Terrorists occupy federal building in Oregon

[rah]

Again, thinking what would happen does not necessarily mean approval of it.
And Native Americans have not been viewed as terrorists in the past but as a persecuted minority. BIG DIFFERENCE.

[Berzerker]

I'm not especially familiar with the Rice case, but what options did they have for investigation? If a guy is pointing a gun at people, or appears to be, do they have the time or ability to zoom in on the firearm with a camera and verify that it is real, or to do a lookup on the suspect to verify that he's an adult?

There was nobody at the scene other than the cops and the kid, they spent 2-3 seconds "investigating" as they drove up a few feet away and killed him - the video shows how much time they took to assess the situation. They had plenty of time to drive around checking him out, they had plenty of time to park on the street and walk up to ask questions or take secure positions and yell orders at the kid. The cop was trigger happy and thank God he's no longer on the force, he wasn't qualified to be there in the first place - a previous trainer said the shooter shouldn't even be a cop.

I'm saying that if Muslims protest the federal take over of federal lands they will be treated the same way. If they want to protest the rights of Muslims to pray whenever they want at work, or something related to their religion, that shows that they aren't assimilating int our culture of course they will be treated differently, and it's ridiculous to expect otherwise.

Our culture requires Muslims to stop being Muslims? I thought we had a 1st Amendment to protect religious freedom and here you're telling me we must give up that freedom to assimilate?

[rah]

If they want to protest the rights of Christians to pray whenever they want at work, or something related to their religion, that shows that they aren't assimilating into our culture of course they will be treated differently, and it's ridiculous to expect otherwise.

Just verifying how stupid that sounds if you swap out Muslims for Christians. Yeah pretty stupid.

[Kidlicious]

Again, thinking what would happen does not necessarily mean approval of it.
And Native Americans have not been viewed as terrorists in the past but as a persecuted minority. BIG DIFFERENCE.

Well the militants have actually gotten a lot of negative reaction. There's some liberal in Congress calling for a condemnation of the militants. It's pretty ridiculous when Congress condemns the people for protesting against them.

There would probably be some people calling Muslims terrorists if they were doing it, but it could go the other way. You could see much more shaming of those people and a bunch of idiots like Michael Moore saying "we are all Muslims" and ****.

[Kidlicious]

Just verifying how stupid that sounds if you swap out Muslims for Christians. Yeah pretty stupid.

It sounds stupid because Christians don't pray at certain times of the day.

[rah]

I'm positive that if Muslims were doing it that some would be calling them terrorists and that the Government would be handling it more aggressively.

THAT"S WHY I POSTED

I have to disagree with you on this one. I think the feds would respond much more aggressively.

If you're not going to read what people respond to you, please don't respond back.

[rah]

It sounds stupid because Christians don't pray at certain times of the day.

And that wins the ignorant post of the day.

[Kidlicious]

Our culture requires Muslims to stop being Muslims? I thought we had a 1st Amendment to protect religious freedom and here you're telling me we must give up that freedom to assimilate?

Terrorism changes that. The purpose of terrorism is to cause people to be so afraid of you that they change their behavior. So to the degree that the terrorists are successful people will change their behavior. So you can't blame people for getting uptight about a bunch of radical Muslims with guns breaking the law.

[Elok]

I highly doubt this would happen (except the counter-militia stuff, that would likely happen). More likely we'd be seeing stories about Islamic extremists or ISIS in the US. Trump and Fox would of course be spearheading the effort, the other R candidates all blustering and trying to out-absurd Trump on the issue. More rational people/outlets would still be talking about it as Islamic Terrorism one way or the other, especially once the blowback from the absurdist news started making it's own headlines. You'd have talking heads telling us how this is all the fault of [allowing immigrants into the country|leaving Iraq|not bombing enough other countries]. It would be a circus.

Not that I think this warrants that ... not much does ... but it's hard to imagine armed Muslims taking over Federal land publicly stating they are willing to fight and die for their cause ... not ending up a media circus. It's just way, way too good for ratings and poll numbers to pass up.

You're probably largely correct about the circus; I hadn't considered the sex appeal of the them-terrists narrative. Ultimately, however, I think it'd hang up on the same snag that kept it out of mainstream news here (until people squinted at it hard enough to think they saw a hypocrisy angle): these people, while in flagrant violation of the law, do not seem to have hurt anyone, appear likely to hurt anyone in the near future, or do anything more than mildly inconvenience a handful of bureaucrats in some sector of the government nobody in the general public much cares about. It's entirely possible that they could stay squatting in that building for the next year without significantly bothering anyone at all, assuming the people who worked there kept their files online. They might even improve their efficiency by switching to telecommuting. I think. I'm still not clear WTF this office does.

EDIT: You can probably tell I haven't been following this story too closely, huh?

[Kidlicious]

And that wins the ignorant post of the day.

[Berzerker]

Terrorism changes that. The purpose of terrorism is to cause people to be so afraid of you that they change their behavior. So to the degree that the terrorists are successful people will change their behavior. So you can't blame people for getting uptight about a bunch of radical Muslims with guns breaking the law.

You said Muslims need to assimilate, but why are you helping the terrorists achieve their goal?

[Kidlicious]

You said Muslims need to assimilate, but why are you helping the terrorists achieve their goal?

I wasn't talking about Muslims directly. I was talking about liberals like Aeson, commenting about people being afraid of radical Muslims. They either are or are not going to assimilate. They probably aren't. The purpose of terrorism is to strike fear in people. But the result in the West seems to be those on the left complaining about Islamophobia, instead of terrorism so that they can make their political opponents look bad. That could result in more opportunities for radical Islamists to change our society to their liking which is their primary objective.

[Uncle Sparky]

So, why haven't the police arrested the Yokel Haram? They are breaking laws, unlike blacks that get shot for being black.

[Lonestar]

He was a twelve year old kid.
You are a grown up man.
Fundamental difference.

**** man, my Dad had taught me gun safety before I was even ten, and words like "don't point even toy guns at cops" were thrown around.

He wasn't a toddler. He was 12, old enough to reason with and think this **** through.

[-Jrabbit]

Really? You're going to victim-blame?

Nice.