Page 2 of 3 [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

29 Oct 2012, 3:51 pm

GGPViper wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
blackelk wrote:

It's funny, as soon as Obama was elected, the FBI starts scaremongering about right wing extremist/racist groups as the number one threat facing America.

.


I don't think it was scaremongering at all, the election of a black president was an unprecendented event with unprecedented levels of anger in the far right and white power circles. It took less to provoke the Timothy McVeigh bombing.


Obama isn't black.


Try telling that to the boneheads in the Nazi party.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

29 Oct 2012, 3:54 pm

thomas81 wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
blackelk wrote:

It's funny, as soon as Obama was elected, the FBI starts scaremongering about right wing extremist/racist groups as the number one threat facing America.

.


I don't think it was scaremongering at all, the election of a black president was an unprecendented event with unprecedented levels of anger in the far right and white power circles. It took less to provoke the Timothy McVeigh bombing.


Obama isn't black.


Try telling that to the boneheads in the Nazi party.


If I had a dollar for every time the Republican party was smeared by liberals as either being racist or somehow connected to the Nazis, I'd be a very wealthy individual.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

29 Oct 2012, 3:54 pm

To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

29 Oct 2012, 4:03 pm

TM wrote:
To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"


*cough*Ikhwan Al Muslimeen*cough*



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

29 Oct 2012, 4:11 pm

Id say none other than the [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hs5ANeQkOE[/youtube] :lol:


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


blackelk
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 308
Location: New York

29 Oct 2012, 4:21 pm

thomas81 wrote:
blackelk wrote:

It's funny, as soon as Obama was elected, the FBI starts scaremongering about right wing extremist/racist groups as the number one threat facing America.

.


I don't think it was scaremongering at all, the election of a black president was an unprecendented event with unprecedented levels of anger in the far right and white power circles. It took less to provoke the Timothy McVeigh bombing.


Yeah, those white power boogeyman. They are so powerful these days.

McVeigh's beef with the government was nothing near as petty as the color of the President;s skin,


_________________
"Meaninglessness inhibits fullness of life and is therefore equivalent to illness. Meaning makes a great many things endurable ? perhaps everything.?


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

29 Oct 2012, 4:27 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
blackelk wrote:

It's funny, as soon as Obama was elected, the FBI starts scaremongering about right wing extremist/racist groups as the number one threat facing America.

.


I don't think it was scaremongering at all, the election of a black president was an unprecendented event with unprecedented levels of anger in the far right and white power circles. It took less to provoke the Timothy McVeigh bombing.


Obama isn't black.


Try telling that to the boneheads in the Nazi party.


If I had a dollar for every time the Republican party was smeared by liberals as either being racist or somehow connected to the Nazis, I'd be a very wealthy individual.


You misunderstand. I'm talking about real Nazis. These guys-

Image



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

29 Oct 2012, 4:29 pm

TM wrote:
To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"

Again its open to your own interpretation of what terrorism means.

The right wing seems to have a very selective definition.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

29 Oct 2012, 5:28 pm

thomas81 wrote:
TM wrote:
To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"

Again its open to your own interpretation of what terrorism means.

The right wing seems to have a very selective definition.


Bruce Hoffman used the following 5 points;
- Political in aims and motives.
- Violent or threating the use of violence.
- Designed to have far- reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate target.
- Conducted by an organization with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure.
- Perpetrated by a sub-national group or a non-state entity.


Now, I'm sure that you'll either come back with a redefinition of "aggression" or "violence" in order twist the concept to be applicable in order with your somewhat special view of morals. I'm also quite sure you'll contend with the "sub-national" group point and possibly try to make "non-state entity" applicable to corporations. The same would likely be true for "far reaching psychological repercussions" and "political in aims and motives" as well.

I would for this reason be inclined to include violence or aggression against non-combatants, but you could most likely put a textbook anti-corporate spin on that. After all, the sea life in the gulf were anti-combatants and those BP terrorists murdered them in cold blood.

Terrorism is one of those things that are hard to define precisely for this reason. If I say "Suicide bomber" most people think of it as synonymous with "terrorist" if I say "IRA" quite a few people may be inclined to agree with me, if I were to say Baader-Meinhof, Black September, Aum Shinrikyo, or LRA, some may agree with me. It would appear that "terrorism" is a bit like pornography, "I know what pornography is when I see it." as I believe a Supreme court justice once said it.



ComradeKael
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 223

29 Oct 2012, 5:37 pm

The FBI.

The CIA.

The United States Armed Forces.

Also America seems fine with helping "terrorist" when it suits them.

But America would never finance Islamic Extremist would they?



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

29 Oct 2012, 6:30 pm

ComradeKael wrote:
The FBI.

The CIA.

The United States Armed Forces.

Also America seems fine with helping "terrorist" when it suits them.

But America would never finance Islamic Extremist would they?
All hail the Peoples Liberation Army.


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

30 Oct 2012, 1:10 am

ComradeKael wrote:


And it always comes back to bite them on the arse.



outofplace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,771
Location: In A State of Quantum Flux

30 Oct 2012, 2:54 am

Greenpeace. Seriously, I wish the Japanese government would start sinking their ships and shooting down their aircraft when they harass their fishing vessels. If there are any survivors, try them for high seas piracy and give them long sentences doing hard labor.

As far as Tea Party activists, preppers, etc. , they pose no threat to anyone. They just want to maintain the ability to protect their property in case of someone threatening them with violence or property damage. I am more scared of Occupy than I am of the Tea Party as Occupy HAS caused property damage whereas the Tea Party has not.


_________________
Uncertain of diagnosis, either ADHD or Aspergers.
Aspie quiz: 143/200 AS, 81/200 NT; AQ 43; "eyes" 17/39, EQ/SQ 21/51 BAPQ: Autistic/BAP- You scored 92 aloof, 111 rigid and 103 pragmatic


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

30 Oct 2012, 5:10 pm

TM wrote:
To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"


Talk about a boogeyman.

Enabling: no one.

Makng excuses: no one.

Lets go off these nonexistant people right now!



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

30 Oct 2012, 5:13 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
TM wrote:
To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"


Talk about a boogeyman.

Enabling: Cultural relativists, moral relativists, people who are easily duped, just about everyone who buys oil from the middle east and I could go on.

Makng excuses: See number 1.

Lets go off these nonexistant people right now!


Fixed that for you.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

30 Oct 2012, 7:07 pm

TM wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
TM wrote:
To be honest, the discussion shouldn't be "Who are the biggest terrorists" it should be "Who is enabling terrorism and making excuses for it?"


Talk about a boogeyman.

Enabling: Cultural relativists, moral relativists, people who are easily duped, just about everyone who buys oil from the middle east and I could go on.

Makng excuses: See number 1.

Lets go off these nonexistant people right now!


Fixed that for you.


Calm down!
Here is a towel-for the foam coming out of your mouth.

No need to "go on"- because all that you're doing is just repeating the same one thing over and over again.

Ok.

So your long list of 'enablers' is really a short list. A list that contains only two groups: 1)those who do not hate all muslims,(2) and those who buy oil.

I guess if you hate muslims that gives you magical powers to stop terrorism, and if you dont hate muslims then it gives you magical powers to enable terrorists.
Youll have to explain to the rest of us exactly how that works.

But yes- people who buy oil do indeed help enable terrorists. They make the sheiks rich, and the sheiks give money to the Taliban. Also the USA is forced to defend oil by occupying oil rich muslim countries galvanizing the local population against us as foriegn imperialists and that further plays into the hands of AlQueda and the taliban. Or we are forced to prop up corrupt puppet dictators to control the oil for us- and that has the same effect of playing into the hands of the terrorist.

The trouble is that this second bunch of baddies (the ones who buy oil) are US- you and I. And that is not going to change anytime soon.

So your list of two kinds of enablers does include one group that really is guilty as charged- us oil oil buyers.