Jon Letendre Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 And that if he'd been clinically treated for something then that fact would, with all the powers of sprinkled fairy dust, turn this incident into something else? Something we may never fully understand? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 45 minutes ago, Jon Letendre said: And that if he'd been clinically treated for something then that fact would, with all the powers of sprinkled fairy dust, turn this incident into something else? Something we may never fully understand? ? Jon, Ha... Maybe this can become a teachable moment as we strive to make a sustainable effort at inclusiveness. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 Looks like I'm not the only one who noticed media weirdness in reporting the Munich massacre. Alex starts with one of his over-the-top conclusions, but then gets into the documentation part, which is his true value. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 (edited) A tale of three tweets BREAKING: Syrian refugee armed with a machete arrested after killing a woman and injuring two others in #Reutlingen #Germany - Sky News — Conflict News (@Conflicts) July 24, 2016 DETAILS: The motives of the attack in #Reutlingen are still unclear https://t.co/YM21KXUyeM pic.twitter.com/roZc7wbeyk — RT (@RT_com) July 24, 2016 Edited July 24, 2016 by william.scherk Add intro, separated tweets with P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 Was he right handed or left? Experts are examining the machete blood spatter patterns in an attempt to find out, but clear conclusions may never emerge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Just an observation, I may be wrong. The only way Islamic terrorists usually kill themselves is by either blowing themselves up in a crowded area, or shooting people/axing/knives etc etc until they themselves are gunned down. I don't think I've heard of one that shoots himself.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted July 26, 2016 Author Share Posted July 26, 2016 11 hours ago, Jules Troy said: Just an observation, I may be wrong. The only way Islamic terrorists usually kill themselves is by either blowing themselves up in a crowded area, or shooting people/axing/knives etc etc until they themselves are gunned down. I don't think I've heard of one that shoots himself.. A passive aggressive Jihadi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveWolfer Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said: The only way Islamic terrorists usually kill themselves is by either blowing themselves up in a crowded area, or shooting people/axing/knives etc etc until they themselves are gunned down. I don't think I've heard of one that shoots himself.. Of course we may never know. And he may not be a Jihadi. But it would be funny if he got the details of a terrorism attack wrong and thought that the sequence of events was to 1.) Kill lots of people. 2.) Finish with blowing yourself up. 3.) Enjoy your 72 virgins in paradise. But he didn't have any explosive and just thought that getting to #3, to his 72 virgins could be done by shooting himself. ------------- To be a fundamentalist of this sort (if that is what he was) isn't going to happen to a stable, rational fellow. So, in some ways it is splitting hairs as we dissect the differences between a nut case who goes on a rampage and a Islamic Fundamentalist terrorist who goes on a rampage. Slightly different flavor nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 (edited) Boldly, boringly on two remnant misunderstandings. On 7/23/2016 at 10:53 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: On 7/23/2016 at 9:26 AM, william.scherk said: On 7/23/2016 at 8:15 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: [T]he following is probably just a coincidence, huh? [Link to the UK Mirror story** from which the following was truncquoated. Emphasis added] Quote Information, again, is yet to fully emerge about the reasons behind the teenager's gun attack, but pro-ISIS Twitter accounts have been widely celebrating the attack with some suggestions that the group has taken credit for it. I don't know what you quite mean by coincidence -- and I am not clear if your question in context suggests you might believe that the reported shouts of Allahu Akbar are not coincidence. Would you be saying "Killer's shouts of 'God is Great' are also not coincidental"? And if you would say that, then what does the shout signify to you? (My first guess is that this reported shout [taken in isolation from other information] signifies to you a motive or the motive -- the attacker was [purely?] motivated by allegiance to Islam/jihad/ISIS) Since when have you ever been rhetoric challenged? You are one of the most rhetoric-nuanced people I know. Dodge. On 7/23/2016 at 10:57 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: On 7/23/2016 at 9:26 AM, william.scherk said: The Full Story is not obvious to me right now, and I expect it is not obvious to you either. William, Ha! Of course the Full Story is not obvious to me. I'm glad it's not obvious to you, either. But the General Gist Story is pretty much in everyone's face. The gist of the Munich Massacre ... [to Add In] On 7/23/2016 at 11:07 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Look at these two facts: 1. ISIS is going apeshit screaming We did it! We did it! We did it! all over social media. Is this a 'true fact'? "We did it! We did it!" by ISIS fanboys claims the massacre as "ours" or perhaps claims it happened as part of an ISIS plan -- after the fact of the shootings. The "apeshit screaming" in itself is not dispositive. It does not in itself let us make a firm conclusion as to whether he was directed by ISIS, sympathized with ISIS, or was 'inspired' by ISIS. How have you decided the level of involvement in reality, Michael -- if the link is quite clear in your mind? In other words, in other words, explain your 'findings' ... indicate clear connections to ISIS. I mean, if you care to explain your research. Quote 2. William above quotes an NBC story saying there are no indications the shooter "had links to ISIS or any other terror group." More correctly, the NBC story quoted state authorities. Quote Who in their right mind will expect that to go unnoticed? Is it any wonder nobody believes the media anymore? A passive 'in their right mind' construction in question form obscures the point (for me) and is more likely misunderstood. Yes, of the ISIS-Link facts of Munich Massacre, at the time of the NBC report, one fact is that state authorities investigating and reporting to the German public had found no compelling 'link.' I must guess or infer that you did not believe there was reliable information in the authorities' reports. That German authorities were lying or covering up or being 'politically correct' in detailing motivation. That there is an obvious ISIS connection [ie, ISIS supplied a) inspiration; b) planning support; c) direction from ISIS 'handlers'; d) funding and materiel acquisition help ...] Here's my angle in our Munich exchanges: I must guess what your argument is ... and in guessing I run the risk of error. Far simpler for you to lay out a coherent Story of the shooter's enmeshment within the ISIS orbit.. The How ISIS recruited, the Why ISIS contacted, the When the ISIS plan was conceived and given to the shooter, the Who were the ISIS ''controllers" or arm-suppliers, the What form of necessary support from ISIS led to the massacre. The When 'official ISIS organs' claimed the attack as their act, in furtherance of their goals. -- I think that the recent ISIS-controlled/supported/inspired atrocities in France and Germany are of a different type than the shooting atrocity in Munich. In the throat-slashing, in the truck-ramming, in the ax-wielding train attack, in the suicide explosion -- a clear and present connection to the death-cult ISIS was teased out of onrushing 'fact' quite quickly. All I would ask you or any other rational inquirer to do, Michael, is to investigate, compare and contrast Typing. Quote If the media wants to manipulate people to fall in line with a political agenda, it is going to have to go back to Covert Persuasion 101 classes. It has gotten really sloppy. '"The Media" and the "Political Agenda"' is a fine subject header. It could lead a fine article, a persuasive argument, a rational analysis built on hard mental work. As for the persuasiveness of suggestive points regarding the Munich Massacre, I will keep my mind open. It's still unclear to me what you believe. I guess you could give us a psychological/motivational portrait of the shooter, accounting for all reliable information gleaned in your research. Quote Talk about desperation. What the media fears the most is becoming irrelevant as it does everything it possibly can to become irrelevant. This sort of slides off into the swamp of generalization. Talk about desperation (in and of "The Media") -- yes. Yes talk about relevant particulars and principles, motives and history, facts and 'factoids.' Talk about a media (a person, a group/entity, network, editorial board, leadership, 'stance,' track record of reliability, track record of bias, propaganda, 'party line'). Contrast defective instance with reliable instance. As I remarked above in my 'strategic' and historical understanding of the great war in Syria/Iraq, there is an undeniable evil in ISIS, a grotesque evil, a sociopathic evil. The 'war on the West' is the real and dangerous policy of ISIS. In the military playbook and in its second-order playbooks (Dabiq, etc) terror attacks in/on the West, on soft civilian targets, with utmost brutality -- these are war/policy/religious directives. It is supposed to bleed into the consciousness of psychological 'marks' in the West, especially in the closest West, the most 'mixed' West, where Muslims are a significant minority. Those marks are inducted by 'quasi-cells' or informal networks of ISIS sympathizers, agents, recruiters, and enter the maw of the war to be trained to martyrdom by various means. If not dispatched to Raqqah, if not selected and groomed, if not able to get to the cockpit of death, a ringer or plant or 'inspired' local will follow the playbooks. The penultimate goal of the sociopathic state is to break the compact Europe has made with Islam. Islamic State wants to break any bonds of co-existence that have taken root in Europe (in the USA, in Canada/Australia/former British dependencies). Wherever there is co-existence in liberty, there is the field for atrocity, for terror, for opening and deepening divisions, for destroying a sense of safety and community cohesion. Acts like the church atrocity are designed to ultimately break a host society's matrix of co-existence, to 'call the ummah home' to the End Times capital. I go on about 'motivation' in the case of Munich on a couple of narrow points. The ISIS-led/planned/executed/supported/inspired attacks I mention above are of a type -- acts of terror designed to help usher in Day of the Boxcars. Whether Bataclan, a Catholic cleric throat slit in France, or the atrocity in Nice, or the axe and machete attacks in Germany, the aim is the same: to deepen anxiety and suspicion between the 'host' and its 'Islam.' Terrorism works. My other small issue was that there will be mass slaughter events that do not fit the simple single I-Type I sketch above. These outliers are not 'of a type,' in my mind. These do not obviate disgust and anger over death-cult "religious war" "civilizational war" "end-times war" attacks. I mean, I feel as sick at heart over Type One ISIS-inflected terror attacks with undeniable roots in radical Islamic terrorism. I will leave this emotional subject until the next Breaking News where 'Design' is not-immediately Typed --a possible 'outlier' where motivations are unclear in the first hours, especially where the particulars do not fall in line with ISIS 'design.' These are massacres that have the same physical effect and effect of dread and grief and rage in the aftermath (Gabby Gifford, the Charleston massacre, a generic school shoot-up, a 'rampage killing' / deranged shooter, workplace revenge, 'personal' targets, and so on). Michael, dear leader, you will boldly go forth as always, as is good. My point of view is not meant to hobble you, but to help consolidate reliable information. It isn't always immediately apparent that a Type One or Type Two (or Type S to Z) mass killing has occurred. I share a little bit of your cynicism and negativism as regards the blob term The Media. We both keep our tools sharp. I don't believe the Munich Massacre fits the bill of a Type One attack. It is still unclear to me what Type you fit on the horrific crime. Let me be clear. I immediately judge Type ISIS events as horrific 'Islamic' crimes, fully cognizant to shockwaves of emotion. I also type a higher crime design category in my moral universe, a crime against humankind, a war crime, a crime against humanity itself, a crime against the most vulnerable and in need of protection. All the ISIS criminal atrocities in the West are thus additionally crimes against humanity to my mind. They revolt me in a depth-charge kind of way. If I were a god, I would get involved. I would terminate the gardeners of evil. So I almost kind of understand Bob's autistic lurch into ethnic cleansing theorist. We all probably have horrific revenge fantasies unshared. The seeds of evil are sowed in war. Edited July 27, 2016 by william.scherk TBAdded 'Gist' mark. Added 'Boldly' ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 36 minutes ago, william.scherk said: The "apeshit screaming" in itself indicates nothing. It does not in itself let us make a firm conclusion... William, You used to be good at this stuff. What happened? The charge was there was NO INDICATION of ISIS involvement. "Apeshit screaming" by ISIS folks is an indication, especially since there was a lot of it. You may not like the indication, but it is an indication. Since when does NO INDICATION = FIRM CONCLUSION? When you switch things like that, you're supposed to hide them behind euphemisms or clever rationalizations first, not just make the switch immediately. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 (edited) On 7/22/2016 at 7:31 PM, william.scherk said: Up here in Canada, the idea has been to counter extremism with family-reunion tropes and public behaviour. Every Syrian refugee is embraced most tightly, in a positive regard, to more publicly knit them into the Canadian project. It is very Big Brother, but in a weird municipal water-park way. We don't like our new Canadians to be shut-ins or 'keep to themselves' people. By 'family-reunion tropes' I meant community gatherings small and large. The local Syrian refugee families are hauled out to events, from potluck 'meet the new neighbours' on up to our national day festivities. By 'public behaviour' I mean multiple stories that feature inter-actions outside a refugee family and sponsors. The behaviour is of the community and its social institutions from the most informal to the most symbolic. This is the local story about volunteer effort the fire-house/cop-shop tour, the library outreach, church alliance with local Muslim association, an open-house -- this is the satisfying 'human interest' story which spells out the details on family X and particular challenges. I can't make an argument that there is a direct relation between the big-brother surveillance/monitoring/assisting and a future lack of Canadian jihadis from this cohort of refugees. I speculate that we figure out if not directly 'know' the actual people as individuals. Those who are destined to implant themselves in Canada one way or another (self-segregate, non-assimilate, nurse old-country grievance and vengeance). The lady in the hijab on the bus with her toddlers. The family at the shops. The guy who needs help learning English. We got our eyes on you. "Helping" to assimilate to secular 'national' values. An instance of the informal 'big brother/sister' embrace of Syrian refugees, via BuzzFeed , out of Toronto. Refugee family sort of lost in transport. A day to remember. “They’re our newest Canadians and we need to ensure that they succeed and that they feel welcome. “I would just hope that all of their experiences were like this and this wasn’t out of the ordinary,” she said. “This is the country that they came to.” Quote < Facebook: vhtaylor Edited July 30, 2016 by william.scherk Yes, BBCode still works ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now