NYC truck attack.

So a white guy gets angry and is unstable and shoots 3 people in a Walmart.

And a brown guy is unstable and kills 8 people in NYC because he thinks Allah wants him to do it.

They're both screwed up to hell. They're both fucked up mentally. One believes he has a "Cause" because he's fucked up. The other is angry and wants to kill his ex(?) because he's fucked up.

Where's the big difference?

Your turn to be the "big intellectual", Conil.

It does seem like a bit of a double-standard.

This guy has been charged under the federal terrorism laws, but I assume he’s neither been declared fit nor unfit for trial yet.

Guy kills a few people at Walmart or a bunch of people in Vegas, after elimination of ‘terror’ as a motive, we then seem to usually focus on mental health. Guy kills a bunch of people in the name of Allah or follows the ISIL playbook for an attack, is mental health even considered as part of the equation? Should it matter in either case?

The guy seems to have been radicalized in the US. Any kind of radicalization that happens on US soil needs to be addressed with full-effect and if possible, prevented. I’m not sure how you do it effectively without violating constitutional rights of all Americans.

I’d never heard of Telegram before this happened, that and that seems like a good place to start.
 
Why would a terrorist not be a "fucked up guy" and vice versa? They're not mutually exclusive.

For example, the Vegas shooter. Clearly a terrorist, even if his cause is obscure. And clearly very, very fucked up.

And I appreciate your humility, Conil. You have so much to be humble about.

The Vegas shooter you may want to call him a terrorist, although there is no universal definition of terrorist, but most use this definition: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. I don't see any in his case unless he did convert to Islam and did it on behalf of Isis like they claim.

Also you can use terms like fucked up guys, its a general term. I'm sure many here would use that term to define you.
 
The Vegas shooter you may want to call him a terrorist, although there is no universal definition of terrorist, but most use this definition: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. I don't see any in his case unless he did convert to Islam and did it on behalf of Isis like they claim.

Also you can use terms like fucked up guys, its a general term. I'm sure many here would use that term to define you.

The accepted current definition of "terrorist" omits the "in pursuit of political aims" tag. That's probably what confuses you.

Out little chat is over and you go back on ignore, where I usually keep you.
 
The Vegas shooter you may want to call him a terrorist, although there is no universal definition of terrorist, but most use this definition: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. I don't see any in his case unless he did convert to Islam and did it on behalf of Isis like they claim.

Also you can use terms like fucked up guys, its a general term. I'm sure many here would use that term to define you.

Isn’t it defined within the Patriot Act?

A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act "dangerous to human life" that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) 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

https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

I don’t see how the Vegas mass murderer could have been charged under the federal law.

Mass murder is defined in Nevada (state) law as an act of terrorism. This seems a bit nebulous, and I don’t believe they actually investigated the event as an act of terror.
 
The accepted current definition of "terrorist" omits the "in pursuit of political aims" tag. That's probably what confuses you.

Out little chat is over and you go back on ignore, where I usually keep you.

But why? Hahaha That's so funny....how many people that disagree with you do you have on ignore?
 
It’s defined within the Patriot Act.


https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

I don’t see how the Vegas mass murderer could have been charged under the federal law.

Mass murderer is defined in Nevada (state) law as an act of terrorism. This seems a bit nebulous, and I don’t believe they actually investigated the event as an act of terror.

I agree that's why there is no universal definition, In Canada, section 83.01 of the Criminal Code[1] defines terrorism as an act committed "in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause" with the intention of intimidating the public ". http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/rr09_6/p3.html
Mass murderer like you said is a good definition for the guy in Vegas.
 
Criminals or nuts, quite different from someone doing it in the name of Allah or for Islamic groups. I thought you would pick that up considering you see yourself as a big intellectual here on Terb.
Apparently the Vegas terrorist was part of the Trump Cult (hence the Trumpian silence )

[video]http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2017/11/las-vegas-mass-shooter-revealed-to-be-a-donald-trump-supporter-report-details-002143793.html[/video]
 
It does seem like a bit of a double-standard.

This guy has been charged under the federal terrorism laws, but I assume he’s neither been declared fit nor unfit for trial yet.

Guy kills a few people at Walmart or a bunch of people in Vegas, after elimination of ‘terror’ as a motive, we then seem to usually focus on mental health. Guy kills a bunch of people in the name of Allah or follows the ISIL playbook for an attack, is mental health even considered as part of the equation? Should it matter in either case?

The guy seems to have been radicalized in the US. Any kind of radicalization that happens on US soil needs to be addressed with full-effect and if possible, prevented. I’m not sure how you do it effectively without violating constitutional rights of all Americans.

I’d never heard of Telegram before this happened, that and that seems like a good place to start.

I think part of the problem is that you cannot control the Net. If the asstwat in NYC wants to d/l 200 ISIS execution videos on his phone and gets off on watching them, how are you technologically going to stop that?

I'm sure those videos and the rants that accompany them are highly illegal in Canada under the Hate Speech laws. But the ability to block and scrutinize every device anywhere is beyond the capacity of any state.

Mass murder is now common in the US for any # of reasons personal to the perp. Unless you're one of those guys who believe that ALL Muslims are potential murderers simply because they're Muslims, then motive is secondary. The # of Muslims actively involved in jihadi terror in North America is probably less than 1 in 100,000 and that's low enough not to consider it a mass political problem and more of a problem in certain people being susceptible psychologically to notions of violence, celebrity and martyrdom.

I think that's what I was fumbling to say to Conil.
 
Apparently the Vegas terrorist was part of the Trump Cult (hence the Trumpian silence )

[video]http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2017/11/las-vegas-mass-shooter-revealed-to-be-a-donald-trump-supporter-report-details-002143793.html[/video]

Blasting News is not that reliable. I would wait for confirmation from a more reputable source.
 
Isn’t it defined within the Patriot Act?



https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

I don’t see how the Vegas mass murderer could have been charged under the federal law.

Mass murder is defined in Nevada (state) law as an act of terrorism. This seems a bit nebulous, and I don’t believe they actually investigated the event as an act of terror.

I am guessing that The Patriot Act defines "terrorism" a certain way because it triggers certain state powers, like perhaps warrantless surveillance or special secret courts to scrutinize documents and evidence without the press leaking all sorts of state and intelligence community information.
 
I think part of the problem is that you cannot control the Net. If the asstwat in NYC wants to d/l 200 ISIS execution videos on his phone and gets off on watching them, how are you technologically going to stop that?

I'm sure those videos and the rants that accompany them are highly illegal in Canada under the Hate Speech laws. But the ability to block and scrutinize every device anywhere is beyond the capacity of any state.

Mass murder is now common in the US for any # of reasons personal to the perp. Unless you're one of those guys who believe that ALL Muslims are potential murderers simply because they're Muslims, then motive is secondary. The # of Muslims actively involved in jihadi terror in North America is probably less than 1 in 100,000 and that's low enough not to consider it a mass political problem and more of a problem in certain people being susceptible psychologically to notions of violence, celebrity and martyrdom.

I think that's what I was fumbling to say to Conil.

The number that I see published most often by credible news or research organizations is approx. 100,000 people fighting for Jihadist causes around the world at any given time. As there are 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide, the math tells the story: 0.00625% of Muslims are terrorists. Radicalization is VERY rare.

https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/03/trumps-false-muslim-claim/
 
Apparently the Vegas terrorist was part of the Trump Cult (hence the Trumpian silence )

[video]http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2017/11/las-vegas-mass-shooter-revealed-to-be-a-donald-trump-supporter-report-details-002143793.html[/video]

Blasting News is not that reliable. I would wait for confirmation from a more reputable source.

Blasting news? LMAO even oagre is calling bullshit on this one.
 
Neighbor of NYC jihad mass murderer noticed suspicious activity, did not report it

Even in a neighborhood packed with immigrants, all with their own customs, languages, foods and idiosyncrasies, there was something about Sayfullo Saipov and his family that seemed not quite right.

With the benefit of hindsight, neighbors now believe that the 29-year-old Uzbek immigrant was plotting an attack long before he allegedly plowed his rented truck down a bicycle path in Lower Manhattan, killing eight people.

Three weeks before Tuesday’s attack, a neighbor had noticed that Saipov frequently rented trucks like the one used in the attack.

“This is the kind of truck you use for construction, but he wasn’t doing construction,’’ said Carlos Batista, 23, who noticed that one of the trucks was parked outside a vacant building nearby for nearly a week. “Why would you spend the money to rent this kind of truck and just leave it outside if you’re not using it? … Now I think he was practicing.”

Others were uncomfortable with Saipov’s wife, who wore a niqab, a Muslim garment that reveals only the eyes. Other women among the many Muslims in the neighborhood wear simple head scarves, neighbors say.

“It was unusual around here. You could only see the eyes’’ said Dolores Stanton Vargas, 59, who lives across the street from the neighborhood mosque.

Saipov and his wife, Nozima Odilova, 23, moved about 15 months ago into a scruffy low-rise red-brick building behind the mosque. They had two girls, one now 6 and another 4, and a baby boy who was born about six months ago.

“The wife hardly went out. They were very mysterious,’’ said Altana Dimitrovska, 63, a Macedonian immigrant who lives in the same building. She said that the wife would watch through the curtains of her window as the girls played in the front courtyard, and would occasionally push the baby around the courtyard in a stroller. Saipov was the one who took the older girl to school.

“The girls didn’t have friends. There were no parties,’’ Dimitrovska said.

Language and cultural impediments kept the young family from befriending many people in the neighborhood. But Saipov did have two friends, men who looked similar to him with long beards, who were frequent visitors along with their wives, neighbors said. The wives dressed similarly to Saipov’s wife — wearing the niqab — which made them stick out in the neighborhood.

Over the summer, Batista got into a quarrel with the two visiting men who yelled at him for riding a noisy dirt bike in the evening. Saipov, he said, came out of the apartment and patched up the argument.

“Actually, he was kind of the peacemaker,’’ said Batista. “He seemed pretty nice. After that, he would wave at me when he drove by.’’

The Saipov family was last seen at the apartment complex over the weekend, neighbors said — suggesting that Saipov might have moved his wife to another location in anticipation of the attack. But he rented the pickup truck nearby at a Home Depot in Passaic, N.J.

Saipov immigrated to the United States in 2010 after winning what is called a diversity visa in a lottery designed to bring in immigrants from underrepresented nations. He lived initially with an Uzbek family in Cincinnati who were acquainted with his father. Although he spoke little English, he quickly started working as a truck driver and trying to start his own business. The year after his arrival, he registered his first company, Sayf Motors, at their address in Symmes Township, Ohio, signing the documents of incorporation with the Ohio secretary of state in tidy cursive handwriting….

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-new-york-sayfullo-saipov-profile-20171101-htmlstory.html
 
I never claim to be such a genius like you oagre, I'm a humble guy. The Muslim guy has been clearly declared a Terrorist by authorities, not fucked up mentally, like you say. He had Isis paraphernalia with him, Isis declared he was working for them. If it walks like a duck it quacks like a duck, its a duck.

I'd argue that your mentally fucked up when you decide to take up a terrorist outlook.
 
I'd argue that your mentally fucked up when you decide to take up a terrorist outlook.

You can argue different things. Mentally fucked up can mean different things, but the authorities will declare him psychiatric ill or not. So far I don't see anything that refers to him as having a psychiatric illness.
 
You can argue different things. Mentally fucked up can mean different things, but the authorities will declare him psychiatric ill or not. So far I don't see anything that refers to him as having a psychiatric illness.

Just because a court can't prove you are insane doesn't mean you are sane.

Deciding that it is okay to drive a truck to run over strangers is not normal behavior. I'm not a psychiatrist but I am sure there's a term for a person who is okay with indiscriminant killing.

Now does that mean the person should get off because they are crazy? Well I think it depends, were they bat shit crazy and thought they were in a Grand Theft Auto video game or some state of psychosis? Just my opinion but there are different levels of crazy.... some you are responsible for your actions some you are not. But either way if you are that dangerous you should be locked up in an institute or prison.

The point I am making is that when there's a non muslim who acts out violently they are troubled lone wolves etc etc

I just find that there's an attempt to separate a terrorist from the vegas or Walmart shooter.

But to me they are one and the same at some point those people all arrived at a point in which they felt it was okay to act out and commit some horrible acts and that's not normal (as evidenced by the majority of people who don't act that way).
 
After the Boston marathon bombing, I was struck by what the bomber's uncle said when asked what might have motivated them:

"Being losers, hatred to those who were able to settle themselves -- these are the only reasons I can imagine. Anything else, anything else to do with religion, with Islam, is a fraud, is a fake"

I think that most of these "terrorists" are not really motivated by politics and don't give a shit about Islam or ISIS. They are just frustrated losers looking for a cause to to justify lashing out in a dramatic fashion.
 
After the Boston marathon bombing, I was struck by what the bomber's uncle said when asked what might have motivated them:

"Being losers, hatred to those who were able to settle themselves -- these are the only reasons I can imagine. Anything else, anything else to do with religion, with Islam, is a fraud, is a fake"

I think that most of these "terrorists" are not really motivated by politics and don't give a shit about Islam or ISIS. They are just frustrated losers looking for a cause to to justify lashing out in a dramatic fashion.

That tends to be the common denominator when our focus in Canada was on who was leaving to join ISIL.

I kind of hate to use the word “loser” as part of the profile, as Señor Trump has ensured it now means anyone who’s not him or one of his followers. But, you’re not seeing popular kids dropping out of Dick Ivey to join the fight.

Adhearance to Islam isn’t really the common denominator that needs our attention; it’s not helpful for us to think it is THE common denominator. Jihad and Jihadist views seems to attract particularly damaged/fucked up/confused/stupid peolple to its ranks. It’s anti-intellectual and a perfect fit for assholes who think it’s Haram for women to wear yoga pants but Halal to strap explosives to yourself and kill other Muslims. It takes a particularly weak mind and angry soul to think this way.

In profiling these people, mass murderer seems a better profile to focus on rather than Islamic terrorist. I’d be willing to bet the New York truck guy has more in-common with the Vegas mass shooter, the Walmart guy, the Trenchcoat Mafia, the Sandy hook guy and Timothy McVeigh than he has in common with 99.9% of Muslims worldwide.
 
The point I am making is that when there's a non muslim who acts out violently they are troubled lone wolves etc etc

I just find that there's an attempt to separate a terrorist from the vegas or Walmart shooter.

But to me they are one and the same at some point those people all arrived at a point in which they felt it was okay to act out and commit some horrible acts and that's not normal (as evidenced by the majority of people who don't act that way).

Yes I separate the religious/political terrorist from a paranoid schizophrenic. The consequences of both are terrible, and if you compared the above Islamic terrorist with Timothy McVeigh I would agree, but I find a schizophrenic and a terrorist two different things.