Muslim lawyers will "burn alive" anyone who defends murdered 12 year old Christian

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Ya - I knew all that, alas.

My comment was flippant - as there's loads of other 'stuff' going down, those 600+ years, from then till now.

Really, I was being flippant.

I twigged to the fact that the 12-year-old lass was Christian.

Seriously though? is larger problem for that 'judge' - I'm no Middle East Scholar, but I do study with open mind, always with open mind.

Problem is that judiciary in that country has little scope for independence/honesty, due to having to kowtow to army chief (always ruler of country, whether behind throne or ON it, since 1958)--as Ikhtifar Chaudry (one of the few independent/honest judges in that country) found out when he was dismissed by Musharraf.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Um well lets see the group is threatening to burn people alive. They are using terror to keep another group of people from following justice. A person who uses terror for political gains is what? Yes, a terrorist.

When I use that argument for non-Muslims taking similar actions, I.e. Workplace violence, it's considered to be invalid. So, it seems that any bad acts by Muslim is terrorism. When you reason that way, you dilute your logic.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

When I use that argument for non-Muslims taking similar actions, I.e. Workplace violence, it's considered to be invalid. So, it seems that any bad acts by Muslim is terrorism. When you reason that way, you dilute your logic.

Your good at making accusations here aren't you. I've already said its not limited to muslims, so you can drop that ####### right now okay? You want to know why workplace violence is not terrorism? Because its an individual with no affiliations attacking another group out of revenge with no political motivation.

[sandinista! 1,816]

Generally I agree with you, however in this situation it has all of the ingredients of domestic terrorism. Its dependent on how the threat of violence is delivered, and to whom it is delivered.

By the way some of what the mafia, triads, and the yukiza do actually has been classified as terrorism. Ironically organizations like al qaeda have learned a lot from how the above organizations work.

but are there any examples of them actually being charged as such? personal opinions are one thing, being charged as such by the law another. in baltimore, a woman named angela dawson, her husband and their five children were actually burned alive when their house was firebombed after she informed the police of drug activity in her neighborhood, and was preparing to testify to it in court. no one was charged with terrorism in that case.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

but are there any examples of them actually being charged as such? personal opinions are one thing, being charged as such by the law another. in baltimore, a woman named angela dawson, her husband and their five children were actually burned alive when their house was firebombed after she informed the police of drug activity in her neighborhood, and was preparing to testify to it in court. no one was charged with terrorism in that case.

I believe Italy may have leveled charges against the Camorra family but not sure. I know that they officially labeled a few of their attacks as "terrorism"

The RICO act has a terrorism clause which is used to prosecute organized crime in the US.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Sousuke

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Your good at making accusations here aren't you. I've already said its not limited to muslims, so you can drop that ####### right now okay? You want to know why workplace violence is not terrorism? Because its an individual with no affiliations attacking another group out of revenge with no political motivation.

You can drop your ####### righteous indignation. You've labeled the acts of this group of lawyers as terrorism even though it doesn't even meet your definition in the above post. Don't tell me that's not a self-serving accusation, and, based on your dismissal of my observation, one that you're ready to apply to this workplace issue, sans violence, but not willing to apply to a shooter on the job, which can certainly have political motivation. What's the contrived political motivation you've ascribed to this situation, expert?

but are there any examples of them actually being charged as such? personal opinions are one thing, being charged as such by the law another. in baltimore, a woman named angela dawson, her husband and their five children were actually burned alive when their house was firebombed after she informed the police of drug activity in her neighborhood, and was preparing to testify to it in court. no one was charged with terrorism in that case.

Good point. I remember that event.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

You can drop your ####### righteous indignation. You've labeled the acts of this group of lawyers as terrorism even though it doesn't even meet your definition in the above post. Don't tell me that's not a self-serving accusation, and, based on your dismissal of my observation, one that you're ready to apply to this workplace issue, sans violence, but not willing to apply to a shooter on the job, which can certainly have political motivation. What's the contrived political motivation you've ascribed to this situation, expert?

Good point. I remember that event.

Preservation of an elite member of the bar association seems political to me especially as the bar is protecting him. Are they not, in a way, a part of law in that region? A person walking in and shooting coworkers isn't very political IMO.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

You can drop your ####### righteous indignation. You've labeled the acts of this group of lawyers as terrorism even though it doesn't even meet your definition in the above post. Don't tell me that's not a self-serving accusation, and, based on your dismissal of my observation, one that you're ready to apply to this workplace issue, sans violence, but not willing to apply to a shooter on the job, which can certainly have political motivation. What's the contrived political motivation you've ascribed to this situation, expert?

Frankly, I do not like labeling crimes. So to get stuck on the definition of terrorism is somewhat ironic for me. I'll back off of this issue. If you remember, I do not believe in labeling crimes "hate crimes" and I do not believe in the death penalty even for a man such as this (despite my death note comment).

Yes, I recognize that this entire thread is simply neoconservative bait thrown out to stir the pot and create negative views of Islam and Pakistan.

However, through this thread and others you have posted in it has become apparent to me that you have an agenda in this forum and that, in fact, you are similar to users such as danno and the like who continue to vomit threads pushing their neo-conservative viewpoints. Your agenda just happens to be the opposite of theirs.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Frankly, I do not like labeling crimes. So to get stuck on the definition of terrorism is somewhat ironic for me. I'll back off of this issue. If you remember, I do not believe in labeling crimes "hate crimes" and I do not believe in the death penalty even for a man such as this (despite my death note comment).

Yes, I recognize that this entire thread is simply neoconservative bait thrown out to stir the pot and create negative views of Islam and Pakistan.

However, through this thread and others you have posted in it has become apparent to me that you have an agenda in this forum and that, in fact, you are similar to users such as danno and the like who continue to vomit threads pushing their neo-conservative viewpoints. Your agenda just happens to be the opposite of theirs.

I'm no neo-conservative (why is that a pejorative?). I'm a life long conservative, and my agenda is no secret. I'm a Muslim who is sick and tired not only of terrorists disparaging my faith, but of non-Muslims who use the terrorists and other mal-actors to disparage my faith. I won't be silenced when I know threads like this are being used to smear me and others who have nothing to do with rape, murder and assault. So, if you want to pigeon hole me with "neo-conservatives", as though that's a bad thing, I don't care, as long as they have my back.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I'm no neo-conservative (why is that a pejorative?). I'm a life long conservative, and my agenda is no secret. I'm a Muslim who is sick and tired not only of terrorists disparaging my faith, but of non-Muslims who use the terrorists and other mal-actors to disparage my faith. I won't be silenced when I know threads like this are being used to smear me and others who have nothing to do with rape, murder and assault. So, if you want to pigeon hole me with "neo-conservatives", as though that's a bad thing, I don't care, as long as they have my back.

Then be more careful when selecting the wheat from the chaff.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Then be more careful when selecting the wheat from the chaff.

I've been a Muslim for 56 years and here for 5. I know the wheat and the chaff pretty well by now.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I'm no neo-conservative (why is that a pejorative?). I'm a life long conservative, and my agenda is no secret. I'm a Muslim who is sick and tired not only of terrorists disparaging my faith, but of non-Muslims who use the terrorists and other mal-actors to disparage my faith. I won't be silenced when I know threads like this are being used to smear me and others who have nothing to do with rape, murder and assault. So, if you want to pigeon hole me with "neo-conservatives", as though that's a bad thing, I don't care, as long as they have my back.

Also, where did you get that I was calling you a Neo-Conservative? I was only saying that your posts push an agenda. I wasn't saying that it was a neo conservative agenda, quite the opposite in fact.

I've been a Muslim for 56 years and here for 5. I know the wheat and the chaff pretty well by now.

Obviously you don't, at least not in this forum, if you think I'm like Galt or danno.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Also, where did you get that I was calling you a Neo-Conservative? I was only saying that your posts push an agenda. I wasn't saying that it was a neo conservative agenda, quite the opposite in fact.

Obviously you don't, at least not in this forum, if you think I'm like Galt or danno.

I don't know what you're like. I just responded to what you wrote.

[Peikko 1,575]

Actually, you didn't. He wrote that you are like the neoconservatives, in that you have an agenda, but that your agenda was opposite to theirs. I am not entirely certain what he meant by that, but what it definitely does not mean is that he associates you with neoconservatism.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Then why assume that I think all bad acts by Muslims = terrorists

That's certainly not the case.