LA Times Editorial Announces: White Men are Terrorists

well in the discussion I had with the dude was hate groups...not so much terrorist groups or acts. but yeah, you can say NOI did one act of terror in killing malcom. Im not sure of anything else.

 

Two Options:

1) Lobotomy

2) Post-Birth Abortion

Either way, these terrorists are a threat to the principality of the US and it's continued endeavors to strive toward a greater tomorrow. Best for them to die as cold rotten flesh. A swift bullet to the head is all that is needed.

 

Excellent point. The D.O.D refuse to call him one despite his yelling of Allah Ahkbar while mowing down our soldiers. This refusal has as such denied those killed, wounded or whom tackled him from receiving a PURPLE HEART.

"Not have wanted to seem as if"? They still haven't, 3 1/2 YEARS later.

Even despite mere days after the shooting it was revealed "The Joint Terrorism Task Force had been aware of e-mail communications between Hasan and the Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki", whom the Admin clearly called a Terrorist. No 'PC" here at all. It's just wild to me they refuse to call him a terrorist or what he did an act of terrorism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting

 

And the whole point of this thread even though you may not like or agree with the title or the OP article posted, was to point out the very fact that there are PLENTY of people in America who plan or commit acts of violence & destruct that should have them defined as terrorists but for various reasons they are not.

 

Huh? That's the same one whom Ra and I were talking about.

Where did it say their militia groups activities declined during the Republican era?? Even the chart graph shows an increase.

I don't say yes to your last line (particularly since the Boston Bombers were vocal Obama supporters)...
but to the rest I say yes. I think they think he is loon, and are confused by his targeting the Pres. Also the letter to Obama was 'suspected' to have ricin, which is why the WH are declining for now to call him one until they run conclusive tests.





Keep in mind, his ex-wife and family have said he has struggled for years with mental illness.

He has also been consumed by trying to publicize his claims of a Govt conspiracy that they filled a freezer with body parts which they plan to sell on the black market. I don't think they want to even 'classify' him as a terrorist.

 

thought there were two a republican senator and obama

 

Thanks luv. But what I'm actually saying is the TITLE is way TOO INCLUSIVE. It's not specific in the least! But BB's anti-WM train hasn't stopped yet. All aboard.

 

Yes, a Republican Senator. He said (paraphrasing) "must someone die before I get your attention"
(Ricin also suspected. None found).

 

Was the same guy suspected for both?

 

Actually it was a Judge who received a letter they are reporting. Have to look into the full story on the Senator since these mailings were overshadowed and still in its infancy..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/19/laura-curtis-paul-kevin-curtis_n_3114596.html

 

I never said that you did. I said it. And I said it because during the Bush Era any increased activities by militias that occurred could be looked at because of 911 and increased "American Pride" & "National Defense" against outsiders, as compared to Clinton & Obama where the government itself are seen as the enemy to America or rather "real" America.

So in other words it not really some cover up to protect Obama, it's them realizing that this guy has a genuine history of mental issues so are not calling him a terrorist due to him not acting more on some ideological beliefs, but just general irrational thinking.

 

As far as "hate crimes" go, it depends on the action taken. For instance, if someone punches a white man for being white then it is a hate crime. If someone lynches a white man because he is white and leaves him there for all to see as if he is "strange fruit" then it is terrorism. Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion (merriam-webster's dictionary). So, there are many things that aren't considered terrorism, but by definition, technically are. It's unfortunate.

 

A- for effort. LOL

 

Kind of coming in late here but after reading that article I wonder if the writer isn't, in fact, part of a hate group because he writes as if he's generally ticked off himself.

As for white assholes who commit these moronic and vilolent crimes not being called terrorists while Muslims are, the president had been calling the Boston bombing done by Muslims a tragedy for a while. He may have added terrorist act since the first day or two I'm not sure. In the end does it really matter? It's senseless violence plain and simple.

 

Regardless of race,color, religion, creed and etc, it is all bad. Terrorism is a campaign for individuals and groups to use violence against people or an organization that they feel has threatened them or their way of life. These groups have been around a lot long than I could remember. I used to read Soldier Of Fortune magazine and found ads for a lot of groups and mercenaries. After a mercenary was hired to kill a guy's wife, the magazine stopped advertising mercenaries. But the groups are still there.

 

Its interesting that when the culprits are white there is incredible effort to remain fair and unbiased but when they've been non white we as culture had absolutely no problem rounding up people who look like the culprits. We deny rights and unlawfully detain them. This rush to being pc under these recent circumstances is interesting.

 

Who, or, what are "the usual suspects?" People? Ideology? The fact that I would rather be pc is not the issue. The issue is that individuals and groups, and I don't care what race they are, commit violent acts that result in the permanent injuries and deaths of innocent people to further a cause or wage a war for said purpose. We, the living, are not free from fear. Only the dead are. And we are all going to die. We just don't know when, where, how, by what means or by whom.

 

Like I said it becomes very pc when the culprits are white. After 9/11 everyone was ok with looking at anyone that was muslim/arab as a potential threat. Racially profiling them was ok with everyone "if you got nothing to hide why resist". I guess it depends on where you lived at the time I guess.

 

When 9/11 occurred , it was acceptible, not pc, to racially profile. Three med school graduates on vacation in Florida enter a diner. Almost all the white patrons looked at these men. One of the men jokingly mentioned 9/11 because of the awkwardness of what was going on. When they finished eating, a waitress called the Florida Highway Patrol and reported the men. They were stopped, detained and their luggage blown up by the bomb squad. The waitress was praised for her action, but the families of the three men wanted to sue her and FHP for racial profiling. The incident also hurt their chances of working in the medical field in Florida.

 

Don't look like that.