Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

In a shocking attack in the USA, a gunman whose favourite book is listed as 'Mein Kampf' has shot a Jewish Congresswoman in the head (she's in a critical condition as I type) and killed 6 others, including a 9 year old girl.


Suspect gunman: Jared Loughner

Let me say, I personally believe the people around him aren't hypocrites when they are going to get blamed for not preventing this hate crime. I also fully expect that this attack which actually did kill innocent civilians will be classified as not a terrorist act, because the guy must be deranged and we can't blame his political views or extremist agenda for his act. Whatever we label this crime - it should not be excused.

However, a possible accomplice is being sought.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12145076

(The attack, does back up the FBI stats that show that hate crimes against Jews are more common in the USA than hate crimes against Muslims).

Cheers,
Shafique

He lists among his favorite books "Mein Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto". But he also includes a broad variety of other titles, including: "Animal Farm," "Brave New World," "To Kill a Mockingbird," and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest".

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/a ... 002e0.html

Why let facts get in the way of fiction?

There's no evidence, as far as I know, that the shooting had anything to do with the congresswoman being Jewish.

Not too fast Al shafique, there is nothing to indicate that he shot her because she was Jewish, he probably did not even know she was.
If you have any information to support your conclusion share it here, and call the FBI because they say they dont know the motive.

Herve - you have a point, this will only go down as a Jewish hate crime in the FBI stats if the evidence shows that her religion was the reason she was targetted (other reasons being given - she is a Democrat).

Let's see what the reasons given eventually are - there's a lot of media speculation (esp in the States) at the moment.

The more I read, the more it looks like it is the Tea Party rhetoric coming home to roost! It was only a matter of time for one of the far right nutters over there to take some of the rhetoric literally. The media is reminding us of Sarah Palins (now unfortunate) campaign:

Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, a prominent conservative, for months used a graphic of a gun cross-hairs to urge followers to "reload" and "aim" for Giffords and other Democrats.

The local sheriff thinks it is bigotry - but it may well be political:

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said a consuming atmosphere of political vitriol centred on Arizona may have been a factor.

"The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous," he said. "And unfortunately, Arizona, I think, has become the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

Cheers,
Shafique

Shaf, you seem to disagree with the possibility of it being classed as a terrorist act if the motive was not anti-semitism?
Thats what herve has been arguing for the several weeks, and why the islamic terroism figures in Europe are skewed.
I'm glad that you now agree with herve

^No, sorry you've lost me Benwj (seriously).

I said I fully expect this to be classified as 'not a terrorist act' - heck, let me quote myself:

I also fully expect that this attack which actually did kill innocent civilians will be classified as not a terrorist act, because the guy must be deranged and we can't blame his political views or extremist agenda for his act.

I intended to imply that I DO consider this to be an act of terrorism - because of his political or extremist views (I was making the assumption that political motivation was the most likely - hence why I listed it first).

As such, I also think this act of terrorism should be included in the list of FBI stats for terrorist acts. The motivation may or may not be anti-Semitism, but it is definitely not Islamic. Whether the FBI will classify it as an act of terrorism remains to be seen. But I'm pretty sure that herve will argue that it is not an act of terrorism.

But that said, perhaps I have misunderstood herve - if there are points that we do agree on, that would be fantastique!

That said - benwj, if I've misunderstood your post - let me know.

Cheers,
Shafique

You busted shaf, only you wrote "Jewish" congresswoman shot, no headlines, nobody. Man......... you have a corrupt agenda.

^Not so fast caps.

How about this for a headline:

Shooter of Jewish Congresswoman listed 'Mein Kampf' as favorite book

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-d ... k-1.336025
and

Near fatal shooting of Jewish congresswoman shakes Arizona community

Now, go back and re-read my first post.



Cheers,
Shafique

Bravo! Al Shafique considers it a terrorist act even before the FBI, and regardless of the motivations. Hence his biased opinion.
Your motivation and mission is to account any possible assaults to skew statistics to minimize the Islamic threat.
It may be terrorist, it may not be, it is too early to say.
My motivation has always been to use the correct definition because it is the only way to fight and prevent terrorist attacks. Identify MO's and patterns.
This poor woman had been targeted and threatened for months , and not because she was Jewish, it is dishonest for you to skew the discussion toward a religious attack when it is clearly not.
And for somebody who hates Jews, your constant quotes from Israely papers shows that you always looking for something to distort the truth. of course if this woman is jew, jewish papers are going to be charged with emotions and recognize her as a jewish, to use these papers to spin facts shows you are dishonest.
The shooting happened in the US, quote US papers, not hareetz.
You mention my Kempf as an attempt to deceit and try to show the attack was anti jewsih, should i remind you that the Quran inspired countless more terrorist attacks than my Kempf.

I agree with you - it may or may not be classed a terrorist attack. To me, my initial reaction is it is - innocent civilians targeted at a meeting where a congresswoman is targetted too.

I fully understand your rant and your sentiments though - I expected that tasting your own medicine would not go down well - but all I did was indeed quote a Haaretz headline, which was factual.

If you wish to discuss whether the Quran (or Muslims) have killed more Jews than Hitler or the previous Biblical inspired massacres - we can have that conversation in the religion forum. (However, I'd rather count bodies of civilian victims rather than get into a warped debate with you over what is a terrorist act and what isn't.)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I agree with you - it may or may not be classed a terrorist attack. To me, my initial reaction is it is - innocent civilians targeted at a meeting where a congresswoman is targetted too.

If you wish to discuss whether the Quran (or Muslims) have killed more Jews than Hitler or the previous Biblical inspired massacres - we can have that conversation in the religion forum. (However, I'd rather count bodies of civilian victims rather than get into a warped debate with you over what is a terrorist act and what isn't.)

Cheers,
Shafique

Again , your deceit and constant distortion.
I did NOT compare the quran or Hitler in killing people.
I compared the Quran and My Kampf, both books, as you mentionned my Kampf, maliciously, to mislead people into beleiving this was a anti jewish attack.
I said, the Quran inspired more killings, than My Kampf, NOT Hitler.

As I said, we can discuss your beliefs about Mein Kampf and the Quran against reality in an appropriate thread in the religion forum.

I'll be very interested in your body counts and definitions.

Cheers,
Shafique

Herve wrote:I did NOT compare the quran or Hitler in killing people.

Herve, you're absolutely right that shafique distorts what posters write.

I've publicly mentioned this on the forum in the past.

Trolls are, if nothing else, very predictable:

And really, it isn't just non-Muslims who have complained about his posting style. Anyone who disagrees with him notices that he's very far from rational or capable of understanding the position of his opponents, often deliberately taking their arguments out of context and saying, 'I'm glad you agree with me, blah blah blah'.

dubai-chat/the-mind-troll-t44069-15.html#p353508

I don't see any point in engaging shafique on issues.

Best strategy is to ignore him and hope he goes away.

Totally agree with you EH

Shaf, you are way off on this one. The shooter was clearly mentally ill. This has nothing to do with religion! Check out his videos on Youtube. http://www.youtube.com/user/Classitup10

I concede, my last sentence in the OP in brackets should have contained a proviso (IF this is determined to be a hate crime then... ) - mea culpa.

However, the rest of that post was quite carefully worded, and it is interesting to see what the reactions have been to the thread title and indeed the post itself.

I was going to see whether the usual suspects would condemn the shooter's act rather than attack me for using a Haaretz headline and my commentary.

I deliberately chose to mimic the 'style' of reporting here of a shooting that involves a Muslim shooter killing civilians and a 9 year old girl - but I couldn't bring myself to completely emulate it. That would be to cynically exploit a heinous crime. Yet still, just stating facts - it had the desired, dare I say - predictable, effect.

Now that the shooter has been charged, and there are reports of notes being left - let's see what the reasons he gives for this attack are. He may, after all, be charged with domestic terrorism charges later:

Mr Loughner has so far been charged with one count of attempted assassination of a member of Congress, two of first degree murder and two of attempted murder.

FBI Director Robert Mueller refused to comment on the gunman's motivation but he did not rule out the possibility of pressing additional charges under a domestic terrorism statute at a later date.

(And the article also says Fox News is reporting that he may have been a member of a far-right group - but they say he wasn't a member)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12145117



Cheers,
Shafique

LOL ! A little off topic I did this in another forum ,about the story of human shields in Egypt. One had the orginal title and one an incendiary anti muslim one. For two days the two threads ran. One orginal title thread has just 20 views and one acidic Herve-ish remark like the thread here and another one.....LOL

This was done after a recent debate that Muslims don't speak out or do anything. While my point of argument they do either it never reaches the news and people rather pay attention or watch soomething that confirms their bais or they just don't ( want to ) hear it.

^ Enlightening.

It's actually something that has been going on for years - but has been improving lately (but is still bad).

I remember that when Khomeni issued the Fatwa against Rushdie, our mosque held a press conference and the print and tv did turn up. The Imam addressed them and said that he fully expected that none of them would actually publish/broadcast what he would say. He went on to explain what Islam teaches about blasphemy (i.e. that there is no actual punishment on earth ordained in the Quran or Hadith) - and went on to explain this in depth with references. Press packs with refs were handed out.

True enough - only the Independent newspaper made any mention of the news conference the next day and that was only a few paragraphs in the middle of the paper. Everyone else chose not to publish.

However, things have got better since.

Coming back to this thread - I have to say, I did expect at least one person to come out and join me in condemning the killings. I mean, if Muslims don't condemn the killings carried out by other Muslims - they must be supporters of the actions ... mustn't they?

Cheers,
Shafique

Condemnation...wait lemme go back and re-read the thread


Nope ! nothing there, hence I have to unfortufortunately come to the conclusion.

1. All American young males are terrorists
2. No one has condemned spoken out against this hence they full support these actions


Ok. enough of that non sense.

Very sad and tragic indeed specially when you hear a 9 year old child was also killed in this henious and uncalled for act of violence.

With all the headlines I have seen and news stories on the TV about this tragedy, not once was there mention of "Jewish Congresswoman..........". You failed to mention the religion of the other people who were shot and killed.

Shaf, why don't you stop with all the Jew-bashing Islam-promoting, (anti?)terrorism and give it a rest. You are truly consumed with it. Think about fining another hobby. Maybe you didn't get the responses you were looking for because you inserted the word "Jewish"???

The title "Jewish Congress woman" was taken from a couple of Haaretz headlines. I didn't insert it - but I did choose to use it. It is factual - and indeed it is as relevant as the use of Muslim in other headlines (think about it - I agree with you).

I don't view any of my posts in this thread as Jew-bashing. Indeed, I would be horrified if any of my posts were actually Jew-bashing.

One of my great dislikes is the equation of criticism of some Israeli actions as Jew-bashing - primarily as a smokescreen to get away from the crimes. Anti-semite being misused as an insult is far too common these days.

Cheers,
Shafique

"Jewish congresswoman in critical condition after Arizona shooting attack"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/internation ... k-1.335939

Giffords known for her openness and Judaism
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/01 ... judaism%22
"According to the Jewish news organization JTA, Giffords was raised by a Christian Scientist mother and a Jewish father."

I generally read/listen to reports that try (and I mean "try") to be objective. Obviously Jewish publications will make reference to her being a Jew. (Isn't that the purpose - to be as Jewish as possible?) If she was a practicing Christian I'm sure she wouldn't be worthy of a passing comment, unless she was known for being pro or anti Jew.

I would not have known the Congresswoman was Jewish had I not seen the Haaretz articles first - indeed the news coverage generally has been notable for not mentioning the religions of the victims or the shooter.

I contrast that with the posts and headlines that immediately ascribe blame to religions when a Muslim is involved (or even suspected to be involved) - and before motives are established.

I would like to think that in this case, if the the shooter had been a slightly mentally imbalanced (but not crazy) 22 year old called Ahmed - then neither his religion nor that of the victim would have featured in the immediate headlines. I would also hope that the benefit of doubt about motives and even the questioning of whether it was a terrorist act would be the same.

The killing of civilians in a targetted assassination is reprehensible and inexcusable. The fact that the shooter wanted to be in the military is a chilling thought - kudos to the US military for not letting him in.

Cheers,
Shafique

I think the sad irony of this has passed over many heads. That when something like a robbery takes place. The headlines will read "Muslim man robs 7/11" as if him being a muslim had anything to do with it ?

desertdudeshj wrote:I think the sad irony of this has passed over many heads. That when something like a robbery takes place. The headlines will read "Muslim man robs 7/11" as if him being a muslim had anything to do with it ?

If you all insist in shoving your religion in everyones face how can you complain when it is used to describe you? The thing is that with most people you wouldn't know what religion they were but Muslims have to wear it like some badge of honour. Then when someone describes you as a Muslim you shout 'racist'. You can't have it both ways.

Intresting, how many people have come riding down on bicycles knocking on your door asking you to convert !

You just see it as in your face because everytime you see a brown person you see a muslim and because he's brown and stands out in the crowd to you, he's shoving his religon in your face and that tarnishes your image of a white England. Your ignorance shows from things like when you post pictures of sikhs thinking they are Muslims. Because brown+beard+turban= Muslim. Hey to you we all look the same, right.

If only we could hear the thoughts of people like you when you see the many brown people in the UK and from your statements the moment you land at the airport. Must really suck to be you, in your phobic world.

Boo ! Watch out a Jihadi behind you ! LOL

You're turning into shafique, where you are incapable of seeing and understanding what is obvious to everyone else.

You just see it as in your face because everytime you see a brown person you see a muslim and because he's brown and stands out in the crowd to you

No, we see them as Islamic because they cite the texts and teachings of their religion, travel off to live in Taliban run training camps, subscribe to the views of Islamic hate preachers, hand out Korans before a terror attack and praise their God when they gun down non-believers or detonate a bomb in a densely packed crowd.

Yes EH all 1.5 billion of us are doing exactly just that ! How did you know, are you one of us

I just went through my email contacts that I have of each and every muslim alive today, which we use to communicate and plot for a secret Jihad against the great infidel. Didn't happen to see your name on the list !

Damn shaf ! I think Assange is on to us too. You better not be our Bradley Manning !

And what media labels a terrorist 'Islamic' or 'Muslim' that wouldn't do the same to an abortion bomber who was Christian?

Are we supposed to believe someone just because they say so?