I read this board all the time and hesitate to post simply because I usually get ignored or unfairly shot down.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
|
I read this board all the time and hesitate to post simply because I usually get ignored or unfairly shot down.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Hello Carol:
I'll NEVER ignore you again.
excon
Nope ;the FBI has been pretty successful in setting up stings to prevent such attacks . There are a lot of unanswered questions . Given that the older brother was a welfare case ,how was he able to travel for so long ? He went 6 months to Dagestan in 2012 . What was he doing there ? How was this operation financed ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Seriously... there is no conclusion you can draw except the fact that the FBI and DHS dropped the ball.
No, it was a question, hence the question mark. It's not out of the realm of possibilities because we already have elements saying the whole thing is our fault. I was hoping you didn't see it that way and you've confirmed it, so don't get all bent out of shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
And if they stick around long enough they'll see your nonsense, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Over at the NY Times Tom Friedman has the answer to the question everyone is asking in the wake of the bombing, what now? The answer? Rebuild America and the place to start is with a carbon tax.
Yes, obviously the best place to start with preventing such another attack is with a new tax. You can't make this stuff up.Quote:
UNTIL we fully understand what turned two brothers who allegedly perpetrated the Boston Marathon bombings into murderers, it is hard to make any policy recommendation other than this: We need to redouble our efforts to make America stronger and healthier so it remains a vibrant counterexample to whatever bigoted ideology may have gripped these young men...
...
So what to do? We need a more “radical center” — one much more willing to suggest radically new ideas to raise revenues, not the “split-the-difference-between-the-same-old-options center.” And the best place to start is with a carbon tax.
You knowingly cut out a whole lot of content in the middle of the article. The carbon tax line has nothing to do discussion ways to prevent another attack. It was referring to the current budget talks.Quote:
Yes, obviously the best place to start with preventing such another attack is with a new tax. You can't make this stuff up.
Your lies are tiresome.
Is Friedman still pretending he's an economist ? I kind of thing the best course we should take is to build build build the pipelines and drill baby drill.
Il Duce Cuomo tried to link the attack to climate change too:
One gets the sense that this is more reflective of the, quote, unquote, new normal, if you will. So much of society is changing so rapidly, we talk about a new normal when it comes to climate change and adjusting to a change in the weather patterns. New normal when it comes to public security in a post-9/11 world where these random acts of violence, which at one time were implausible, now seem all too frequent.
His wife worked her butt off, so that income plus money he received from welfare (and parents?) could have easily paid into his flights to and from Dagestan. Once he was at his parents, he didn't do much, sounds like. He slept until 3 p.m. every day; his father asked him if he came to visit or to sleep. How much does it cost to fly round trip to Russia?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
New reports say the bombing idea was a recent one, had just been whomped up and put into operation since the beginning of the year.
Dude, the... at the end of the first quote and the... between the paragraphs are clear indications that content was omitted. Secondly I linked the source so I hid nothing. I happen to believe people can read the whole damn thing for themselves without your help if they want to Now when you show a news source, any news source that quotes the entire context of anything you might have a point, but you won't so you don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Wrong bucko, that paragraph began with this line:Quote:
The carbon tax line has nothing to do discussion ways to prevent another attack. It was referring to the current budget talks.
Rebuilding our strength has to start with healing our economy.
His idea to do just that is to start with a carbon tax, "And the best place to start is with a carbon tax." I stand by my original post as an accurate representation regardless of your tiresome protests.
Since you think you know everything can you tell what I'm thinking now?Quote:
Your lies are tiresome.
Sorry, you're wrong. You're trying to mislead people, you do it all the time for some sorry political point.
ZZZZZzzzzz...
I think I'll wait for the hard hitting press investigation... I'm sure just like Benghazi ,we will hear the truth from the administration and the compliant press.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
What WILL you believe?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
If you believe that you will believe anythingQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I assume you got the selected quote directly from a media source, so I am not accusing you of dishonesty. But it is actually a dishonest media ploy.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
It works like this:
An example in this case would be starting a paragraph that ends with words such as "bigoted ideology", "gripped these men". You then leave out a significant part of the text and come in with a paragraph using words such as "radical centre", thus linking the author to the emotive words in the above paragraph. In this example it would be, "bigoted ideology" "gripped these men", "radical centre".
You then claim that you were not using any of these words in a context. The terms you were just using the words that were actually there. It just so happens that the author used the term "radical" as a solution. You go on to say that the selected words of the author just so happened to find themselves close to the other radical explanations that were found in the article.
I am not blaming you, but this is the worst type of dishonest journalism.
Man you are certainly not part of the solution are you?
I'm not a journalist, this is a discussion board with a character limit, I almost always link the source (which in this case is a first person source) so I cannot be honestly accused of being a liar as is NK's sole contribution to the discussion. So in my opinion if you want to take issue take issue with the guy dishonestly calling me a liar whose sole purpose on this forum seems to be attacking me. I misrepresented nothing, I focused on the source's admitted primary solution, quoted verbatim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I wasn't accusing you of doing anything deliberately wrong. My attack was on a journalistic style that seems to have become popular with certain sections of the media.
An example of this type of journalism might come in the form of a live coverage of some crime in progress or a crime that has just been committed.
A scenario might be that the police have in a custody a person of Latin American appearance. While not linking this to actual events the commentators talk about illegal immigration in general. While not linking this to actual events taking place they might talk about countries in Latin America having radical left or right wing governments that might be seeking revenge. While not linking this to actual events they might talk about radical religions.
All they are doing is having a political conversation in general. It just so happens that a lot of controversial words were used in isolation to the events. It just so happens that these words appeared in proximity to the actual events
Furthermore, they would claim that if people make certain links and jump to conclusions when it comes to these words, then it not their problem.
In the end news organizations are not doing anything wrong. After all, no one expects journalists exercise responsibility in these matters..
Ok, and I like to think you are a fair guy. But like I said this is a discussion forum with limited space for us to post so abbreviated quotes are a necessity, so I'd think as a fair guy you'd be more concerned with a fellow member accusing me wrongly than you would be with journalistic styles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
So far the fact are leading me to believe that the 0 administration is plagued with the same lack of communication between intelligence agencies that preceded 9-11-01 .Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
It was revealed yesterday that the CIA wanted Tamarin Tsarnaev placed on the no fly list .
Russian officials contacted the FBI in March 2011, then reached out to the CIA in September 2011, citing concerns he might have been associating with extremists.Because he was a permanent resident of the U.S. the CIA alerted the FBI, DHS etc "specifying that Tamerlan may be of interest to them" .
Janet Napolitano said U.S. authorities were aware when he traveled to Russia in January 2012, because the system "pinged" when his name was entered in flight data. Yet 6 months later when he returned ,there was no follow up interview by any of the agencies.
What is not known is what he did for 6 months overseas . You say he lounged around like a lazy bum. I think he was there for other reasons . What we do know is that less than a year after his trip ,he was blowing up innocent people in Boston . His radicalism was evident to EVERYONE who associated with him . And yet , there was no investigation of him even though there were multiple warnings .
Tom not everyone who goes to these places goes for terrorism, I went to Pakistan immediately after Bhutto's death, make something out of it
Were you on terror lists from 2 intelligence agencies ?were the Russians calling and warning about you ?
The left that continues to enlighten us on the possible reasons except the obvious one that these guys had to bomb people. The folks who brought you it's our fault, it's Bush's fault and brain damage from boxing now give you the real reason... rap music.
Isn't that somehow linking the black community to the bombing?
Depends... was it Emminem videos ?
Don't know, but he did quote him on Twitter the day after the dirty deed.
Not really, but I would imagine that by selective quoting and juxtaposing paragraphs you could imply that is the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Were Boston Bombers Self-Radicalized? No, They Got Help From Mosque - Investors.comQuote:
The New York Times thinks the Boston bombers "self-radicalized" on the Web. But it didn't look at their mosque, which has churned out other terrorists, too.
USA Today, on the other hand, did look at their mosque — the Islamic Society of Boston — and found "a curriculum that radicalizes people," according to a local source quoted in the paper's investigation. "Other people have been radicalized there."
In fact, several ISB members and leaders have been convicted or suspected of terrorism, including:
• Abdurahman Alamoudi, the mosque's founder and first president, who in 2004 was sentenced to 23 years in federal prison for plotting terrorism as al-Qaida's top fundraiser in America.
• Aafia Siddiqui, an MIT scientist-turned-al-Qaida agent, who in 2010 was sentenced to 86 years in prison for planning a New York chemical attack.
• Tarek Mehanna, who in 2012 was sentenced to 17 years for plotting to use automatic weapons to murder shoppers in a suburban Boston mall.
• Ahmad Abousamra, an ex-mosque official's son, who fled the country after the FBI charged him with conspiring with Mehanna to kill Americans.
• Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a mosque trustee and Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader banned from the U.S. after issuing a fatwa that OK'd killing U.S. soldiers.
• Jamal Badawi, a former ISB trustee who in 2007 was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a plan to funnel $12 million to Palestinian suicide bombers.
In justifying mall attacks, the FBI said Abousamra stated "civilians were not innocent because they paid taxes to support the government and because they were kaffir (non-Muslims)."
The Tsarnaev brothers, who killed three and injured some 200 spectators, appeared to share that rationale.
In 2009, ISB invited Yasir Qadhi to speak, even though the Saudi radical advocates turning the U.S. into an Islamic state and calls Christians "filthy" polytheists whose "life holds no value in the state of jihad."
The Tsarnaev brothers, who began radicalizing in 2009, posted YouTube videos featuring imams exhorting the death of Christians and Jews and calling for the establishment of the caliphate.
ISB leaders have defended its rotten apples, including Siddiqui and Mehanna, despite overwhelming evidence against them.
USA Today reports the mosque gets millions from the Saudis, who push an anti-Western strain of Islam. And it's run by the Muslim American Society, which the FBI believes is the main U.S. front for the Muslim Brotherhood, which created Hamas and al-Qaida.
In its propaganda, MAS routinely claims America is at war with Islam. The younger Tsarnaev brother cited this myth as a reason for attacking innocents.
President Obama vows to finally crack down on terrorists. Perhaps he should focus on the spiritual factories radicalizing them.
Katherine Russell Tsarnaeva, the wife of Tamerlan Tsarnaev is being looked at by investigators as a possible accomplice.
Dzokhar Tsarnaev supposedly told investigarors that she called her husband after the FBI released photos and videos of the Tsarnaev brothers. She gave them the heads up that the FBI was looking for them. According the his statement she wasn't surprised her husband was involved ,or upset about it. That call was what prompted them to attempt their escape.
She claims she knew nothing of their plans . But she also did not call the FBI and let them know who they were looking for. Instead ,she called to warn her husband. That call may cost her .
Boston bombing: US Muslims react with fear, frustration, and new resolve - CSMonitor.com
I guess it's the Muslims turn to be denigrated as a people in a country that has a history of doing it.Quote:
Still, the Muslim community appears to understand the need to confront radicalism within its ranks.
“Radicalism is a problem because even if it recruits one person, that's one person too many,” says Mr. Al-Marayati of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. “Some 0.1 percent of radicals are relevant to American society, whereas 99.9 percent of Muslims remain irrelevant. We have to change that equation.”
In fact, according to a Muslim American Public Opinion Survey, religious Muslims are actually less likely to engage in anti-American extremism, and “mosques and religiosity are associated with high levels of civic engagement and support for the American political system.”
Oh boo hoo. It's perfectly fine to denigrate Christians with impunity. Our target is narrow and specific, radical Islamists that want to kill us and destroy our way of life.
Are you in denial that radical Islamists want to kill us and destroy our way of life? If you doubt that I can't help you, the evidence could not be more clear. If you recognize that why tiptoe around it, confront it for what it is.
I don't attach a religion to the loony criminals out there. They are all a danger to the peace and safety of the honest law abiding citizen. Radical Islamics are as much a cult to the larger body as white supremacists are to Christianity. Bad humans are just bad humans and killers are the worst. Who cares what bible they read, or the country they are from, or the methods they use?
Tal, entire countries live under Islamic law. People are stoned in public, heads and hands are cut off, women are OPPRESSED beyond belief. How can you NOT attach religion to it?? Seriously?
Yes many countries are as you describe, and I don't abide by it, but many are not as backward. Why ignore the better examples of Islam which are the majority for the few bad apples? I wouldn't do that to Christians or any other religion.
Have Christians forgot where they came from? As many of you have evolved and put your sordid past behind you, so shall others, and many have already. Or you don't mind the term Christian Radicals. The ones who blew up churches and hanged people. The ones to this day engage in bad behavior fueled by hate.
Are you defending the fool who shot up a mosque of Sikhs?
You're the same guy who post after post railed on us for imposing our beliefs on you. You're the same guy that brought up pedophiles and baby killers in the church. Now you have the audacity to ask, "Why ignore the better examples of Islam which are the majority for the few bad apples?"Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Unbelievable. One can only conclude you're in denial or afraid of offending Muslims. I understand though, it takes no courage to bad mouth Christians who will do you no harm.
If the entire mosque was radicalized I think that was justification enough for some surveillance . Certainly if not the mosque ,then Tamerlan Tsarnaev should've been subject to some warrentless wiretapping... that were codified under the 2008 FISA Amendments Act, by the Democrat led Congress .
Terror Watch List Counter: A Million Plus | American Civil Liberties Union
We can't keep up with the millions of real criminals buying a gun, yet you expect a million people to be watched? Soft targets to be guarded? Why buy a gun when its easier to buy bomb material?Quote:
In September 2007, the Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center (the FBI-administered organization that consolidates terrorist watch list information in the United States) had over 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007 - and that the list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month.1 (See also this new March 2008 report.2 )
Cheaper too!
BS they dropped the ball on the guy. They got specific warnings from the Russians ,multiple times . His name popped up from the data base ,so DHS knew he was travelling . Millions of people are NOT travelling over seas to a den of jihadism, and spending half a year before returning to the US .So that narrows the list considerably .
The warrentless wiretapping was tailor made for someone like him .For one thing ;there would be NO question today if he was in communication with outside jihadists . We would know if there was outside funding sources . For another it is likely that he communicated with his brother over the phone about the plot.
As I noted ,he attended a radicalize Mosque . You mean to tell me that when the FBI interviewed him before he travelled that they did not know that ? And why not ?
Now we learn the mom was on the terrorist database too. Jeeze ,we let anyone in this country !
http://news.yahoo.com/boston-bombing...p%3D5629%22%7D
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:37 AM. |