patrick.net

Vicente says

Weapons used definitely not AK-47 smuggled over in anyone's luggage.

So what? If Paris events teach us anything the actual acquisition of weapons is not that big a problem even in a country where everything but bb guns is banned.

Rew says

Most domestic attacks are Christian, Jewish, or have other non-Islamic leanings if there is a religious component.

That's bullshit and has been disproved plenty of times. There are hardly any religiously motivated broad killings except for the usual suspects. Most other forms of domestic terrorism go against a specific cause, be it eco/animal rights. anti-government extremism, anti-abortion or even anti-semitic attacks by others groups. None of those are attacks aimed at world domination and subjugating/killing all non-believers.

thunderlips11 says

So even if Christian Fundamentalists kill 50 people in a ten year period and Muslims only, say, 14, Islam is far and away more violent because there are far, far, far fewer Muslims than Christians in the USA.

Like you mentioned, most of them never show or profess a Christian manifesto, but if they are white Americans they are deemed Christian terrorists. You may as well file all the people killed in Mexico's drug wars under Christian terrorism since Mexico is predominantly Christian ;) A more accurate line would be that compared to all other potential causes, the risk of getting killed in a terrorist attack is very low. Which is of course hopefully always true and certainly no reason not to act or not to defend your country from these attacks.

Rew says

I think the enemy is very well defined in the Bible just as it is in the Quran : evil, of which unbelievers can be a source or propagator of. In practice, where the enemy was often defined as a specific living person, Christianity would say heretic, while later, Islam coined infidel.

You can claim Christian terror groups aren't the pure teachings of Christ, not true Christianity, but that's the same case for Islam. There is no place in the Quran that states murder is a path to salvation.

BS. The Shariah law explicitly recommends killing people in a number of situations. The idea that Islam if only applied in its purest form does not condone violence is non-sense and a total lack of intellectual integrity. Just read the texts.

The comparison to Christianity is specious and irrelevant. No we are not perfect. But there is clearly a unique issue here with that religion, and not recognizing it is preposterous and dishonest.

Rew says

Islam is a smaller blip, in the blip of causation of terror attacks. Most domestic attacks are Christian, Jewish, or have other non-Islamic leanings if there is a religious component.

Would you say 911 was a blip? We have a small percent of Muslims. Would you say ISIS is a blip in Sirya? In almost all countries with large percent of Muslims you have either killings of non-believers and/or killing, amputations, whipping of Muslims themselves. Why are you turning your eyes away from that?

Right on, HS.

Here's a great irony that is never mentioned:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzammil_Hassan

mell says

That's bullshit and has been disproved plenty of times.

No. Most domestic attacks are Christian, Jewish, or have other non-Islamic leanings if there is a religious component. (bolded the last part of that sentence for you. Exact copy from above)

Which fits a graph like this ...
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/

Which is built off a table of FBI attacks like this ...
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05#terror_05sum

Rew says

Which is built off a table of FBI attacks like this ...

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05#terror_05sum

Which bizarrely doesn't count the Beltway Snipers as Terrorists, even though there was countless diary entries, drawings, etc. with Koranic Quotes and expressions of love for OBL. Probably for Political Reasons so Bush could claim "No Terror on US Soil since GWOT started".

Also, the FBI counts every time some Greenie spikes a Redwood tree or pulls the wires on a Forestry Service bulldozer as a single unique act of "Terrorism".

9/11 was also a "Single Act of Terrorism" according to the FBI.

In my book, it would take a whole lotta redwood tree spiking to equal one 9/11.

Rew says

Which fits a graph like this ...

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/

Loon Watch is an Islamic Apologist site, it never criticizes or mentions Islamic Terror.

Loon Watch operator Nathan Lean also hates Atheists. Funny how it's okay for him to hate on Islam Critics, but not okay for Atheists to make snarks about Islam (but okay when we make snarks about Christians)
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/30/dawkins_harris_hitchens_new_atheists_flirt_with_islamophobia/?source=newsletter

Rew says

I think the enemy is very well defined in the Bible just as it is in the Quran : evil, of which unbelievers can be a source or propagator of.

That's exactly the problem. People think if they obey rules, then by definition they aren't evil.

Eichmann believed that too and look what happened to him.

lalalala says

So what? If Paris events teach us anything the actual acquisition of weapons is not that big a problem even in a country where everything but bb guns is banned.

I just read an article by the NRA pointing out that we in California have already met Obama's gun control wishlist, and have the strictest anti-gun laws in the country. So much for legislating safety...

Ironman says

Crap, now how will Obama try to spin this into the need for stricter gun laws. The AR15's used in the shooting were illegal in the configuration they were in. But Obama STILL thinks criminals with abide by any laws that are passed, that's why we need MORE laws.

Nah, the Graun is already whining that the ISIS connection will take the debate "away" from Gun Control and back towards Immigration and the Multi Cult.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/04/san-bernardino-shooting-tashfeen-malik-isis-connection

Heraclitusstudent says

That's exactly the problem. People think if they obey rules, then by definition they aren't evil.

Eichmann believed that too and look what happened to him.

Totally agree. And no one religion is any more innately prone to radicalization than another, especially the three Abrahamic religions, which are very "law" based. Societal factors are equally as stronger a catalyst toward being able to radicalize someone. (IE : plenty of worshiping Muslims around me, well off, American, and I'm not afraid they are going to blow me up one day. Cannot say the same for the poor and oppressed in the mid-East.)

Except terrorists aren't poor or poorly educated, particularly those that strike in the West. The profile of terrorists is generally well-educated and well off, and more often from wealthy countries.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB110911119848561282
http://scholar.harvard.edu/barro/files/02_0610_mythpoverty_bw.pdf

You know what drives Terrorism? Identity Politics and Religion.

thunderlips11 says

Now post some videos of Christians or Jews in these days stoning adulterers, please.

PS Still Waiting for some videos of Western Jews and Christians stoning adulterers, or killing somebody for working on the Sabbath, etc. in recent times

Rew says

no one religion is any more innately prone to radicalization than another

For example, droning over something 5 times a day is an excellent way to wash your brain. Repetition is one of the most potent propaganda technique.

Rew says

Societal factors are equally as stronger a catalyst toward being able to radicalize someone.

Societal factors are factors. They don't influence written dogmas. And there is a link between beliefs and actions. This cannot be denied.
One other factor here are the deliberate, organized, well financed attempts by foreign groups in the world to spread these beliefs into the west.

I understand in your angelic view of the world everyone just want to live in peace and attend their own business. As inconvenient as it is to you, this view is just too simplistic. Some people have an ideology of death, they are bent on teaching it, and spreading it. Where you give them space, they will multiply. And what you are doing now is exactly that: defending that space in the name of liberty of cult.

This is a battle of ideas. It cannot be won, by bombing, or by forbidding actions.
It certainly cannot be fought by totally ignoring the problem.
No. Bad ideas are fought by confronting them, in the media, and person by person.
But to do that, you need to first recognize that there is a problem.

This will not go away by itself. The problem will only grow and grow. Just watch Europe.
The attacks that already happened are unlikely to be the end of it.

question is irrelevant given the dearth of facts...

YesYNot says

San Bernardino shooting - mental health problem or Islamic war?

Ironman says

So, who wants to answer?

Thunderlips already answered this: you need a nosy surveillance state/ continuation or enhancement of the patriot act

MMR says

Thunderlips already answered this: you need a nosy surveillance state/ continuation or enhancement of the patriot act

Let me refine my answer: you need a concentrated surveillance. Since having a single massive haystack that incorporates most of the worlds telecommunications among billions of people and firms is a big handicap towards finding a few needles. Fine if the NSA is trolling for economic, military or political secrets of non-Americans, normal intelligence collection.

We might start by checking the social media and emails of those applying for Visas from certain MENA countries. Or those who fit a certain profile, like Muslim Engineers who lived/studied in Germany.

This should be paired with greatly reducing the numbers of immigrants allowed to even apply each year for those countries, which will also reduce the haystack's size and make it easier to actually sort through the evidence.

thunderlips11 says

We might start by checking the social media and emails of those applying for Visas from certain MENA countries. Or those who fit a certain profile, like Muslim Engineers who lived/studied in Germany.

Or guys from Russia, like these two Tsarnaev fuckwads.

lalalala says

Or guys from Russia, like these two Tsarnaev fuckwads.

I thought you Banderastanis were hoping for the Chechens to help you out. You know what they say about judging somebody by their friends and heroes. Fundie Islamists and Nazi Collaborators.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/08/world/europe/islamic-battalions-stocked-with-chechens-aid-ukraine-in-war-with-rebels.html

thunderlips11 says

I thought you Banderastanis

Who?

Guess what? Enrique Marquez, Jr., suspected of supplying arms to the San Ber Terrorists...
is Bah'ai, Unitarian, Roman Catholic, Smarta Hinduism... a convert to the Religion of Peace!

Investigators with the FBI today questioned Enrique Marquez Jr., the man who originally purchased the two “assault-style” rifles used in last week’s San Bernardino shooting in which 14 people were killed, according to law enforcement officials briefed on the probe.

Authorities have been trying to talk to Marquez, 24, since the weapons were first traced to him, but could not until today because he was being evaluated for an unspecified health care issue, the officials said.

...
An individual associated with a local mosque, who asked not to be named, said Marquez started coming there three or four years ago, after he had converted to Islam. The person said Marquez was shy and polite, but did not seem that bright. Two members of Farook’s family, but not Syed Farook, attended the same mosque, the person said.

Marquez previously worked at a Wal-Mart, and before that was employed by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, federal officials told ABC News.