Current Events > Austin bomber has been shot dead by police

Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
SlashmanSG 03/21/18 8:01:28 PM #305:	thronedfire2 posted... the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. Especially, not exclusively. --- Fight Science with Wood http://i.imgur.com/MMRZgNi.gif http://i.imgur.com/Um0p3xx.gif http://i.imgur.com/MIbbUHB.gif <cite>SlashmanSG posted [p:898244758] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>thronedfire2 posted...</cite> <quote>the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.</quote> Especially, not exclusively.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 03/21/18 8:07:18 PM #306:	He was mad at the world. There's your motive. A mass shooter type, who just used bombs Interim Austin police Chief Brian Manley described the recording as a confession and said Conditt did not mention hate on the recording. "It is the outcry of a very challenged young man talking about challenges in his life that led him to this point," the interim chief said. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:898245102] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>He was mad at the world. There's your motive. A mass shooter type, who just used bombs <quote>Interim Austin police Chief Brian Manley described the recording as a confession and said Conditt did not mention hate on the recording. "It is the outcry of a very challenged young man talking about challenges in his life that led him to this point," the interim chief said. </quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Capn Circus 03/21/18 8:15:29 PM #307:	ledbowman posted... thronedfire2 posted... ledbowman posted... thronedfire2 posted... I was driving Just because a series of attacks scares people doesn't make it terrorism. I'm not saying he isn't a terrorist, but they haven't said anything about a motive yet, and the right motive would make it terrorism Why do you dismiss the dictionary definition of terrorism in which a political motive is not required? noun 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. ? Especially, not exclusively. Come on man. Especially, not exclusively--true. But "especially, not exclusively" does not automatically mean all acts of violence and destruction. If terrorism was defined that way, it would have an exclusive definition reflecting that. For example, this is what the U.S. government defines terrorism as: "International terrorism: Perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored). --for example, the December 2, 2015 shooting in San Bernardino, CA, that killed 14 people and wounded 22 which involved a married couple who radicalized for some time prior to the attack and were inspired by multiple extremist ideologies and foreign terrorist organizations. Domestic terrorism: Perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with primarily U.S.-based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. " --- "I think that man will be president right about the time when spaceships come down filled with dinosaurs in red capes" - Tom Hanks <cite>Capn Circus posted [p:898245574] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>thronedfire2 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>thronedfire2 posted...</cite> <quote>I was driving Just because a series of attacks scares people doesn't make it terrorism. I'm not saying he isn't a terrorist, but they haven't said anything about a motive yet, and the right motive would make it terrorism</quote> Why do you dismiss the dictionary definition of terrorism in which a political motive is not required?</quote> noun 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. ?</quote> Especially, not exclusively. Come on man.</quote> Especially, not exclusively--true. But "especially, not exclusively" does not automatically mean all acts of violence and destruction. If terrorism was defined that way, it would have an exclusive definition reflecting that. For example, this is what the U.S. government defines terrorism as: "International terrorism: Perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored). --for example, the December 2, 2015 shooting in San Bernardino, CA, that killed 14 people and wounded 22 which involved a married couple who radicalized for some time prior to the attack and were inspired by multiple extremist ideologies and foreign terrorist organizations. Domestic terrorism: Perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with primarily U.S.-based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. " </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 03/21/18 8:17:28 PM #308:	I would classify this as a confession, Manley said. On this recording the suspect describes the six bombs that he constructed with a level of specificity that he identified the differences between those six bombs, he said. "Having listened to that recording, he does not at all mention anything about terrorism, nor does he mention anything about hate. but instead it is the outcry of a very challenged young man talking about challenges in his personal life that led him to this point, he said. But in terms of a motive, Manley said, Were never going to be able to put a rationale behind these acts. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:898245696] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><quote>I would classify this as a confession, Manley said. On this recording the suspect describes the six bombs that he constructed with a level of specificity that he identified the differences between those six bombs, he said. "Having listened to that recording, he does not at all mention anything about terrorism, nor does he mention anything about hate. but instead it is the outcry of a very challenged young man talking about challenges in his personal life that led him to this point, he said. But in terms of a motive, Manley said, Were never going to be able to put a rationale behind these acts.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HippopotamusRex 03/21/18 8:23:21 PM #309:	Did this really go the last 50 posts with appeals to dictionaries? Discourse really is this petty that people want to start shit so much that the last entire page went on a semantic tangent just to win some unrelated argument? I honestly don't know because I glossed over it its so damn ridiculous at this point with how people act online. --- The Retro Hippo of the Retro Achievements http://retroachievements.org/User/HippopotamusRex <cite>HippopotamusRex posted [p:898246054] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>Did this really go the last 50 posts with appeals to dictionaries? Discourse really is this petty that people want to start shit so much that the last entire page went on a semantic tangent just to win some unrelated argument? I honestly don't know because I glossed over it its so damn ridiculous at this point with how people act online.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 03/21/18 8:43:10 PM #310:	After the recent press conference in which the bomber's taped confession was discussed, leftists on twitter began raging over the fact that he wasn't being called a "white terrorist" by the police chief, claiming it's only because he was "white". Funny I don't remember any of them being upset when this guy wasn't called a terrorist by the police. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article145579009.html Hes not a terrorist, he is a racist, filled with hate, Dyer said at a news conference. He set out to kill as many as he could. Hes not going to kill anyone else. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:898247163] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>After the recent press conference in which the bomber's taped confession was discussed, leftists on twitter began raging over the fact that he wasn't being called a "white terrorist" by the police chief, claiming it's only because he was "white". Funny I don't remember any of them being upset when this guy wasn't called a terrorist by the police. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article145579009.html <quote>Hes not a terrorist, he is a racist, filled with hate, Dyer said at a news conference. He set out to kill as many as he could. Hes not going to kill anyone else.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 03/21/18 10:30:32 PM #311:	hockeybub89 posted... The Joker is a terrorist. Chaos is an agenda. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:898253438] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote>The Joker is a terrorist. Chaos is an agenda.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 3:46:51 AM #312:	@Capn_Circus The dictionary definition of terrorism is "the use of violence and threats to intimidate," which is exactly what he did. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/terrorism?s=t --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898265753] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>@Capn_Circus The dictionary definition of terrorism is "the use of violence and threats to intimidate," which is exactly what he did. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/terrorism?s=t</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 3:50:54 AM #313:	HippopotamusRex posted... Did this really go the last 50 posts with appeals to dictionaries? Discourse really is this petty that people want to start shit so much that the last entire page went on a semantic tangent just to win some unrelated argument? I honestly don't know because I glossed over it its so damn ridiculous at this point with how people act online. These people denying that this is terrorism is not insignificant. I don't think me asking for people to be honest about an important subject is petty. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898265850] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>HippopotamusRex posted...</cite> <quote>Did this really go the last 50 posts with appeals to dictionaries? Discourse really is this petty that people want to start shit so much that the last entire page went on a semantic tangent just to win some unrelated argument? I honestly don't know because I glossed over it its so damn ridiculous at this point with how people act online.</quote> These people denying that this is terrorism is not insignificant. I don't think me asking for people to be honest about an important subject is petty.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 9:30:25 AM #314:	@ledbowman Writing another reply in a separate topic helped me articulate my point better and perhaps this will clarify my stance as to find a middle ground with you: "Anyone who considers it terrorism isn't necessarily wrong. Many are justified in personally thinking it is terrorism. But there is a reason it isn't being officially categorized as such, and the reason isn't because he is white." That is from the other topic. Using a broader definition like you are isn't wrong. My point has been, though probably poorly articulated, that while legal/governmental criteria hasn't yet been fulfilled for there to be an official categorization of terrorism, it surely fits the broader definition. That isn't my issue. My issue is people projecting a motive onto law enforcement for not categorizing it as such when they have a standard, Cleary defined definition they operate off of. Hope that clears it up <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898273914] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>@ledbowman Writing another reply in a separate topic helped me articulate my point better and perhaps this will clarify my stance as to find a middle ground with you: "Anyone who considers it terrorism isn't necessarily wrong. Many are justified in personally thinking it is terrorism. But there is a reason it isn't being officially categorized as such, and the reason isn't because he is white." That is from the other topic. Using a broader definition like you are isn't wrong. My point has been, though probably poorly articulated, that while legal/governmental criteria hasn't yet been fulfilled for there to be an official categorization of terrorism, it surely fits the broader definition. That isn't my issue. My issue is people projecting a motive onto law enforcement for not categorizing it as such when they have a standard, Cleary defined definition they operate off of. Hope that clears it up</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 10:59:15 AM #315:	_RETS_ posted... My issue is people projecting a motive onto law enforcement for not categorizing it as such Where did I do that? --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898278030] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>My issue is people projecting a motive onto law enforcement for not categorizing it as such</quote> Where did I do that?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 11:04:46 AM #316:	ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... My issue is people projecting a motive onto law enforcement for not categorizing it as such Where did I do that? My statement was general. I tagged you because you're the one with whom I have interacted the most ITT <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898278293] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>My issue is people projecting a motive onto law enforcement for not categorizing it as such</quote> Where did I do that?</quote> My statement was general. I tagged you because you're the one with whom I have interacted the most ITT</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Xavius 03/22/18 11:52:22 AM #317:	You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. <cite>Xavius posted [p:898280791] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 11:54:14 AM #318:	Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. I don't. Prior to all this, sure, like I wish someone who suicide bombs could have been reached before they got radicalized to that point. But the second Austin Bomber planted the first bomb I was hoping for much worse than he actually got in the end. <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898280909] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> I don't. Prior to all this, sure, like I wish someone who suicide bombs could have been reached before they got radicalized to that point. But the second Austin Bomber planted the first bomb I was hoping for much worse than he actually got in the end.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 03/22/18 11:54:48 AM #319:	Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:898280937] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 12:11:11 PM #320:	Ammonitida posted... Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian. People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898281817] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian.</quote> People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 03/22/18 12:14:06 PM #321:	ledbowman posted... Ammonitida posted... Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian. People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out. Women were quite terrified of the Night Stalker during his reign of terror. And over in Las Vegas, the media interviewed several homeless people who were afraid of a serial killer who had been targeting homeless people in the area. Yes, serial killers are terrorists. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:898281982] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian.</quote> People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out.</quote> Women were quite terrified of the Night Stalker during his reign of terror. And over in Las Vegas, the media interviewed several homeless people who were afraid of a serial killer who had been targeting homeless people in the area. Yes, serial killers are terrorists.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 12:14:10 PM #322:	ledbowman posted... Ammonitida posted... Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian. People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out. But they're afraid to walk through a park when there is one. If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off they would be afraid. If a killer is a coffee shop killer poisoning drinks people would be afraid. See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898281984] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian.</quote> People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out.</quote> But they're afraid to walk through a park when there is one. If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off they would be afraid. If a killer is a coffee shop killer poisoning drinks people would be afraid. See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 12:18:32 PM #323:	_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... Ammonitida posted... Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian. People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out. But they're afraid to walk through a park when there is one. If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off they would be afraid. If a killer is a coffee shop killer poisoning drinks people would be afraid. See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. I'm not talking about the official designation. Why do you keep going to that? You already admitted he fits the dictionary definition of terrorism. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898282250] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian.</quote> People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out.</quote> But they're afraid to walk through a park when there is one. If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off they would be afraid. If a killer is a coffee shop killer poisoning drinks people would be afraid. See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> I'm not talking about the official designation. Why do you keep going to that? You already admitted he fits the dictionary definition of terrorism.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 03/22/18 12:19:31 PM #324:	In fact, all street criminals are terrorists. Muggers, stranger rapists, serial killers, etc. That's why I -- even though I'm male-presenting (born female) -- never walk out at night, except in my back or front yard. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:898282301] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>In fact, all street criminals are terrorists. Muggers, stranger rapists, serial killers, etc. That's why I -- even though I'm male-presenting (born female) -- never walk out at night, except in my back or front yard.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CruelBuffalo 03/22/18 1:34:50 PM #325:	So I dont see it as the headline news on CNN. All they have is it smaller on the page saying his pink gloves let to his arrest. Interesting I thought a certain delusional user said they would be spinning this hard <cite>CruelBuffalo posted [p:898286678] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote>So I dont see it as the headline news on CNN. All they have is it smaller on the page saying his pink gloves let to his arrest. Interesting I thought a certain delusional user said they would be spinning this hard</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 2:07:25 PM #326:	CruelBuffalo posted... So I dont see it as the headline news on CNN. All they have is it smaller on the page saying his pink gloves let to his arrest. Interesting I thought a certain delusional user said they would be spinning this hard I'm sure he'll follow up on it. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898288586] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>CruelBuffalo posted...</cite> <quote>So I dont see it as the headline news on CNN. All they have is it smaller on the page saying his pink gloves let to his arrest. Interesting I thought a certain delusional user said they would be spinning this hard</quote> I'm sure he'll follow up on it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 2:11:53 PM #327:	_RETS_ posted... If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off Would this not also be the literal dictionary definition of terrorism? @_RETS_ --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898288847] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off</quote> Would this not also be the literal dictionary definition of terrorism? @_RETS_</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 2:13:18 PM #328:	ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... Ammonitida posted... Xavius posted... You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him. You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian. People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out. But they're afraid to walk through a park when there is one. If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off they would be afraid. If a killer is a coffee shop killer poisoning drinks people would be afraid. See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. I'm not talking about the official designation. Why do you keep going to that? You already admitted he fits the dictionary definition of terrorism. Because my entire point in all topics about this has been why there is a reason (other than being white/christian/conservative) that he isn't being categorized as a terrorist. You're just the one I happened to interact with most in this specific topic. Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. I never disagreed. I have always been arguing from the standpoint of why it isn't official to oppose the "why isn't Trump/Law Enforcement calling this terrorism" posts. <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898288933] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Xavius posted...</cite> <quote>You can't call him a terrorist if he had no motive. Guy was just a challenged dude wanting attention. I'm glad he's dead but, wish things could have turned for the better for him.</quote> You can call him a terrorist (he was terrorist just like any other serial killer that preys on a community) but don't cry foul if the authorities stick to the official definition of a terrorist. It has nothing to do with him being white or Christian.</quote> People aren't afraid to go sit in a coffee shop at noon because there's a slashing serial killer out.</quote> But they're afraid to walk through a park when there is one. If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off they would be afraid. If a killer is a coffee shop killer poisoning drinks people would be afraid. See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> I'm not talking about the official designation. Why do you keep going to that? You already admitted he fits the dictionary definition of terrorism.</quote> Because my entire point in all topics about this has been why there is a reason (other than being white/christian/conservative) that he isn't being categorized as a terrorist. You're just the one I happened to interact with most in this specific topic. Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. I never disagreed. I have always been arguing from the standpoint of why it isn't official to oppose the "why isn't Trump/Law Enforcement calling this terrorism" posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 2:15:09 PM #329:	ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off Would this not also be the literal dictionary definition of terrorism? @_RETS_ I just posted, but I am not disagreeing with you. If I misunderstood your original stance, I apologize. Every point I've made is in defense of why he isn't being officially deemed a terrorist. If that isn't your argument, it is definitely others arguments (see cjsdowg's topic) and that's the kind of thing I'm intending to address <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898289029] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off</quote> Would this not also be the literal dictionary definition of terrorism? @_RETS_</quote> I just posted, but I am not disagreeing with you. If I misunderstood your original stance, I apologize. Every point I've made is in defense of why he isn't being officially deemed a terrorist. If that isn't your argument, it is definitely others arguments (see cjsdowg's topic) and that's the kind of thing I'm intending to address</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 2:16:59 PM #330:	_RETS_ posted... Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898289142] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree.</quote> No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
thronedfire2 03/22/18 2:17:02 PM #331:	ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off Would this not also be the literal dictionary definition of terrorism? @_RETS_ it would depend on why they're doing it --- I could see you, but I couldn't hear you You were holding your hat in the breeze Turning away from me In this moment you were stolen... <cite>thronedfire2 posted [p:898289145] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>If a serial killer is driving up, shooting into a coffee shop, and driving off</quote> Would this not also be the literal dictionary definition of terrorism? @_RETS_</quote> it would depend on why they're doing it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 2:24:12 PM #332:	@_RETS_ posted... If I misunderstood your original stance, I apologize. _RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... Why are you trying so hard to make sure a political motive is why someone would call him a terrorist when that's not an exclusive component. Because that is exclusively how terrorism is used in discussion. Broad definitions do not apply. Yeah sorry, I'm not buying your "if I misunderstood you" thing. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898289569] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>If I misunderstood your original stance, I apologize.</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>Why are you trying so hard to make sure a political motive is why someone would call him a terrorist when that's not an exclusive component.</quote> Because that is exclusively how terrorism is used in discussion. Broad definitions do not apply. </quote> Yeah sorry, I'm not buying your "if I misunderstood you" thing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 2:26:07 PM #333:	ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism. I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't. I have laid out my point very clearly. If you don't understand it by this point then you are simply just being an asshole for the hell of it. I have been very clear since the post I tagged you in that "while he fits the broader definition of a terrorist, there is a reason he isn't being categorized as such." That is very clearly agreeing with you and counterpointing the "Trump/LEO won't say terrorist because he's white" narrative. <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898289685] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree.</quote> No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism.</quote> I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't. I have laid out my point very clearly. If you don't understand it by this point then you are simply just being an asshole for the hell of it. I have been very clear since the post I tagged you in that "while he fits the broader definition of a terrorist, there is a reason he isn't being categorized as such." That is very clearly agreeing with you and counterpointing the "Trump/LEO won't say terrorist because he's white" narrative.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 2:27:41 PM #334:	ledbowman posted... @_RETS_ posted... If I misunderstood your original stance, I apologize. _RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... Why are you trying so hard to make sure a political motive is why someone would call him a terrorist when that's not an exclusive component. Because that is exclusively how terrorism is used in discussion. Broad definitions do not apply. Yeah sorry, I'm not buying your "if I misunderstood you" thing. I didn't misunderstand you, I attributed the "Trump/LEO won't call him terrorist" narrative to you. That's where I was mistaken. I have only been arguing from the perspective of why he isn't being officially called that, not why you shouldn't personally think he is a terrorist. <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898289774] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>If I misunderstood your original stance, I apologize.</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>Why are you trying so hard to make sure a political motive is why someone would call him a terrorist when that's not an exclusive component.</quote> Because that is exclusively how terrorism is used in discussion. Broad definitions do not apply. </quote> Yeah sorry, I'm not buying your "if I misunderstood you" thing.</quote> I didn't misunderstand you, I attributed the "Trump/LEO won't call him terrorist" narrative to you. That's where I was mistaken. I have only been arguing from the perspective of why he isn't being officially called that, not why you shouldn't personally think he is a terrorist.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 2:51:31 PM #335:	@_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism. I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't. _RETS_ posted... See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898291040] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree.</quote> No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism.</quote> I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't.</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 2:54:13 PM #336:	ledbowman posted... @_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism. I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't. _RETS_ posted... See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about. My point there was about your specific scenario. You said a serial stabber wouldn't make someone uneasy sitting for coffee at noon. I was pointing out the flaw in why that is way too arbitrary of a statement <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898291189] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree.</quote> No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism.</quote> I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't.</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about.</quote> My point there was about your specific scenario. You said a serial stabber wouldn't make someone uneasy sitting for coffee at noon. I was pointing out the flaw in why that is way too arbitrary of a statement</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 3:06:22 PM #337:	@_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... @_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism. I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't. _RETS_ posted... See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about. My point there was about your specific scenario. You said a serial stabber wouldn't make someone uneasy sitting for coffee at noon. I was pointing out the flaw in why that is way too arbitrary of a statement But you knew I wasn't talking about the official state definition in that scenario yet still argued explicitly about that. Nice try. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898291960] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree.</quote> No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism.</quote> I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't.</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about.</quote> My point there was about your specific scenario. You said a serial stabber wouldn't make someone uneasy sitting for coffee at noon. I was pointing out the flaw in why that is way too arbitrary of a statement</quote> But you knew I wasn't talking about the official state definition in that scenario yet still argued explicitly about that. Nice try.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#338	Post #338 was unavailable or deleted.
_RETS_ 03/22/18 3:09:32 PM #339:	ledbowman posted... @_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... @_RETS_ posted... ledbowman posted... _RETS_ posted... Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree. No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism. I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't. _RETS_ posted... See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism. This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about. My point there was about your specific scenario. You said a serial stabber wouldn't make someone uneasy sitting for coffee at noon. I was pointing out the flaw in why that is way too arbitrary of a statement But you knew I wasn't talking about the official state definition in that scenario yet still argued explicitly about that. Nice try. You're correct. I was conflating my points <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898292159] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>Call it terrorism if you want by its broader definition and I'll agree.</quote> No you won't. You'll squirm and argue with me about how he doesn't fit the official state definition of terrorism.</quote> I've already agreed with you... what do you mean no I wouldn't.</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>See why your logic doesn't work?Again, people's feelings have no influence on the official designation of terrorism.</quote> This is what I mean. You'll still argue with me about the official state definition even though you already said you understand that's not what I'm talking about.</quote> My point there was about your specific scenario. You said a serial stabber wouldn't make someone uneasy sitting for coffee at noon. I was pointing out the flaw in why that is way too arbitrary of a statement</quote> But you knew I wasn't talking about the official state definition in that scenario yet still argued explicitly about that. Nice try.</quote> You're correct. I was conflating my points</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 03/22/18 3:14:12 PM #340:	@_RETS_ posted... You're correct. I was conflating my points _RETS_ posted... You may have pulled your drool bib up too high and simply just can't see what I've been telling you. In that case, I forgive your incredible ignorance. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:898292453] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>You're correct. I was conflating my points</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>You may have pulled your drool bib up too high and simply just can't see what I've been telling you. In that case, I forgive your incredible ignorance.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_RETS_ 03/22/18 3:15:56 PM #341:	ledbowman posted... @_RETS_ posted... You're correct. I was conflating my points _RETS_ posted... You may have pulled your drool bib up too high and simply just can't see what I've been telling you. In that case, I forgive your incredible ignorance. Sure <cite>_RETS_ posted [p:898292561] in Austin bom... [t:76437223]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>You're correct. I was conflating my points</quote> <cite>_RETS_ posted...</cite> <quote>You may have pulled your drool bib up too high and simply just can't see what I've been telling you. In that case, I forgive your incredible ignorance.</quote></quote> Sure</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Current Events > Austin bomber has been shot dead by police (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Austin bomber has been shot dead by police