Yes, I am surprised. I am surprised that people who might be upset about terrorism would think
vandalism of a school would be an appropriate response. Anger and reprisal is not an uncommon human response.
If Catholics in the name of their religion were bombing and maiming people all over the world on a daily basis
and targeting civilians in attacks across the globe, targeting school children in Russia, blowing up airplanes full
of innocent civilians, blowing up commuter trains full of innocent civilians, sawing off people's heads, ect x 100
I would expect some reprisals against Catholic institutions and would certainly not be surprised if that happened.
Apparently the people who did the vandalizing thought it was appropriate. Yes obviously so.
They think it will send a message.
It is the wrong approach and the criminal behavior should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
And no, that is not an assumption, that is a conclusion based on the evidence. Yes it is an assumption and it is also an incorrect conclusion.
And didn't your question of "arer you surprised" apply to the vandalism?Yes and I stand by that staement 100%.
Who could be surprised that a Muslim Mosque might be attacked?
Do you not think that real possibility has ever been discussed that it would happen?
Put aside your pride for a moment to win an argument and honestly say you
think that authorities are "surprised" this happened? No one with any knowledge
of the current level of violence coming from the Muslim world could logically be "surprised"
that anger would build enough to cause something like this to happen. One of my best friends who is Muslim
is very concerned what might happen to him and his family if the radical Muslims are successful in a catastrophic
attack against an American city they keep promising will happen. He is scared the repercussions could be very
bad for his family. And I asssure you he is not talking about school vandalism.
Considering you're someone who says things like "ASSuming" and "ASSumption", you really shouldn't be assuming
you know what my reaction would be.Can you not come up with your own ideas?
Assuming the KKK would attack an African American is certainly no leap of faith assumption,
but like I said, since you won't even admit the obvious, I am not sure why I continue discussing
with such disingenuity, but I suppose it's good practice and somewhat enjoyable to a point.
First of all, I probably would be surprised You would be surprised if the Klu Klux Klan attacked an African American?
Ummmm I am not sure this is discusssion is even worth continuing if you will not admit the obvious.
The point is you said it wasn't surprising and proceeded not to condemn the vandalism but to post numbers about attacks and people killed by Islamic terrorists. No you are the one missing the point.
You can not control the point I was making or decide what my point should be because you think thats what the point should be.
My point is my point to make, not yours.
But because I choose to make a point about a post you don't agree with you prefer to try to demonize me.
My point was not to condemn the vandalism, but to point out that it was not a surprise the level of anger at worldwide violence from the Muslim world has risen to this point. And as stated before, in my opinion it is going to get much, much worse. If we have a major attack on US cities with chemical weapons or WMD's school vandalisms are going to look like "the good old days". It could get very, very ugly and a situation the authorities may not be able to control very similar but much much worse than the Rodeny King LA Riots.
You're surprised that someone thought that looks like a justification? I have already basically stated I am never surprised by what I read on message boards.
And of course I am not surprised when people object to "politically incorrect" or non-standard approved responses about the "Religion of Peace".
No, it's not an assumption. Yes it is and again it is a wrong assumption.
Now it's my turn to ask you a question. Oh goody. I hope the fans in the outfield are wearing their mits.
Let's say someone posted an article about a terrorist attack that killed some Americans (God forbid), and then in response to that article someone said merely, "Are you surprised?" and then, without any further comment or condemnation of the terrorists, posted some statistics about deaths related to American foreign policy in the Middle East. Thats funny, because thats exactly what many on the Left did and still do.
I believe BaBa Streisand's husband said on a radio show on 9/11: "Happy 9/11 Day"
Maybe I should haave said "Happy Vandalism Day"?
Now that you could do you ASSuming on.
Would you see that reply and think the person was not excusing the terrorist attack? Uh no. I would not at all think that. Many on the Left basically said that exact same thing
but I don't think they were "excusing" the Sept 11 attack. They were upset the act happened
and think Bin Laden should be prosecuted.
Would you think the reply was from someone who thought the terrorists should be punished?Well I can't speak for the entire planet, but because some on the Left thought past American foriegn
policy may have played a factor in the Sept 11th attack would by no means mean they
did not think the Sept 11 planners should not be brought to justice. Are you saying all those on the
Left that think past american foreign policy played a role in bringing about Sept 11 think the planners
of Sept 11 should not be punished? I don't think that is true at all. I think even Michael Moore, Ron Paul,
and Cindy Sheehan would condemn the Sept 11 attack and think the perpetrators should be brought to justice.
Yes, but that sentiment was noticeably lacking in your initial post.Because as I stated earlier that was not the point I wanted to make.
You keep trying to dictate what my point "should have been" but you don't control the points I choose to make.
You're calling Henny a bigot because she didn't see you condemn the vandalism in your initial post? No, no, no. I am calling Henny a bigot because when Henny called/implied I was a bigot by reading my response that she disapproved of she exposed herself as a bigot.
Seems to me you're the one doing all the assuming. Or maybe you're just naive enough to think that anyone not agreeing with you is a bigot.
No that describes Henny and why I think she is a bigot.
Typing in all caps, repeating yourself, but you're not offended? Sure.Oh so now you know when I am offended and I don't?
You know me better than I do?
You're funny.
Since when does "all caps" = offended?
Can you source that definition of "all caps" please?
I sometimes use all caps for emphasis.
Sorry I can't be pigeon-holed in writing style either.
To see anger reaching a level of stupidity? Hm. I suppose you're right. It does so frequently. Ok finally, finally, finally. Let there be light.
Yet, I still find myself surprised that people would do this, as your initial post and the above quote seem to imply, as a response to terrorist actions. Maybe I just have too much faith that people ought to know better.I don't recall saying anything was an absolute shock. Ok, but it seemed your were "very surprised" but I won't play semantics right now.
I may distrust some organizations, what does this mean at this particular junction if this conversation?
but I tend to be surprised when I see evidence of individuals doing something that seems, as in this case, not only hateful but stupid. Honestly, I do not understand how you could be "surprised" in today's world when we see in across the board in every facet of life every single day in the news. But I''l take your word for it.
I guess I'm just not the sort to expect that of people. I've never gotten used to it. To be quite honest, I think I do not want to get used to it. I certainly don't want to come to expect it.
All very true.
True, but not being surprised and posting numbers about terrorist attacks doesn't exactly equal a condemnation of the vandalism.Again condemnation was not the point I chose or intended to make at that point.
That's kinda funny coming from someone who has declared Henny a bigotONLY, after Henny said/implied I was one.
and who decided he can tell me how I will answer his questions. Questions?
Was there more than one?
Refresh my memory.
Perhaps you should consider that you don't know enough about Henny or me to make the assumptions you're apparently making.
Remeber she called me/implied I was bigot first, so maybe Henny should follow your advice.
According to your logic, she does not know enough about me to assume I am a bigot
When she did that without knowing my intent, without knowing condemnation was not the point I was making, it became obvious
that Heny was "intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own".
Or is it okay for you to assume you know other people even though you can't read their intent or what their heart feels any better than they can read yours? Okay for thee but not for me?Again Henny used the term bigotry towards me first, so maybe you ask Henny those questions.
I'm not pigeonholing anyone. In my opinion yes you are because I have a point to make that is different from what you think the first response to a post should be you want to "pigeon hole" me as someone that supports vandalism against Muslims and that I condone such criminal behavior when you have no credible evidence to support such implications.
I'm also not lyingWhen you say "
You've basically excused the vandalism" you are indeed lying or greatly mischaracterizing someone you
do not even know because that is not at all what I have done. Plus in my opinion you are lying or out of touch with reality
when you respond and basically say you would be surprised to see violence from a Klu Klux Klan member against an African American.
However, I am having doubts about whether or not you're doing any of that. Doubting Thomas had his good points.
