New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Terrorist?

The Thinker said:
You did.... I remember that. Well-done! I was just in the car and heard on the news she posted her allegiance to ISIS on Facebook. I wonder if... whoever does the evening news these days will have that as a headline.
Click to expand...

Not bloody likely. The "news" staff at NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, et al are still crawling around under their desks looking for the NRA/Tea Party connection they just know is there somewhere...
 
The Thinker said:
Well then we have a goal for the media: talk about the wife as little as possible.
Click to expand...
This Is How the Matrix Is Done in Real Life

One newspaper, instead of connecting it to the Boston Marathon and Fort Hood, grouped it in with the White terrorist in South Carolina and the non-political psycho in Oregon. So now we know what box we are required to think in.
 
Arkady said:
That would depend on how we define terrorism. However, using either my own definition or the definition under federal law, motivation matters. For both domestic and international terrorism definitions, the FBI includes intent in the definition. To be terrorism, there had to be an intent (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping. So, what was the intent of the attack? Do we know yet? That's not a rhetorical question -- I haven't been following the story closely, so I don't have the latest info. But, the last time I checked, we didn't know and inferences were still tenuous as new information came in. If this was personal (some beef with those people at that location), that wouldn't show an intent to coerce a population or influence or affect the conduct of a government.
Click to expand...

Along those lines, I find the target choice interesting. Perhaps they chose it due to familiarity. But if I were going to go somewhere, shoot the place up, leave behind and detonate a bomb, I'd pick somewhere that strikes the hearts of more people. A public assistance place scares a small slice of the population. Why not a gas station, bank or somewhere more widely used? Even a Social Security Administration building would have been "better".

Of course, we're dealing with kooks, so that's hard to account for.
 
LeRoy_Was_Here said:
No. They were intensively poking into how and when and where Farook met her, and if she was responsible for radicalizing him.

Which seems to be an intelligent line of investigation.

Are you opposed to that???
Click to expand...

No. I think it's a good thing. However, I think they should also discuss in context of the importation of more savages Muslims from the Middle East and the vetting process Obama claims we have.
 
The Thinker said:
About what? How she was vetted by the Obama cartel?
Click to expand...
swindlers_list_collage_med.jpg
 
The Thinker said:
Along those lines, I find the target choice interesting. Perhaps they chose it due to familiarity. But if I were going to go somewhere, shoot the place up, leave behind and detonate a bomb, I'd pick somewhere that strikes the hearts of more people. A public assistance place scares a small slice of the population. Why not a gas station, bank or somewhere more widely used? Even a Social Security Administration building would have been "better".

Of course, we're dealing with kooks, so that's hard to account for.
Click to expand...

The terrorists in general do not understand American psychology. I hesitate to even post this on an open forum, but if ISIS or Al Qaeda wanted to REALLY terrify the American public, they would not focus their efforts on trying to launch a major terror attack on one of our major coastal cities, such as New York or Los Angeles or Boston or Seattle or Houston or Washington, D.C.

No, they would want to strike at the American heartland. Imagine how the American psyche would be affected by some major terrorist attack, killing thousands of people, in such places as Terre Haute, Indiana; or Peoria, Illinois; or Sioux City, Iowa; or Loveland, Colorado; or Ogden, Utah.

Then Americans would not feel safe ANYWHERE.
 
Queen Titania said:
swindlers_list_collage_med.jpg
Click to expand...

Friggin' AWESOME!!!!! Talk about a bunch of crooks. And I thought what's-his-name (the guy that came up with the TARP scam), Bush and the other guys were the best. These guys make the Bush cartel look like a kid's lemonade stand.
 
LeRoy_Was_Here said:
The terrorists in general do not understand American psychology. I hesitate to even post this on an open forum, but if ISIS or Al Qaeda wanted to REALLY terrify the American public, they would not focus their efforts on trying to launch a major terror attack on one of our major coastal cities, such as New York or Los Angeles or Boston or Seattle or Houston or Washington, D.C.

No, they would want to strike at the American heartland. Imagine how the American psyche would be affected by some major terrorist attack, killing thousands of people, in such places as Terre Haute, Indiana; or Peoria, Illinois; or Sioux City, Iowa; or Loveland, Colorado; or Ogden, Utah.

Then Americans would not feel safe ANYWHERE.
Click to expand...

I agree. I would go to those towns and strike at a mall or grocery store.
 
The Thinker said:
Friggin' AWESOME!!!!! Talk about a bunch of crooks. And I thought what's-his-name (the guy that came up with the TARP scam), Bush and the other guys were the best. These guys make the Bush cartel look like a kid's lemonade stand.
Click to expand...

The anti-Semitism in that post must have gone completely over your head.

Whoosh!!
 
Zam-Zam said:
From CBS News:

One of Farook's co-workers told CBS News correspondent David Begnaud he had a sense that Farook was becoming radicalized after getting married.

That worker narrowly missed the shooting. San Bernardino health inspector Christian Nwadike said he and four other men were in the bathroom when the first shots were fired.

"When the blast came in, I lost every feeling, I kept thinking this may be life or death," Nwadike told CBS News. He stayed on the floor of the bathroom for about 10 minutes, but could hear what was happening outside.

There were cries, there were shots," he said.
Nwadike, who's originally from Nigeria, sat in a cubicle next to Farook for 5 years.

"When he came back from Saudi Arabia, he started growing beards -- that was the change," Nwadike said. He believes Malik helped radicalize Farook.

"Yes, by the wife, I think he married a terrorist," he said.

Nwadike said Farook was never violent or rude, and that "he rarely talked."

"I couldn't believe it, that's what I'm missing, there's no way that I can look at him and see attached to this," Nwadike said. "But it happened and it was him."


Complete text: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-ber...-whether-suspect-syed-farook-was-radicalized/


Whatever his motives, what Farook did seems to me to be a clear act of terror - thereby making him, be definition, a terrorist. This was planned, coordinated, and deliberate, not unlike the recent shootings in Paris. There is a common denominator here, and those trying to spin it in a different direction are going to have a difficult time.
Click to expand...

Starting to look like ISIS planted a terrorist in the US through marriage. Wonder if it was an arranged marriage?
 
LeRoy_Was_Here said:
The anti-Semitism in that post must have gone completely over your head.

Whoosh!!
Click to expand...

Oh I saw that and understood it. To me, it's irrelevant. I don't care about that angle at all. They are just greedy crooks period.
 
Arkady said:
That would depend on how we define terrorism. However, using either my own definition or the definition under federal law, motivation matters. For both domestic and international terrorism definitions, the FBI includes intent in the definition. To be terrorism, there had to be an intent (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping. So, what was the intent of the attack? Do we know yet? That's not a rhetorical question -- I haven't been following the story closely, so I don't have the latest info. But, the last time I checked, we didn't know and inferences were still tenuous as new information came in. If this was personal (some beef with those people at that location), that wouldn't show an intent to coerce a population or influence or affect the conduct of a government.
Click to expand...

Was paris a terrorist attack? What was their motivation?

Terror is their motivation. They are attacking the US to try to draw them into the war in the middle east. Looks like ISIS may have embedded a terrorist in this case through the marriage.
 
I find it astonishing that CAIR (the muslim anti defamation league in America) is still more concerned about "profiling" than the slaughter of random citizens by muslim residents.

until that is fixed - that is "good" muslims start turning in the wolves in their midst - we're going to continue to have a rocky relationship with all of islam, I guess.

there is NO WAY the Baptists or Methodists would become apologists for rogue protestant terrorists in America, and put forth as their first and only message that "Baptists are just like you and me", wearing stars and stripes hats.
 
SW48 said:
Was paris a terrorist attack? What was their motivation?

Terror is their motivation. They are attacking the US to try to draw them into the war in the middle east. Looks like ISIS may have embedded a terrorist in this case through the marriage.
Click to expand...

False flag
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top