Not surprising: like I said, you’ve decided what you want to believe and no amount of encountering contrary facts will change your mind.
More wilfully blind factual errors on your part. Your irrational determination to believe what you want to believe is impervious even to direct and explicit contradiction from people saying that Geert Wilders does deserve free speech rights:
Only the ones who are lining up alongside the radical-Islamist mullahs to insist that there’s no difference between Islamist-extremist violent tyranny and Islam per se.
You and your Islamophobic ilk are the best allies that the radical-Islamist extremists have, because you stand shoulder to shoulder with them in maintaining that only violent and repressive interpretations of Islam are eligible to be called Islam.
I don’t support what Islamist-extremist violent radical Muslims do.
I absolutely do support the actions of the many, many non-extremist non-violent Muslims who are teaching school, fixing toilets, cooking dinner, reading the newspaper, and carrying on many other activities while not supporting violence or oppression in the name of religion.
That position is entirely sustainable, and I intend to go on sustaining it.
Well, if some people do argue that this event should have been shut down in accordance with a “hate speech” law, I will wholeheartedly agree with you that those people are wrong about that.
Leading dhimmi media outlets are reacting as predicted. The problem with Muslims launching a mass-murder plot against people exercising their free speech rights is – that “conservatives” are relieved the plot was foiled.
Second: Did you ever consider that “no one even showed up to protest the event, except the two people who had to be shot dead by cops because they tried to murder everyone at the event” sounds really fucking stupid?
That’s not what the article says. Apparently every time you use the word “dhimmi”, your reading comprehension actually worsens.
Why would I shoot you?
There are 500,000 Muslims in Texas alone. These two assholes represent 0.0004% of the Texan Muslim population (and .000087% of the US Muslim population). That’s not even a rounding error, it’s statistical noise.
Why didn’t any of the other 99.9996% of Texas Muslims show up to help these two out, much less even protest outside the event? Why didn’t any of the other 99.999923% of American Muslims? Why did they instead say of the event and its hatemonger organizers “just ignore them, let them do what they want”?
It looks like you are trying to couch a moral argument in the scientific terminology of statistics, but it just sounds like gibberish to anyone who knows what they are talking about. What you wrote doesn’t make sense.
:dubious: Wow. Although A’isha all through this thread has been defending the free-speech rights of Islamophobes and unwaveringly condemning Islamist-extremist violent attempts to silence Islamophobes…
…and although we’re all interacting anonymously over the internet anyway so the notion of any actual shooting taking place in this thread is meaningless…
…Haberdashthinks it’s okay to pretend he’s scared of A’isha shooting him solely because she’s Muslim.
That right there is textbook hatemongering bigotry. Haberdash doesn’t give the flimsiest fragment of a rat’s ass what any individual actually thinks or says or does. He simply wants any excuse to insult Muslims, any Muslims.
And now he’s so hopped up on the vicarious testosterone rush of two Islamist terrorists getting taken out that he’s moved from insulting all Muslims in general to specifically insulting A’isha.
Even though A’isha has never done anything to injure Haberdash and has constantly condemned Islamist-terrorist acts, Haberdash will gladly stoop to mocking her as a terrorist simply because she’s Muslim. WHAT A FESTERING LITTLE PIMPLEDICKED SHIT.
The argument is that the vast majority of Texas Muslims didn’t even think this event was worth protesting. So the two violent Islamist-extremist terrorists who showed up to attack people at the event, and got what they deserved for it, are not at all representative of Texas Muslims in general.
Please explain what it is about that perfectly reasonable point that you think “sounds like gibberish”.
That point is fine semantically. The problem is the method used to argue it: the phrases “statistical noise” and “rounding error” have specific statistical terms, referring to the residuals in a regression and the error between an calculated and an actual value due to rounding respectively. A’isha’s post doesn’t use these phrases in their proper form, or even in a form that’s similar to their proper use. The terms are just tossed into a discussion of morality, and that’s why it’s (statistically) gibberish.
Kimstu certainly had no difficultly grasping my meaning. The semantic point was the only one I was making. My use of those phrases was rhetorical only, and not an attempt to actually use those terms in a proper statistical sense.
I probably could have tried harder to understand your point. Sorry, I’m a little grumpy today.
So it turns out the gunman was sentenced to probation in 2010 and was surveiled by law enforcement a few months before the attacks. Does this change anything?
It’s okay. I also apologize for snarking back at you like that.
It makes me wonder why, if the authorities already had their eyes on him as a potential terrorist, they weren’t able to head this attack off in time. Did someone drop the ball, or did they actually decide he wasn’t a threat and stop watching him so closely?
Yeah, it will definitely be interesting to see if this was due to a one-off mistake of someone slipping through the cracks or due to a more systemic failure. If it’s the first case, then we just need to double-down and try harder. But if this was due to the limited resources and the fact that terrorism is intrinsically hard to track, that’d pose some difficult questions. Do we throw more money and law enforcement resources at this issue? Abridge free speech and censor advocacy of terrorism and religious violence online? Choose to accept some terrorism as a part of life?
I’m not sure I see any actual “failure” on the part of the feds here. The flip side to having a free society is that you can’t lock people up before they’ve actually committed a crime, no matter how criminally-inclined they seem to be.
It seems clear that they knew this guy had had plans to travel to Somalia to fight with jihadis, but that was war, and US citizens are allowed to fight in foreign wars if they’re not against the US. Other than just keeping a general eye on him as a name on the watchlist, what more could they legitimately have been expected to do?
The free society that we are trying to defend from both violent criminals and paranoid rights-infringing bigots requires that even bad guys have rights that you can’t set aside until and unless you catch them actually doing something bad.
Still, if more money and law-enforcement resources will increase our chances of catching bad guys doing something bad before they hurt anyone, without infringing the rights of anyone who must be presumed-innocent-until-proven-guilty on general principle, I’d be in favor of that.
That’s pretty much the only sane option. That doesn’t mean scrapping any and all efforts at security, but in that field returns diminish sharply past a certain point and resources are not infinite, especially in DON’T YOU FUCKING DARE TALK ABOUT RAISING TAXES America ;).
I’m perfectly fine with government hovering somewhere around that point and accepting that sometimes, rarely but surely, tragic shit will happen. And that’s just the cost of [del]doing business[/del]living in something other than a dystopian police state.
I would have assumed Ali learned quite enough about Islam from being a Muslim for the first thirty years of her life, or from being held down and having her genitalia carved out at age five, or from the seven years she spent working in shelters for abused women fleeing Muslim marriages. But anyone who speaks against these practices is the enemy so we’ll leave all of that out of the article; the only legitimate topic is “Islamophobia” and why people who have a problem with this culture are wrong.
I also apologize for snarking back at you like that.