Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 7/5/2002 10:49:16 AM EDT
Well looks like Israel got it right and our law enforcement agencies are dragging there behinds! This is according to an Isreali News paper: Israel says the attack at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport was a terror attack. Transport Minister Ephraim Sneh said on Israel's Army Radio that Israel believes the shooting was a terrorist attack. He said extremist organizations are planning to hit Israeli targets outside Israel and that airports are preferred targets. [b]American authorities are withholding judgement on whether the shooting was a terrorist incident.[/b] El Al airlines Director General Amos Shapira agreed with the government assessment. He told journalists that El Al has stepped up security worldwide in recent days but said there had been no specific threats regarding Los Angeles. El Al airlines is considered to have the strictest and most effective security procedures of all airlines. The policies were put into effect following a string of hijackings in the 1960s and 70s. Current El Al security procedures require passengers to check in three hours ahead of their flight and undergo intensive security screenings and physical searches. At least two plain clothes armed security agents fly on every El Al flight. In the Los Angeles shooting, two people were killed and several others injured in the incident, which took place shortly before noon local time. The lone gunman has been identified as a 41-year-old Egyptian who has been living in the United States for the past 10 years. Reports from the scene said the man had been standing in line when he suddenly opened fire. Two El Al security guards intervened, wrestling with the gunman and eventually shooting him dead. Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres praised the guards for their quick action. He said many more people would surely have died if guards had not acted as rapidly as they did. Here is the article on the web: [url]http://www.voanews.com/index.cfm[/url]
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 10:50:47 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 10:55:40 AM EDT
"Hate crime". Another liberal crock of shit doublespeak big lie.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:05:58 AM EDT
Same as homicide bomber. Since they killed Jewish people, the FBI won't call it terrorism unless they kill a lot of Americans.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:29:04 AM EDT
The FBI statement is just assinine. He was comitting a terrorist act, ergo he is a terrorist... He doesn't HAVE to be a part of a terrorist group to perform the same mission... His wife and sister have been picked up by the Egyptian Security Service. They are being interogated and held for FBI agents to come and talk to them. They need to be watched closely, I got a feeling money, and a lot of it, is going to be coming their way, and we need to watch for it. Given his age, being a married man with kids, I don't think he would of done this without knowing that someone would be taking care of his family. He knew that before he went in...
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:35:16 AM EDT
I guess I would only say that, IMHO, all terrorist acts would by definition, be "hate" crimes. -legrue
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:46:40 AM EDT
Why are you guys so hung up on what the FBI is labeling it after a preliminary assessment? The incident is being investigated and at some point a more definitive statement will be issued. What's wrong with that? As far as what the "terrorist" was thinking or what his motive was he ain't sayin much right now.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:55:11 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 12:08:24 PM EDT
Remember the airliner that went down after taking off from Kennedy Airport a few years ago with the Egyptian pilot reciting the Quran as he steered the plane into the water, and the FBI said it wasn't a terrorist act. Why? because he didn't have any KNOWN ties to a terrorist group.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 12:11:46 PM EDT
according to another article I read on the Jeruselem Post web site, they are saying that this Mohommed guy had,get this "Two" california drivers licenses. One had the birthdate of July 4, and the Other had the birthdate of april 7! But both state year of birth to be 1961. Know if this guy was not trying to hide something, what in the world would he need two drivers licenses from the same state that has two different birthdates on them? I could be wrong but the last I hear you only needed a regular drivers license to drive limos, and besides if he did need a special drivers license to drive limos, why did he not have the same birthdate as the other? hmm, makes me wonder? Just an observation. It mentions this at the end of the article. here is the web site: [url]http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/Full&cid=1025787708204[/url]
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 12:17:50 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 12:18:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By MinuteMan3: according to another article I read on the Jeruselem Post web site, they are saying that this Mohommed guy had,get this "Two" california drivers licenses. One had the birthdate of July 4, and the Other had the birthdate of april 7! But both state year of birth to be 1961.
View Quote
I dont know this guy from adam, but you are saying the one says [red]7/4/61[/red] and the other says [red]4/7/61[/red].... I do know enough about foreign countries to know all of them are not on our system. A lot of them would write today as [red]5/7/2[/red] while we would write it as [red]7/5/2[/red]. Just an obvious observation from an open mind.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 12:47:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 12:52:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2002 12:55:34 PM EDT by rkbar15]
Originally Posted By DoubleFeed: Because it is a loud and clear message that our government institutions STILL have not accepted the reality that we are under a deliberate, sustained attack. No, it has to be an "isolated incident" and a "hate crime". I hate the term "hate crime".
View Quote
Maybe it's just semantics but in the absence of any other information to the contrary would you label every subject acting alone at the time of the incident and armed with a handgun/knife a terrorist? I don't care for the term "hate crime" either.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 1:00:54 PM EDT
To be considered a terrorist in the USA you must first fill out the terrorist registration form DD666. In lieu of form DD666 a suicide note declaring your intentions may be substituted. Anything short of that and you may not be considered for cash rewards or take possession of your 72 virgins. [rolleyes] Watch-Six
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 1:14:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 1:46:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2002 1:46:52 PM EDT by FMJunkie]
Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer: 7/4 birthday same day as attack. 7+4=11 same day as 9-11 hmmmmmmmmmmmmm i know go back to my beer and leave the thinking to the adults[:D]
View Quote
Are you an undercover Reynold's Wrap sales rep?[;D]
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 2:03:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rkbar15:
Originally Posted By DoubleFeed: Because it is a loud and clear message that our government institutions STILL have not accepted the reality that we are under a deliberate, sustained attack. No, it has to be an "isolated incident" and a "hate crime". I hate the term "hate crime".
View Quote
Maybe it's just semantics but in the absence of any other information to the contrary would you label every subject acting alone at the time of the incident and armed with a handgun/knife a terrorist? I don't care for the term "hate crime" either.
View Quote
We HAVE other informantion. He was a Egyptian Muslim immigrant He attacked Jews at the El Al airline counter. He sent his wife and kids back to Egypt before he comitted the act. A lone suspect killing two innocent people and attempting to kill three others isn't the part of the information that gets him labled a terrorist... the target, the motive, and the effect of the attack are what make terrorism.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 2:12:09 PM EDT
He sent his wife and kids back to Egypt two weeks ago...He had two pistols extra mags a knife.. Guess we will have to wait and see if Sadaam sends his relatives their check.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 2:21:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 9divdoc: He sent his wife and kids back to Egypt two weeks ago...He had two pistols extra mags a knife.. Guess we will have to wait and see if Sadaam sends his relatives their check.
View Quote
They are already being questioned: [url]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=1&u=/ap/20020705/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_airport_shooting_4[/url]
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 4:20:47 PM EDT
I think we're getting a little off the original subject. [b]The comment posted by MinuteMan3 was:[/b] "Well looks like Israel got it right and our law enforcement agencies are dragging there behinds!" [b]My question/comment was:[/b] "Why are you guys so hung up on what the FBI is labeling it after a preliminary assessment? The incident is being investigated and at some point a more definitive statement will be issued. What's wrong with that?" The investigation is ongoing and will probably take several weeks to arrive at an accurate assessment of the event. Why don't we just give the investigators some time to sort the incident out before we all jump to a potentially false conclusion?
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 4:55:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2002 5:16:34 PM EDT by rkbar15]
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: A lone suspect killing two innocent people and attempting to kill three others isn't the part of the information that gets him labled a terrorist... the target, the motive, and the effect of the attack are what make terrorism.
View Quote
I think you need to read what I said: "Maybe it's just semantics but in the absence of any other information to the contrary would you [b]label[/b] every subject acting alone at the [b]time of the incident[/b] and armed with a handgun/knife a terrorist? This [b]may[/b] very well be a planned organized act of terrorism. It may also be just an act of an angry/despondent individual whose wife ran off with his kid(s). Once again how about we let the FBI investigate the incident before we jump to a conclusion.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 5:11:29 PM EDT
You people are so quick to staple the tag of terrorist attack on it you don't realize what you are doing. It will become proof eneugh for your gun rights to be taken away even more in order to protect you all from terrorist attack.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 5:14:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer: 7/4 birthday same day as attack. 7+4=11 same day as 9-11 hmmmmmmmmmmmmm i know go back to my beer and leave the thinking to the adults[:D]
View Quote
I kneel to you and surrender my user name in defeat.[V]
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 5:40:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rkbar15:
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: A lone suspect killing two innocent people and attempting to kill three others isn't the part of the information that gets him labled a terrorist... the target, the motive, and the effect of the attack are what make terrorism.
View Quote
I think you need to read what I said: "Maybe it's just semantics but in the absence of any other information to the contrary would you [b]label[/b] every subject acting alone at the [b]time of the incident[/b] and armed with a handgun/knife a terrorist? This [b]may[/b] very well be a planned organized act of terrorism. It may also be just an act of an angry/despondent individual whose wife ran off with his kid(s). Once again how about we let the FBI investigate the incident before we jump to a conclusion.
View Quote
No YOU need to read what I said: Lots of people unfortunately go postal. But they go postal at people they interact with. Their co-workers, their families, people they think wronged them. They don't go to the El Al counter and blow away their workers and people waiting in line. And you don't have to be part of a terrorist organization to make a terrorist attack! It is what you target and why you target it/them that make you a terrorist NOT who you associate with.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 6:36:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: No YOU need to read what I said: Lots of people unfortunately go postal. But they go postal at people they interact with. Their co-workers, their families, people they think wronged them. They don't go to the El Al counter and blow away their workers and people waiting in line. And you don't have to be part of a terrorist organization to make a terrorist attack! It is what you target and why you target it/them that make you a terrorist NOT who you associate with.
View Quote
How do you know what relationship or business association he had with El Al Airlines or any of the El Al employee's? Do you know if he had an argument or was "wronged" by an El Al employee? Once again these are just some of the questions that need to be investigated and answered before coming to a conclusion. I never said he was part of an organization? I said, "This may very well be a planned organized act of terrorism." Organized in this context means "well thought out/systematically planned."
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 6:48:28 PM EDT
Did Oswald interact with Kennedy? Did the wacko who shot the Israeli P.M. a few years ago interact? Neither of these two were called terrorists and until there some concrete evidence to rationally argue otherwise, the guy at LAX was probably just a lone wacko too. There are enough REAL terrorists around, and they are usually supported by an organization that provides them with enough equipment, logistics and support to make them a helluvalot more destructive than this guy with his two Glocks and a knife! I don't see the why the knee-jerk reactionaries here feel the need to manufacture them based entirely (as yet) circumstancial evidence.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:00:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2002 7:06:39 PM EDT by RevRob]
Originally Posted By Scarecrow: You people are so quick to staple the tag of terrorist attack on it you don't realize what you are doing. It will become proof eneugh for your gun rights to be taken away even more in order to protect you all from terrorist attack.
View Quote
More and more Im starting to think thats the plan!!! I noticed on a Cleveland station this evening a preview for the news, about how there are more and more armed incidents. Have you noticed that incidents like the one in LAX and 911 as you have pointed out, are fueling liberal calls to take away ownership of firearms. Interstingly enough even on this list, if you point out that its not Americans but foreigners who are the Terrorists, well your immediatly squelched as a racist. Think about it its the guns(Sarcasm), not the fact that America is under attack. Someone who should not be in this country to begin with uses a weapon in an act of violence or terror and law abiding American Citizens are to pay? I think its the fault of politicians who make immigration easy, so they can stack up votes for the next election. So now I guess Im a racest, whats that what if they made it hard back in the days when my ancestors came over? Well 1/4 came over in 1635 befroe there was a U.S. and married natives soo. The other 3/4 came over and did have it hard, they lived in immigrant gettos in NYC, learned English, served in the military and worked their way up. And I was still raised with the understanding that you where not an American unless you where 3rd generation here. My father was very proud of how his family worked and earned being here, so that my brother and I could be 3 rd generation. Now I guess anyone can come, get lost or just wait until an election year. Now Im ranting but it seems what Scarecrow inadvertantly is pointing out seems to be inevitible and by design. Sorry but with the flood gates open and the feds unable to stop it ill keep my CAR. If you dont agree feel free to hand em over.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:13:28 PM EDT
Oh ya ( Rant continued) If you remember these days if a person threatens another with harm by means of violence they can be charged with making terrorsistic threats. That kinda opens such threats and action up totally to be considered terroristic. Interestingly when the Black Panthers knocked over a Armored car in Nanuet NY in I think the 70s they where called terrorists even know they really did it for the money. Oh sure it was for the revolution, they money was just there :)
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:19:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rkbar15: I think we're getting a little off the original subject. [b]The comment posted by MinuteMan3 was:[/b] "Well looks like Israel got it right and our law enforcement agencies are dragging there behinds!" [b]My question/comment was:[/b] "Why are you guys so hung up on what the FBI is labeling it after a preliminary assessment? The incident is being investigated and at some point a more definitive statement will be issued. What's wrong with that?" The investigation is ongoing and will probably take several weeks to arrive at an accurate assessment of the event. Why don't we just give the investigators some time to sort the incident out before we all jump to a potentially false conclusion?
View Quote
Why do the investigators need all that time to conclude the obvious? An Egyptian, who is incensed about his neighbors flying the US flag after 9/11 and thus sympathizes with the perpetrators of that act, sends his family home two weeks ago and then does this. What's so freaking hard to figure out about that? One reason the mayor of LA wants it to be labeled a hate crime is so he can rant some more about gun control. A hate crime serves his purpose whereas an act of terrorism may wake up some more people who weren't completely awakened by 9/11 to the fact that the government, regardless of state, local, or fed, cannot protect and see the need for gun ownership, which would not serve his purpose. Besides, it can't be a hate crime because it wasn't perpetrated by an evil, white, American male.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:34:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By rkbar15: I think you need to read what I said: "Maybe it's just semantics but in the absence of any other information to the contrary would you [b]label[/b] every subject acting alone at the [b]time of the incident[/b] and armed with a handgun/knife a terrorist? This [b]may[/b] very well be a planned organized act of terrorism. It may also be just an act of an angry/despondent individual whose wife ran off with his kid(s). Once again how about we let the FBI investigate the incident before we jump to a conclusion.
View Quote
I read your posts and you seem to be agreeing that an individual acting alone cannot perpetrate a terrorist act and he/she must be connected to a group to be considered a terrorist. But yes, an Egyptian individual armed with guns and knives attacking an El Al counter after expressing rage that his neighbors are flying the American flag since 9/11, would be considered a terrorist by most REASONABLE people.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:37:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Scarecrow: You people are so quick to staple the tag of terrorist attack on it you don't realize what you are doing. It will become proof eneugh for your gun rights to be taken away even more in order to protect you all from terrorist attack.
View Quote
No, you don't realize what you are doing. Labeling it a hate crime would give the antis like the mayor of LA more ammo to spew their garbage. Calling it a terrorist act, which it is, would counter their BS arguments more. Either way, the event happened as reported, regardless of what you call it. I don't understand some people who just don't want to call it what it was. Is it some concern about not insulting the Arab or Palestinian world?
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:43:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: The FBI statement is just assinine. He was comitting a terrorist act, ergo he is a terrorist... He doesn't HAVE to be a part of a terrorist group to perform the same mission... His wife and sister have been picked up by the Egyptian Security Service. They are being interogated and held for FBI agents to come and talk to them. They need to be watched closely, I got a feeling money, and a lot of it, is going to be coming their way, and we need to watch for it. Given his age, being a married man with kids, I don't think he would of done this without knowing that someone would be taking care of his family. He knew that before he went in...
View Quote
Ok, so you think this guy is a terrorist? There is no evidence that he was supported by any organization or group, so how is he a terrorist? He doesn't like jews, big fucking deal! If he was a Scott and had killed a bunch of Italians in front of an international terminal, would it have gotten a blip on your terrorist meter or would he have been a whacky kilt wearin freak with an attitude? OHHHH, so the victims were jews and jews are now under "hate crime" or a terrorist watch which means that anyone who fucks with one is a terrorist or hate crimer! I'm glad I sorted that all out for myself! Your kind has created the "hate crime" category so fucking live with it!
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:49:59 PM EDT
Yeah, I can just see trying to tell people in places like Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma that they can't buy a gun because of the action of some foreigner... it will not fly, it would be resisted. That don't mean some stupid Californian wont TRY to enter something like that. But it wont get anywhere in congress. And even if it did, think about it, for THIS there would be blood in the streets. Things may work that in CANADA, but not here...
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:56:17 PM EDT
"If he was a Scott and had killed a bunch of Italians in front of an international terminal" Absurd, Scotts don't kill Italians. It would be just a nut. BUT If a Irish Catholic did it at the British Airways line, or a Ulsterman at a Aer Lingus counter, or a North Korean at KAL...
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:59:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Balzac72: Ok, so you think this guy is a terrorist? There is no evidence that he was supported by any organization or group, so how is he a terrorist? He doesn't like jews, big fucking deal! If he was a Scott and had killed a bunch of Italians in front of an international terminal, would it have gotten a blip on your terrorist meter or would he have been a whacky kilt wearin freak with an attitude? OHHHH, so the victims were jews and jews are now under "hate crime" or a terrorist watch which means that anyone who fucks with one is a terrorist or hate crimer! I'm glad I sorted that all out for myself! Your kind has created the "hate crime" category so fucking live with it!
View Quote
Duh, we are arguing AGAINST this being labeled a hate crime. You apparently think that it is okay to kill Jews, judging by your statements, and you obviously think that he must be part of an organization to be a terrorist. I don't think it is the rest of us with a problem.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 8:01:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 5:00:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LARRYG: Why do the investigators need all that time to conclude the obvious? An Egyptian, who is incensed about his neighbors flying the US flag after 9/11 and thus sympathizes with the perpetrators of that act, sends his family home two weeks ago and then does this. What's so freaking hard to figure out about that?
View Quote
As any experienced investigator will tell you sometimes the "obvious" isn't so obvious. AFAIK his neighbor later refuted some of the initial statements that were made by others. The purpose of any investigation is to arrive at an accurate accounting of what occurred. Jumping to a false conclusion based on the obvious would be counter productive and not in the best interest of the fight against terrorism.
Originally Posted By LARRYG: One reason the mayor of LA wants it to be labeled a hate crime is so he can rant some more about gun control. A hate crime serves his purpose whereas an act of terrorism may wake up some more people who weren't completely awakened by 9/11 to the fact that the government, regardless of state, local, or fed, cannot protect and see the need for gun ownership, which would not serve his purpose.
View Quote
The mayor is going to rant about gun control at every opportunity that presents itself. Anyone who listens to his nonsense is not going to care whether it's a hate crime or an act of terrorism. The mayor will use them both interchangeably to support his gun control agenda.
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 5:26:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LARRYG: You apparently think that it is okay to kill Jews, judging by your statements, and you obviously think that he must be part of an organization to be a terrorist. I don't think it is the rest of us with a problem.
View Quote
Maybe you didn't get Armed Libs comments that: [b]the target, the motive, and the effect of the attack are what make terrorism.[/b] Which I took to mean that if you kill a jew, its almost de facto terrorism since jews are terrorized. Personally, I don't give a shit about Israelis except that they are a weak first line of defense of our interests in the middle east. Your comments about me thinking its ok to kill a jew are unfounded and ridiculously stupid. Just because I don't type with perfectly PC language doesn't mean that I endorse or cheer when a "hate crime" has been committed. I'm just pissed off when a simple act of hate gets turned into a hate crime. So let me ask you again, if it was a jew who walked into Egypt Air and killed 15 people, is that terrorism? Nope, because Egyptians aren't a protected class, so its probably a simple hate crime, now isn't it?
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 5:31:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LARRYG: I read your posts and you seem to be agreeing that an individual acting alone cannot perpetrate a terrorist act and he/she must be connected to a group to be considered a terrorist.
View Quote
Not at all, I never said that an individual could not be a terrorist. Of course and individual can be a terrorist. All I said was lets not make snap judgments until all the facts are in.
Originally Posted By LARRYG: But yes, an Egyptian individual armed with guns and knives attacking an El Al counter after expressing rage that his neighbors are flying the American flag since 9/11, would be considered a terrorist by most REASONABLE people.
View Quote
You're assuming that the initial accounts by unknown sources and the media are accurate. I would prefer to make any decisions based on the facts after they are investigated and verified.
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 2:05:42 PM EDT
So let me ask you again, if it was a jew who walked into Egypt Air and killed 15 people, is that terrorism? Nope, because Egyptians aren't a protected class, so its probably a simple hate crime, now isn't it?
View Quote
NO! THAT would be terrorism.
If a Irish Catholic did it at the British Airways line, or a Ulsterman at a Aer Lingus counter, or a North Korean at KAL...
View Quote
What part of the above did you NOT understand?
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 2:24:19 PM EDT
From the New York Times [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/06/national/06SHOO.html?pagewanted=print&position=top[/url] Registration required- but its free.
At present, Mr. Garcia said, officials are exploring three possible motives. The first is that it may have been a hate crime, although investigators said they had yet to find evidence that Mr. Hadayet held any animus toward Israelis. But a former driver for Mr. Hadayet, Abdul Zahab, 36, said in an interview this afternoon that he often heard his boss express virulent anti-Israeli sentiments. "He had hate for Israel, for sure," said Mr. Zahab, who was born in Syria and worked a month for Mr. Hadayet about two years ago. "He told me that the Israelis tried to destroy the Egyptian nation and the Egyptian population by sending prostitutes with AIDS to Egypt. He said that the two biggest drug dealers in New York are Israeli." Mr. Zahab, who said that Mr. Hadayet had let him go but that he bore no resentment, said both he and his boss felt that the government and news media in the United States were pro-Israeli.
View Quote
And...
American and Israeli officials initially appeared to disagree on Thursday about whether Mr. Hadayet's rampage should be called a terrorist attack. But it became clear today that the difference was really over what constitutes terrorism. Yuval Rotem, Israel's consul general in Los Angeles, said that even a lone individual attacking an Israeli target like the El Al ticket counter should be considered a terrorist. But F.B.I. officials said that only if Mr. Hadayet was linked to a terrorist organization would American investigators call it that, rather than a hate crime. "There is just a difference in how we view things," Mr. Garcia said
View Quote
So basicly its not terrorism unless the FBI says it is. What a bunch of children- well unfortunatly it looks like they are going to get pleanty of experience in the near future to educate themselves...
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 2:52:30 PM EDT
Of COURSE it was a "hate crime". He hated those people enough to attack and kill them. Terrorists hate some one or some thing enough to attack and kill them. The FBI has more than a few axes to grind. They will label it however best suits THEIR purposes, not the truth. It is rather simple, really. Another act of mass murder based on a violent evil religion; Islam. We are at war with Islam and the sooner we see it the better. I do not trust the FBI, or anyother government agency any more than I trust any moslem.
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 4:39:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By MickeyMouse: Of COURSE it was a "hate crime". He hated those people enough to attack and kill them. Terrorists hate some one or some thing enough to attack and kill them. The FBI has more than a few axes to grind. They will label it however best suits THEIR purposes, not the truth. It is rather simple, really. Another act of mass murder based on a violent evil religion; Islam. We are at war with Islam and the sooner we see it the better. I do not trust the FBI, or anyother government agency any more than I trust any moslem.
View Quote
Ok, this seems like the best stance, AS USUAL! I'm just sick of this, "jews are a protected class" crap and the lovely categories that we (they) create to intensify their spotlight in the media and society. I'm really starting to believe that if we cut Israel loose completely, our troubles with the muslims would end. Shit, Israel can defend itself anyway.
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 5:48:50 AM EDT
The Israeli's call it a terrorist attack because they are concerned about any violence committed against Israel or it's citizens by those opposed to Zionism. The U.S. wants to call it a hate crime because of a guilt of conscience over it's own history of racial oppression. As it stands right now, it was a crime committted against an Israeli institution on U.S. soil by a lone gunman. If similar attacks occur it can be rightly called terrorism by everyone.
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 10:16:27 AM EDT
Post from rkbar15 -
The investigation is ongoing and will probably take several weeks to arrive at an accurate assessment of the event. Why don't we just give the investigators some time to sort the incident out before we all jump to a potentially false conclusion?
View Quote
'Accurate assessment of the event' WTF kind of governmental gobbledy-speak is that? An Egyptian citizen attacks the employees of Israel's national airline? And just what sort of info are you and the FBI waiting for? Amazing! Do you let the FBI and the gubmint do [u]all[/u] your thinking for you? Or just your thinking on terrorism? If the FBI [u]actually[/u] says it was an act of terrorism, only then does it qualify in your world as a terrorist attack? How long did you wait before you knew the WTC attack on Sept 11th was an act of terrorism? Until the second plane hit? Right? Just like the rest of the world, right? What's keeping you from making the same astute observance now? Political correctness, that's all! Eric The(Astounded)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 12:00:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/7/2002 12:13:08 PM EDT by rkbar15]
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: 'Accurate assessment of the event' WTF kind of governmental gobbledy-speak is that?
View Quote
Would you prefer that they later have to retract what they initially said? Isn't that what we usually complain about? For the record I'm practicing my "governmental gobbledy-speak" for my new career in the "gubmint". [:D]
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: An Egyptian citizen attacks the employees of Israel's national airline? And just what sort of info are you and the FBI waiting for? Amazing!
View Quote
We're not talking about what my assessment and statement of the incident was. We're talking about the initial statement made by the FBI. I haven't stated what I think of the incident. You're also introducing facts that were not known at the time this post was made.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Do you let the FBI and the gubmint do [u]all[/u] your thinking for you? Or just your thinking on terrorism?
View Quote
A wise man once said, "Don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see." Once again I haven't stated what I believe but I prefer to gather a few more facts about an incident that just occurred before I come to a conclusion. Don't you?
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: If the FBI [u]actually[/u] says it was an act of terrorism, only then does it qualify in your world as a terrorist attack?
View Quote
Once again we're not talking about what my assessment and statement of the incident was. We're talking about the initial statement made by the FBI shortly after the incident took place.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: How long did you wait before you knew the WTC attack on Sept 11th was an act of terrorism? Until the second plane hit? Right? Just like the rest of the world, right?
View Quote
I'm not sure what this has to do with the original question, as the incidents were just a "wee" bit different. We are talking about a lone gunman armed with a handgun vs a 767 crashing into the WTC. Correct? I suspected it was a deliberate act when the live feed came on and the broadcaster started talking about a possible navigation error. Having flown in the area many times the WTC could be seen clearly from 90 miles out. My first thoughts were that the pilot deliberately flew into the WTC ala the Egyptian Airlines “suicide pilot” crash. When the second plane hit it was apparent that it was a full fledge terrorist attack even through the commentator was still babbling about navigation errors.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: What's keeping you from making the same astute observance now?
View Quote
Easy. No one has asked me!
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Political correctness, that's all Eric The(Astounded)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
LOL! If you knew me you'd be laughing also. I'm always getting my chops busted for NEVER being politically correct. I do however think that I should get a few verifiable facts presented by the prosecutor, or would you prefer that I convict your client based on his opening statement?
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 12:55:25 PM EDT
Post from rkbar15 -
Would you prefer that they later have to retract what they initially said?
View Quote
I don't base [u]anything[/u] on what the FBI says or doesn't say since, oh, about April 19, 1993! And whether they are embarrassed by having to retract something they've said is irrelevant. They've embarrassed themselves so many times over the last several years as to be pretty much embarrassment-proof. Don't you think? Do you need a listing of their incredible record of snafus, or can we agree upon this?
Isn't that what we usually complain about?
View Quote
That they have to retract something? Nope. I don't know what you complain about, but what I complain about is their heavy handed tactics with civilians. Witness, the recent shooting of the young lad up in...the North, somewhere. Witness, their 'gung-ho' attack on a church in Central Texas, complete with a crew to finish off any possible survivors. Witness, their unconstitutional attack on the Weaver Family in Idaho, and the cold-blooded murder of Vicki Weaver, who was holding nothing more dangerous in her hands than her own 18 month-old daughter!
Once again we're not talking about what my assessment and statement of the incident was. We're talking about the initial statement made by the FBI shortly after the incident took place.
View Quote
Yes, we are, the point that I was discussing was your defense of the FBI's 'politically correct' initial statement that ignored the most obvious conclusion in the world. Maybe we'll learn more from these Federal Keystone Kops, maybe we won't, but I can guaran-damn-tee you that our original belief that this was a terrorist attack against El Al Airlines will be vindicated, one way or the other!
We are talking about a lone gunman armed with a handgun vs a 767 crashing into the WTC. Correct?
View Quote
We are talking about a lone Egyptian citizen gunman, verifiably irate at neighbors flying the US Flag and the Marine Flag, walking past ticket counters of all types to arrive at and to begin shooting at employees of the Israeli National airlines ticket counter, on [u]our[/u] National Holiday, just after the call by terrorist organizations in the Middle East to strike at Israeli and US targets abroad, [b]are we not?[/b] How plain must it get for you and the Feds?
I do however think that I should get a few verifiable facts presented by the prosecutor, or would you prefer that I convict your client based on his opening statement?
View Quote
No. 1, he ain't my client! No. 2, no one is asking anyone to be convicted on what we know so far, is there? Besides, this terrorist POS is now quaking in his sandals before the Almighty, and will not be able to appeal any sentence handed down in [u]that[/u] Court! Eric The(Reasonable,AsAlways)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 2:44:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: I don't base [u]anything[/u] on what the FBI says or doesn't say since, oh, about April 19, 1993!
View Quote
That’s what I meant in my first post to this thread when I wrote: "Why are you guys so hung up on what the FBI is labeling it after a preliminary assessment?"
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Do you need a listing of their incredible record of snafus, or can we agree upon this?
View Quote
The FBI has been screwin' up since before we were born! No argument here. I don’t take any pleasure in it though.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: I don't know what you complain about, but what I complain about is their heavy handed tactics with civilians.
View Quote
What I meant was not specific to the FBI. All I'm interested in the breaking news report on an incident is an accurate accounting of what occurred. I personally don't give a rat’s ass what "label" the FBI, DA, ATF, PD or SD sticks on it.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Yes, we are, the point that I was discussing was your defense of the FBI's 'politically correct' initial statement that ignored the most obvious conclusion in the world.
View Quote
I haven't defended the FBI. All I said was complete the initial investigation before attaching a label to the incident.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Maybe we'll learn more from these Federal Keystone Kops, maybe we won't, but I can guaran-damn-tee you that our original belief that this was a terrorist attack against El Al Airlines will be vindicated, one way or the other!
View Quote
If you were "asking" me what [b]I[/b] believe occurred then I’d agree with you on that.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: We are talking about a lone Egyptian citizen gunman, verifiably irate at neighbors flying the US Flag and the Marine Flag, walking past ticket counters of all types to arrive at and to begin shooting at employees of the Israeli National airlines ticket counter, on [u]our[/u] National Holiday, just after the call by terrorist organizations in the Middle East to strike at Israeli and US targets abroad, [b]are we not?[/b] How plain must it get for you and the Feds?
View Quote
I think I said this about ten times now. I wasn't responding about what [b]I thought[/b] occurred. As you well know the obvious is not always what occurred. Don't you counselors-at-law always refer to your smoking gun case to get your guilty ass clients off? [:D]
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: No. 1, he ain't my client! No. 2, no one is asking anyone to be convicted on what we know so far, is there?
View Quote
I wasn't referring to the POS as your client. Just clients in general.
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Besides, this terrorist POS is now quaking in his sandals before the Almighty, and will not be able to appeal any sentence handed down in [u]that[/u] Court!
View Quote
LOL. Let's hope so. If he's pickin' his 72 virgins out I'll be PISSED!!
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 2:52:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By osprey21: Of course it was just a "hate" crime. If they termed it a terrorist act.. It would cripple the airline industry bigtime.
View Quote
DING,DING,DING,DING!!! We have a winner! Give the man a cigar. AB
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 2:59:42 PM EDT
Do you think that the guy was depressed? Maybe. Did he want to kill, and possibly die that day? Yes. Was he an Egyptian Muslim? Yes. Was he aware that the people who cheer on the Palestinian Bombers, Islamic Jihad, and Al Qaeda would consider him a hero and a martyr? Of course. Do you think this may have influenced him, and made it easier to become a killer? Probably. Do you have to be part of an organization to be a terrorist? No.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top