them being involved in the attack.
-
Labelling them "Muslim" Terrorists is inciteful and unnecessary. Just as labelling the Westboro trolls "Christian" is unnecessary. Though both groups purport to do these things in the name of "God", we all know that the intent of their leadership is something else, entirely.
- 2,239
- caswellhouse
Fireworks were used to make the bombs used. Scumbag 2 Also states that the attacks were in direct response to thenwars i. Iraq and afghanistan. Not religious based.
http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1325504
http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1325504
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Actually, your insistence on referring to them as "Muslim terrorists" is actually highly inaccurate. Although the suspects were Islamic, and although they were terrorists, that does not necessarily make them "Muslim terrorists", because no motive has been established for the bombings. How do you know they set off the bombs for the sake of their faith instead of, say, because they thought it would be good fun? Furthermore, they remain suspects in the bombing until such time as they are proven guilty in a court of law.
But congratulations on stereotyping the suspects based on their faith, reinforcing all the negative stereotypes of Americans, completely ignoring the rights of the accused as you've already judged them to be guilty, proven yourself to be an absolute hypocrite given the way you vehemently defend the rights of others in other discussions, and then claim that you're "striving for accuracy". It takes a special kind of arrogance to do that.
- 17,865
- 509
Speaking of arrogance and hypocrisy, he lives in Canada
Pot, meet the kettle. Again. Pot and Kettle Party woo.
- 3,460
- Hollywood
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
- 17,865
- 509
Actually, it was more the fact that your post seemed to be addressing him as appearing as an American who was making stereotypes. It appears I wasn't alone in this interpretation of your post.
I know you enjoy being verbose and are a fan of rhetoric, but there is the consequence that your posts become a bit... convoluted. I won't even get into the irony of you labeling someone a hypocrite while discussing arrogance.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 17,865
- 509
Drawing conclusions and jumping to conclusions are different things.
Do consider how many other members have found your insistence on calling them Muslim Terrorists distasteful. Including one that really doesn't care for me much.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
What do you mean "drawn conclusions from no evidence"?
The Tsarnaev brothers are not Muslim terrorists. They are Muslims who stand accused of terrorism, but the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven means that they are not terrorists. Even if Dzhokar Tsarnaev is found to be guilty of terrorism by a jury of his peers, that still does not make him a Muslim terrorist because no motive has been established for the crime. The phrase "Muslim terroist" directly implies that a person of Islamic faith carried out a terrorist attack in the name of that faith. If the Tsarnaev brothers carried out the attacks because they wanted to become household names, then they are nor Muslim terrorists; they are terrorists who simply happen to be Muslims.
Your insistence on calling them "Muslim terrorists" without a shred of evidence that they carried out the attacks in the name of their faith is a distasteful generalisation. For all you know, Dzhokar Tsarnaev had no idea his brother was intending to carry out a terror attack, had no idea what was in the backpack he was carrying, and shot a campus police officer when he learned that federal law enforcement agencies considered him a suspect, and that his upbringing in a world where federal authorities are not to be trusted caused him to panic.
- 28,994
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
Your respect for due process is admirable, but the suspect has already made statements to the effect that their extremist take on Islam was a central factor in their actions, and has made no attempt to deny involvement or to shirk responsibility. The suspect remains innocent in a technical sense only - the evidence is already stacked in favour of a guilty verdict... the suspect has rights and will be afforded the privilege of due process - but that doesn't mean that the murdering scumbag deserves any respect at all - nor does he deserve apologists trying to treat him with kid gloves.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Wow, just wow...incredible actually... And for the record, the conclusion I was referring to was the one I bolded a few posts ago, which was me having anti-Muslim sentiments.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
