Police Found A Man With 2 cans of gas in St. Patrick’s Cathedral - NYC

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I don't want my sarcasm about an another issue downplay this one.

You're absolutely right. This is not to be taken lightly and opens up another discussion.

I was merely pointing out people wanted one thing, and curious how their tone would shift if they were presented something different than their hypothesis.

originally posted by: Trueman

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

My guess is loonie lone wolf then.

Maybe we can direct our concerns to mental health issues in our country.


Edit, from your article.

The 37-year-old man, identified by NBC New York police sources as Marc Lamparello, is being considered an “emotionally disturbed person,” according to police. He was arrested with two gasoline cans, police said.

Radicalism is a mental health issue.

How would you define radicalism?

Is it letting ideology guide you before reason?

Or is it just someone believing something you don't subscribe to?

Where is the line drawn?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Trueman

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

My guess is loonie lone wolf then.

Maybe we can direct our concerns to mental health issues in our country.


Edit, from your article.

The 37-year-old man, identified by NBC New York police sources as Marc Lamparello, is being considered an “emotionally disturbed person,” according to police. He was arrested with two gasoline cans, police said.

Radicalism is a mental health issue.

How would you define radicalism?

Is it letting ideology guide you before reason?

Or is it just someone believing something you don't subscribe to?

Where is the line drawn?

Doesn't matter if left or right, if that's what you really want to ask.

The generic definition is available on line. We both know that.

originally posted by: Trueman

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Trueman

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

My guess is loonie lone wolf then.

Maybe we can direct our concerns to mental health issues in our country.


Edit, from your article.

The 37-year-old man, identified by NBC New York police sources as Marc Lamparello, is being considered an “emotionally disturbed person,” according to police. He was arrested with two gasoline cans, police said.

Radicalism is a mental health issue.

How would you define radicalism?

Is it letting ideology guide you before reason?

Or is it just someone believing something you don't subscribe to?

Where is the line drawn?

Doesn't matter if left or right, if that's what you really want to ask.

The generic definition is available on line. We both know that.

This has nothing to do with left vs right. It's does another ideology conflict with yours.

Take Notre Dame for instance. The narrative being pushed by many here was it was done by Muslims. Never mind the renovations going on, zero evidence of that claim, and zero evidence of anything other than we knew renovations were happening....

There's not even an indication that anyone has tried to hide instances of a Muslim committing heinous crimes. Does the media sometimes word it in ways people object? Absolutely, but the same is done when you flip the coin in other situations.

To me, the people touting the Muslim narrative recently is just as radical as Islamic extremists blaming everything on the west.

Both are wrong regularly. The difference between correctly calling them out and vise versa is reason and facts.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

ow would you define radicalism?

Is it letting ideology guide you before reason?

Or is it just someone believing something you don't subscribe to?

Where is the line drawn?

Well, I would define it as any beliefs which asks people to perform acts which are outside the boundaries of a moral society. This would include harming others, and/or destruction of someone else's property.

Any religion which asks people to harm others in the name of that religion is not a "religion" in my mind, it's a cult.

The line, for me, is easy to define...society makes up laws which bound conduct in that society. The 'line' is crossed when those boundaries are crossed.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I agree with all your points... The only problem with-

Any religion which asks people to harm others in the name of that religion is not a "religion" in my mind, it's a cult.

That's open to interpretation by those who follow, and those who act on it don't represent everyone.

George W. Bush said God told him to go into Iraq. He doesn't represent Christianity, so while his example is folly in ideology (by his part and those who bought into his claim), that doesn't mean that scar is for all Christians to bare.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

The authorities told them so, even before any investigation was conducted. That’s the extent of their “facts”.

a reply to: CriticalStinker


I don't believe Muslims did it neither but someone using them as a scapegoat.

Remember the Pope is a globalist.

a reply to: Trueman

Remember the Pope is a globalist.

By nature, I think Catholicism either created globalism or at least laid down the foundation. People are welcome to take that statement as derogatory or positive, but on my part it's just a mere observation.

a reply to: Trueman

As long as the apologists continue levering their willful ignorance as a weapon of political correctness and subversion, this will keep happening. You can't fix a problem by sidestepping the issues or making excuses for mentally deficient people or those who have a distorted view of reality based on their death cult ideology masquerading as a religion. If it's walking with cans of gas, lighter fluid and lighters into a church, let's stop screwing around and just call a terrorist a terrorist FFS'S.

As far as notre dame, I expect it was deliberate arson by Muslim nut bars. Macron will never allow the police to tell the truth, it would support the yellow vests who are at war with macron. In addition, admitting it's Muslim arson would turn the muslim community against macron and he can't take any more crap than he's alreading taking. So, macron would rather lie and save his own ass (and the globalists) than tell the truth and save France.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

If it's walking with cans of gas, lighter fluid and lighters into a church, let's stop screwing around and just call a terrorist a terrorist FFS'S.

Fine, the Catholic raised Boston College educated professor is a terrorist.

There, I did it.

Oh, all the Muslim terrorists are terrorists too... But I don't find the urge to blame everything on them, because then it makes people question that narrative... Almost like it benefits them eh?

originally posted by: Tartuffe
a reply to: Agit8dChop

The authorities told them so, even before any investigation was conducted. That’s the extent of their “facts”.

Where's the counter facts?

I'm all ears.

It seems to me that someone/group is trying really hard to force start a holy war. This has nothing to do with the false narrative of a Muslim starting the fire in France, but rather that it was shown that a Muslim had been there instead. On top of that Islam had also lost a site due to fire the same day, then we have all the instances of fires being at Churches, Temples, Mosques, and such. While there appears to be no connection between any of them other then the forced evidence of the fires being set by a non-believer of that faith. This NY event falls along those lines, and may be indicative of a similar issue.


False Flag averted?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

That's a pretty fine line.

If people in the religion I follow start murdering people or blowing stuff up...I'm no longer going to be a "follower" of that religion. My expectation would be my religion would swift in casting those individuals out and publicly denouncing their acts from every rooftop. Short of that, it's not any religion I want to be associated with. Harboring these individuals, or looking the other way, is being complicit with their acts, plain and simple.

There's no shades of grey here...not for me anyway.

Oh, and Bush was an idiot! (this, from a conservative) I wouldn't be too surprised to find out he made command decisions based on the latest Sponge Bob episode!

ETA - In fact, I blame Bush for giving us Obama! Without Bush, we might have never had to deal with that Nigerian traitor.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

If it's walking with cans of gas, lighter fluid and lighters into a church, let's stop screwing around and just call a terrorist a terrorist FFS'S.

Fine, the Catholic raised Boston College educated professor is a terrorist.

There, I did it.

Oh, all the Muslim terrorists are terrorists too... But I don't find the urge to blame everything on them, because then it makes people question that narrative... Almost like it benefits them eh?

"Police checked his car and when they found it still had gasoline in its tank, he was taken into custody.

“It’s hard to say exactly what his intentions were, but I think the totality of circumstances of an individual walking into an iconic location like St. Patrick’s Cathedral carrying over four gallons of gasoline, two bottles of lighter fluid and lighters is something that we would have great concern over,” Miller said. “His story is not consistent.”"

Above from the NJ site. So, they haven't released the clowns name apparently, but if he's a Catholic and educated professor, then he's likely a terrorist as well.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
So, they haven't released the clowns name apparently, but if he's a Catholic and educated professor, then he's likely a terrorist as well.

Cheers - Dave

It's Marc Lamparello, I posted it on the last page.

Anybody else thinks Macron is full of Petrodollars up his arse!, there's been no investigation of the fire but they are screaming "it wasn't arson or terrorism"

a reply to: Trueman

Why nobody is talking about this?

Suspect in 3 Black Church Fires in Louisiana Is Charged With Hate Crimes

Here's your potential terrorist, the 'hypocritical right' trying to keep it silent HERE:

Mr. Matthews was charged with hate crimes on Monday.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Tartuffe
a reply to: Agit8dChop

The authorities told them so, even before any investigation was conducted. That’s the extent of their “facts”.

Where's the counter facts?

I'm all ears.

First there must be facts to counter. The investigation is not complete.

Arson at churches isn't anything new. It is something weak and pathetic types who are desperate for atention and control have been doing for a long time. The only thing this has to do with the Notre Dame cathedral fire is how that fire received a huge amount of media and public attention -- so naturally, a weak and pathetic mentally ill person would see that global scale attention and crave it desperately and set out to capitalize on it by targeting another religious landmark in their immediate area.