Another Murdering Muslim Terror Attack in the USA Not Covered by the MSM!

Originally posted by Violater1
reply to post by intrepid

 

Intrepid, would you be as glib if the Terrorist attack in Toronto would have been a success?
en.wikipedia.org...

I see no point in this post. What is it? Your argument fell apart and you had to derail your own thread?

reply to post by schrodingers dog

Go figure, FOXnews. FOX is always on top of the truth. There is one example.
Where is the rest of the MSM?

Originally posted by Violater1

Intrepid, would you be as glib if the Terrorist attack in Toronto would have been a success?

Ok, now that we have corrected the latter and less relevant part of your thread title, lets address the first part and this latest irrelevant comment.

Now, cause I simply don't have neither the time, energy, or inclination to go through the plethora of fallacies in your logic, I will simply refer you to the following in the hope you will do you own homework ... www.don-lindsay-archive.org...

Please do yourself the considerable favor of reading that thoroughly.

[edit on 8 Dec 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by Violater1


I can only assume you're being sarcastic re: Fox News.

You still haven't addressed the issue of mass generalizations based on a few individual cases.

The story was covered by MSM. FAIL. Moreover, what about this murder would deem it a terrorist act?

Originally posted by Violater1
Could you provide a link to your figures.

What? You can't look that up? Frankly, I'm surprised you didn't known that figure by heart, since you're all so concerned about people getting killed around here. Actually, the number would be 118 if you used 2008 figures.

Do the owners of the cars become confrontational with you, because you don't like their, "Volvo?" Do they run you over because you protest to them speeding through a neighborhood full of children?

I bet if I hunted around I'd find more than a few morons that have done just that, and worse.

And worse, those who will side with and defend the rights speeders.

Ah so what, must everything be YOUR WAY? Gee, humon, stop trying to be dictator of everyone else and what they want to believe, ha. Listen, Americans go over to the middle east to kill muslims, it's only fair muslims get to come over here and kill americans, right? Fair is fair. (lol) Be fair, okay?

Originally posted by drmeola
The problem is nobody wants to know the truth if they did they would go to the following links.

...Or perhaps, they may even look to the specific Laws that (are supposed to) govern the USA to find truth.

Originally posted by ADVISOR

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
so let me ask, is it only a terorist attack if the perpetrators are muslim?

No, apparently they can be Zionists, or any other oppresive regime that manipulates and forces mass control.

Take your pick, seems to be and enless coffer ofthem at our disposal.

Let's try to get off the racial/religious/semantics angle that's being nit-picked to death, because it's all merely a distraction to the real core of the truth; They call it "wagging the dog," but from what I've seen here at ATS, they haven't been able to "wag schrodingers dog."

So, why not look at the meaning of the word, terrorism?

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1795

: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

So who "qualifies" as being a terrorist? Certainly not the average Muslim who lives in a peaceful manner...Certainly not the Jew who never harmed anyone else. Even the mugger who took your wallet last month doesn't qualify...Unless he did it repeatedly & systematically. Do you want to see some real acts of terrorism?

The following terrorists don't use religion or race as their motivation for committing acts of terrorism. It's much more insidious than that...It's all about Politics. Politics nails everybody equally, except those who act aggressively while participating within politics.

Didn't GW Bush use fear-mongering tactics against Congress to push through a vote on the Patriot Act, even before Congressional Officers read the damn thing? Even the way the Patriot Act defines "terrorism" & "terrorist" is so broad & vague as to include anybody & everybody as an arbitrary whim of politics. Even the Law rules that any legislation worded so vaguely as to be easily confusable cannot be enforced as Law.

How about the way Bush continued using fear-mongering tactics on the rest of the government & the Public as a whole to push for enforcement of his Executive Orders & Signing Statements? And then again, fear-mongering to gain support of his use of military for an aggressor-invasion of other sovereigns nations (Afghanistan, for one example), even without official Congressional Declaration of War? Bush is documented as being dyslexic, isn't he? How the hell did he even know what he was signing?

There are other examples, such as his push to consolidate Power in the Oval Office, in violation of the various checks & balances in the Constitution, but just the Patriot Act alone is enough to make a point.

Considering this, who should be arrested for acts of terrorism & thrown into one of those prisons for which he illegally "authorized" the use of torture? Even though he's not in Office anymore, he can still be indicted under formal charges because he performed those actions while under Oath of Office! That Oath bound him to uphold the Constitution as a Contract of Employment & subject to all of its terms & conditions...He did a real bang-up job of it, didn't he?

Now also consider that every single Officer in government service is bound by a similar Oath of Office to defend & uphold the Constitution...What about the Officers currently occupying Offices Under Public Trust? They are all subject to the Constitution voluntarily. If they don't swear/affirm to the Oath, they can't occupy the Office or exercise any of its Powers, so it's voluntary; it's as simple as that.

So who all needs to be held accountable for "Breech of Contract" & "Breech of Oath?" In further accordance with the Constitutional terms & conditions under the Common Law, any Act in Breech of Oath instantly revokes the use all Powers vested in the Office. In short, once any Constitutional violation is committed & if said person remains in Office, he/she is acting as an criminal impostor to a sanctioned government officer! Just so there's no misunderstanding of my use of the word, "impostor," here's the definition of the word:

Main Entry: im·pos·tor
Variant(s): or im·pos·ter \im-ˈpäs-tər\
Function: noun
Etymology: Late Latin impostor, from Latin imponere
Date: 1564

: one that assumes false identity or title for the purpose of deception

So this means that, upon GW Bush's very first Act in Breech of Oath, he became an impostor & had no authority to carry out any other actions since that first moment in Act of Breech & therefore nothing he did can be enforced under the Law...To enforce such Breeches of Law as if they were Law is also a criminal act.

So how about Obama's support & perpetuation of Bush's crimes? Doesn't that make him an accomplice & accessory to those crimes? Doesn't that alone constitute "performing Actions in Breech of Oath?" Even more, Obama's got crimes of his own to worry about, even before he obtained the Oval Office. What of Obama's push for the Bailout Bill (which violated lawfully-established Constitutional Procedure over the Due Process of Legislation & violated the public's "general welfare" in favor of Wall Street welfare) while still acting as a Senator? What of his current push on the Health Care issue? Again, that works against the Public & in favor of Insurance Corporations. How about his mandatory Youth Civil Service programs? In strictest application of the Constitution, he can only enforce that upon Immigrated/Naturalized citizens and/or on Federal Possessions & Territories...Making it "mandatory" across the nation is outside of his lawfully-delegated authority & jurisdiction.

Even further, every government Officer who continues to support/perpetuate crimes committed by their predecessors in Office also become accomplices/accessories! So, by strict specifications of the Law itself, at least 99.5% to 99.9% of our current Office Holders are nothing less than criminals acting as impostors to Officially-Sanctioned Government Officers.

The suppressing of & violations against many of the Civil & Individual Rights Under Law (such as the current "policies" restricting peaceful protests, as one of many examples of High Crimes) are merely Acts of Terrorism working through the "chain of command" to the general Public & the individual Citizens. Much of the evidence in support of these Crimes are even a matter of Public Record!

So, I hereby declare that, with very, very few individual exceptions (those exceptions being the Officers who have a provable track record of serving the country faithfully), "YOU'RE ALL FIRED & MUST STAND TRIAL UNDER THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW FOR YOUR CRIMES OF TERRORISM, AMONG OTHER CRIMES!"

I'm not the only one who has learned the truth behind the "smoke & mirrors" strategies of our alleged Government Officers. There's well over 1 million people (& growing in number) who have sloughed off their lies & learned to Deny Ignorance.

[edit on 8-12-2009 by MidnightDStroyer]

Answer this folks.. Whats the difference between a hate crime and an individual isolated act of terrorism?

Not much you can say for sure.

Perhaps this is the new terrorism. The Muslim community says Oh its not terrorism, it's a hate crime.. just to throw us off.. and we believe them because a group wasn't involved claiming responsibility.

But where did this killer get his hateful ideas at?.. The Same place the terrorists get their ideas from.

In the long run it doesn't matter because to the people who follow the Shariah Law the outcome is the Same.. another enemy of theirs dead.. no matter by some kid or from a terrorist.. they both serve the same plan to reach the same end.

So is it any lessened by calling it a hate crime? No.. but if you believe that, your stupid, and when they take over and kill everyone and put a big red dot on the statue of liberties forehead you are going to wonder how this could happen in the USA.. DOH !!

Wake Up People. We need to do whats right to protect our way of life.. if that meas kicking all of them out of the country then so be it.

So you mean you want to protect the Clandestine Service which is known as the CIA & the Secret Service. As they provide stealthy means of Kills, So you don't have to read about how americans were the cause as your eating breakfast? Also you wish to protect the FBI & how J Edgar Hoover was a cross-dresser in the 1950s?

Or perhaps you wish to protect Infragard that snitches on the general public at large? I can understand you want files like JFK closed. You like keeping secrets from the general public? I can understand you enjoy the services of NORTHCOM - The United States Northern Command bringing military personal on US Soil. Your OK with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency taking naked photos of your wife sun bathing in the backyard? It's the american way!

It's not like you work at the Information Awareness Office or anything. You just love all of these services provided to you & your country men?

Is this what you want us to wake up to? Perhaps maybe DARPA Balloons floating in the Air or DARPA Predator B Drones patrolling the U.S-Canadian border with AGM-114 Hellfire Missiles?

btw the Statue of Liberty was a french gift from a foreign people. Liberté, égalité, fraternité French for "Liberty, equality, fraternity (Brotherhood)

according to statistics, you are more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist

its not a terrorist attack..
I am wondering why mods let it go??


[edit on 9-12-2009 by zilch]

reply to post by Project2501


Ok all I have to say is about the Hoover comment and cross-dressers, a similar issue was mentioned about Rudy Giuliani. My point will be I don’t care what you do in your own bedroom I just want the right person for the job that they are doing and I don’t care if he showed up in the white house wearing a dress. We have to stop running elections like beauty contest and start electing people for like any job there qualifications.

reply to post by Kram09


""Since when was someone being murdered an act of terrorism? If that's the case there must be Since when was someone being murdered an act of terrorism? If that's the case there must be thousands of acts of terrorism across the United States daily. ""

THOUSANDS across america DAILY???

your exaggeration of facts is sensational, and if not dishonest then disingenous.

There are four thousand five hundred abortions in America daily, so were you including those in your number?????


[edit on 9-12-2009 by fmcanarney]

This is by far the dumbist, most mis-leading title/thread I have clicked on in a few days.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Wouldnt it be simpler to, I dunno, send them by mass transit to detainment areas where they are gathered, so it is easier to keep track of them?
I suggest train because they are very efficient for transporting lots of weight long distance! And to get more room for detainees, lets remove the bathrooms and all so it is 100% storage space. Disease will be rampant, but they're all in a conspiracy to kill us.

Then, since they're not doing anything useful at the detainment camps, we may as well put them to work! I suggest forced labour and manufacture for the armed forces! If they get out of line, just shoot them! Less paperwork.

And to save money, lets only feed them the bare minimum necessary to live as a skeleton! Its okay, they're untermensch. Whereas we kick ass!

Think how nice it will be to walk down the street and not have to see a different culture than my own for once! They all just parasite off my hard work of the system and their loyalty is to someone else. They're also the reason we're failing in A-stan and Iraq.


...I hope the irony is not lost on you. It starts with fearmongering, propaganda, and then suspicion due to generalised groups... people get nervous and all it takes is one incident to blow up!

I was talking before with member of this site, who happens to be Jewish, in case you care, that we can see a holocaust of muslims coming in the near future... histories repeating because people never learn...

If millions of people can be muslims and good people obviously it is not a problem with the religion. Look at where the generally come from, poverty everywhere. Maybe having no real school and learning from an extremist in a madrassa has something to do with it? Maybe religion is just the excuse..? Or is everyone in Turkey a terrorist too. Please call NATO immediately tell them we made a HUGE mistake!

This isn't terrorism, it's religious-brainwashed hate crime. Terrorism can be religious-brainwashed hate crime, but not all religious-brainwashed hate crime has to be terrorism. It would require a further purpose and intent to terrorise and kill numerous people, with planning beyond most ordinary crimes to be terrorism.

And of course this particular crime is no more terrorism than a christian killing someone because they thought god told them to do it. There are disturbed people everywhere, who interpret religious beliefs too literally.

Although this man is a potential future terrorist, but the same could be said for most murdering criminals who hate a particular group of people.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by john124]

delete (double posting!)

[edit on 9-12-2009 by john124]

reply to post by OhZone


As one of those "defenders of Islam" I shall respond...

I don't doubt that this was a "hate" crime... It certainly wasn't a crime of friendship.

What intrepid is saying, and I agree with him, which doesn't happen all that often on the boards, is the OP's attempt to color all Muslims with the same brush. Most Muslims do not condone these acts, any more than most Christians condone the murder of abortion providers by other so called, by themselves mostly, Christians...

Sad really, that people insist upon attempting to use such tragedies as this to push forward an agenda...

reply to post by nunya13


It is funny the whole time I have been reading this thread I was thinking about that incident and could not remember his name. Thanks for putting that in there. Anyway I think the christians can be accused as being terrorist in other places, look at the crusades. The term Terrorist is very vague in my opinion.

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by OhZone

 

As one of those "defenders of Islam" I shall respond...

I don't doubt that this was a "hate" crime... It certainly wasn't a crime of friendship.

What intrepid is saying, and I agree with him, which doesn't happen all that often on the boards, is the OP's attempt to color all Muslims with the same brush. Most Muslims do not condone these acts, any more than most Christians condone the murder of abortion providers by other so called, by themselves mostly, Christians...

Sad really, that people insist upon attempting to use such tragedies as this to push forward an agenda...

Please cut, paste and quote me in bold underline italics, where I EVER said ALL MUSLIMS.