Printable View
London Bridge killer was wearing an ELECTRONIC TAG after being released from jail a year ago...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...es-reveal.html
London Bridge 'terror attack': Video shows incident - live...
https://www.cnn.com/uk/live-news/lon...ntl/index.html
From article...
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that it is a “mistake” to allow violent criminals out of prison early.
Also another attack in the Netherlands with 3 stabbed but fortunately no deaths,they should call it what it is,ISIS backed terrorists.
London made the decision to embrace unfettered relocation policies and it is the citizens that pay the price.
We are going to reap what we sow also when it comes to social media recruitment of terrorists,all it takes is a disenfranchised soul and it become ripe for manipulation.
Fortantualy in some states if somebody comes at you with a knife you can just shoot them while in other cities you just have to eccept that you are at the mercy of the attacker.
More FAKE NEWS from Richard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Dutch Police: "No terrorist motive" in Hague stabbing of three teenagers
https://www.dw.com/en/the-hague-stab...ive/a-51490938
The suspect, a 35-year old homeless man, was arrested by police at a nearby homeless shelter.
Richard, I'll await your proof that the homeless dude was a member of ISIS. I'm sure you can provide evidence for your claim, since you're not a liar who spreads fake news.
The precise circumstances of the stabbing incident are still unclear. No indications have yet been found to indicate that there was a terrorist motive," the police said in a statement on Sunday.
You need to be on the flight to the Netherlands and give them your proof,otherwise you are posting out of your ass,you do have that proof correct,apparently they need your expertise because as they stated UNCLEAR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
You know what the solution is, don't you?
More guns.
School teachers with guns, morning drills in the gym before the government issue breakfast is the solution.
It seems to be working well here,do a search on knife attacks,there actually have been quite a few all across the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by canuck
Two things stopped them,either a gun or the public getting involved.
Some cities you have no choice but to be a victim or statistic,fortunately where I live nobody is stupid enough to bring a knife to a gun fight.
Ever been to Israel? It is not uncommon to see the military with automatic weapons on the street corners but yet they still are besieged with terrorist attacks.
The UK has a ban on knives but yet they are plagued with knife violence.
Or Maybe society just needs to quit producing so many snowflakes that get mad because they do not get thier way and only see violence as the solution.
Maybe you should be on that plane, since you claimed the stabber was ISIS. I never made a claim as to the stabber's motivation, I simply quoted what the Dutch Police said. Still waiting for the proof of your claim, Richard. Got any?Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Also, since you're illiterate and apparently can't read, they said the exact motive is unclear but they have RULED OUT terrorism as a motive. Did you skip that part or was one of the words too big for you to understand? *I* am not the one making that claim, genius, the Dutch Police are. All I did was quote them, but apparently that triggered you.
Remembering the victims:
Bridge stabbing victims named as University of Cambridge graduates
Bridge attack: families and friends pay tribute to victims
London Bridge attack victims died after being stabbed in chest – inquest
Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones suffered shock and haemorrhaging, Old Bailey told
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-chest-inquest
Okay bham I guess you really are that thick where you insist on proving it repeatedly.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
The London attack was carried out by a known terrorist.
The Netherlands attack response from the police
Police indicated there was no immediate sign of a terrorism motive, but they were not ruling out any possibilities.
From that you have determined that it was not in fact a terrorist attack or terrorist related.
You are the smart one,so smart that you know more then the police investigating the attack.
But everybody else is illiterate and cannot read.
We still don't know the name, motive, or origin of the Hague knifer. What we do know about the Hague knifer was that the police said they didn't have reason to believe that this homeless male was a terrorist. He could also have been crazy, reacting to drugs, rejected by women, had TDS on the advent of Trump's visit or had any number of other reasons to stab teens. Holland did a good job of suppressing eyewitness descriptions of him except for this- " He jumped very athletically over benches to get away. He looked like a cheetah,” one witness told NOS." So we know that the Hague knifer was somewhat athletic, probably young, and did not fit stereotypes of down on their luck homeless people not generally compared with cheetahs.
We still don't know the name, motive, or origin of the Hague knifer. What we do know about the Hague knifer was that the police said they didn't have reason to believe that this homeless male was a terrorist. He could also have been crazy, reacting to drugs, rejected by women, had TDS on the advent of Trump's visit or had any number of other reasons to stab teens. Holland did a good job of suppressing eyewitness descriptions of him except for this- " He jumped very athletically over benches to get away. He looked like a cheetah,” one witness told NOS." So we know that the Hague knifer was somewhat athletic, probably young, and did not fit stereotypes of down on their luck homeless people not generally compared with cheetahs.
Right, because the logical thing to assume when a homeless person stabs someone is that they are an ISIS terrorist. Makes sense, that's just playing the odds. Just like how most homeless people in America who are arrested for acts of violence are actually ISIS terrorists, it totally makes sense to default assume that for the Netherlands as well. Does it make sense to assume that because the stabbing coincidentally occurred on the same day as a terrorist incident in a completely different country, that somehow this random act of street violence by someone who is most likely mentally-ill must be terrorism-related?Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
Still waiting for proof that he's ISIS, Richard. This is my third request now for you to provide proof for your claim, you have already ignored it twice. I fully expect you to ignore it a third time and to deflect with a personal attack.
Homeless man arrested for stabbing another homeless man to death in a Manhattan homeless shelter.
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...cty-story.html
OH SHIT! ISIS strikes again! Why was this not a major news story, given the OBVIOUS terrorism connection?
aj, You probably need to reread my post that you are responding to. My second sentence was, "What we do know about the Hague knifer was that the police said they didn't have reason to believe that this homeless male was a terrorist." It could be that the homeless man's name was something like Rip Van de Knife but I don't know that and neither do you. Or it may have been something else. I prefer to keep an open mind until more information is available. You seem to want to rule out possibilities. I think it odd that no further information is available other than that the suspect is male, homeless, rather athletic inferring youth, and that the police have determined he was not a terrorist. There is still no name, personal information, or motive. How can they even try this guy if the policed don't have a motive?Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
In response to your last sentence: Sometimes European incidents like this where the perpetrator is yelling "Alluha Akbar" are deemed not to be terrorist events if the person has a history of mental illness. Maybe insanity is the motive here too whatever the guy's name and background.
So if it was truly a random act of violence by a disturbed man, and there was no obvious motive, he cannot be tried for the crime? The police HAVE to establish a motive in order for him to be prosecuted or else they have to let him walk free? That's your understanding of how the criminal justice system works? Ok then.Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
Anyways, friend, I am keeping an open mind. It was Richard who declared the man, without a shred of evidence, to be an ISIS terrorist. Still waiting on his evidence. And I notice you're not climbing up HIS ass about "keeping an open mind", but that's because I suspect you actually share his pre-formed conclusion for which there is not a single shred of evidence. Anyways, in my open mind, I also choose to defer to the judgement of the investigating authorities, who have a better understanding of this case than you or I. And here's what they have to say:
https://www.dw.com/en/the-hague-stab...ive/a-51490938
Attachment 39341
So since they're the ones who actually, you know, INVESTIGATED this crime and SPOKE to the suspect, I will defer to their judgement on this over yours or Richards.
To your second point, Dutch authorities have had no issues in the past releasing the name and origin of foreign-born suspects who commit violent acts:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tram-sh...ht-11552909722
So you can quit dancing around your veiled implication that "they're hiding his name because he's Muslim."
-Where did I claim that without a motive "they would have to let him walk free"? I didn't suggest anything about him being freed or about to be let free. Quit making stuff up.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
-Thank you for linking the dw article repeating what I already said and pointing out that your 'open mind' is guided by suspicions. I'm more ok with that than you seem to be. Didn't you also once suggest something to the effect that Mueller had the goods on Trump? There was one new bit of information in your article. It said the attacker lived in a homeless shelter. I'm surprised the media did not question others who lived there about the attacker. Regarding Richard: Unlike how I read you, I cannot be 100% sure that Richard is wrong until I know more.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
-I wrote that the police said they had found nothing to indicate terrorism. I didn't disagree but noted that we still don't know who did it - either his name or background or his motive. You confused my asking additional questions with contradicting something the police said.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
-I didn't write what you wrote in parenthesis. I wrote that for all we know the attacker's name could be 'Rip Van De Knife' or something else. I'm very much an agnostic about this until we learn more. You seem to have decided that we should be content with limited knowledge. We differ. I have since poked around a bit more but only found this inconclusive bit, "The police had initially said the alleged offender, who was on the run, was a man of about 45 to 50 years in age with curly black hair and a darker complexion. They later retracted the description. This is interesting but inconclusive in that Dutch people sometimes meet that description and the police may have decided, for instance, that the person they were looking for did not meet that description. Being 50 is also inconsistent with a man who "jumped very athletically over benches to get away [[and) looked like a cheetah."Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
AJ you are a trip.
You can show me where I posted that the wako with a knife in the Netherlands was ISIS related,you read into what I posted what you wanted to see
Key words being “also in the Netherlands”. Referring to stabbings.
At the time of my post the London stabbing was done by a previously convicted terrorist,that was comfirmed.
The Netherlands are for the most part pretty liberal so even if it was a terrorist they would probably label him as a misguided soul that lost his way.
Highly unlikely terrorist or not they would want to spread panic so they will not fuel the flames,like you do.
If you also want to accuse me of dancing around veiled implications I will make it clear,any terrorist muslim or not should be shot on the spot.
Richard, legitimate question here, are you cognitively disabled?Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
So which part of the above did I "misread?" Let someone else at the Group Home have a turn at the computer now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Speaking of terrorism, a Saudi military officer killed three Americans at the Naval Air Station in Pensacola.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4...terror-related
What say you, Trump Brigade? I eagerly await Trump's forceful condemnation of Saudi Arabia and radical Islamic terrorism in this case. Anyone think that will happen or do you think that this will get a muted response because it's SA and Trump has a "special relationship" with MBS? Seems when it's SA and Turkey, they get a free pass from this Administration for the shit they pull.
Remember, Saudi Arabia was conveniently not included on Trump's "Muslim Travel Ban" list, even though 15 of 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
Actually,I agree with you on this one.
We should not be allowing any Arabs into this country.
You want some irony?
In the 70s we were training Iranian pilots NAS Oceana then shooting them out of the sky in the 90s.
We train them so we can sell them fighter jets,they should never be allowed on US soil let alone any US military establishment.
They turn on you from one day to the next,you cannot trust them,as much as people that have no clue want to cry racist.
You can go to thier house and have an evening meal with thier wife and kids and the next day they will not think twice about putting a bullet in you if thier cause of the minute dictates it.
Hate to tell you,told you so,but you Guys think you are dealing with cute little puppy dogs and love to call everybody a racist that does not agree with you.
Can you wash that American blood off of your hands now AJ?
You cannot,because you were right thier crying racist when the proper vetting before entry was being discussed,that blood is on the hands of everybody that thought it was cute.
It is not cute to the victims that you have created and it shura is not cute for the families that are left behind.
But that is typical,everybody else in the world matters but your fellow Americans,they are just the trash that you have to deal with I guess.
I wouldn't go so far as to identify myself as part of the "Trump Brigade or you as part of the "Quisling Brigade" but I will try to lay out why I think an imperfect Trump is better than some alternatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
After Islamic militants, mostly from Saudi Arabia, killed 3,000 on 9/11 for reasons having to do with Mohammed's teachings according to Osama Bin Laden, W. Bush set up a deal with Saudi Arabia to accept thousands of Saudi students at American Universities. The Bill Clinton/W.Bush immigration and enforcement policies had not served us well. FDR immediatly suspended immigration from Axis countries after 2,500 Americans were killed at Pearl Harbor. I would have preferred that Bush made Saudi visas difficult to obtain. Your article didn't say why this Saudi was killing people in Florida. Did he kill because he was a Saudi or a Muslim or for a personal reasons? Let's find that out. Unlike our discussion about the Hague knifings, we do have a name here, a place of origin, but no motive yet. Are we responding to a Saudi, Muslim, or personal incident?
In 2009, Nidal Hasan killed 19 and wounded 30 at Fort Hood Army base. Mr. Hasan indicated he did it for Islamic reasons. The CAIR spokesman asked American to treat it as an "isolated incident of a deranged individual".
I would prefer that Trump tighten up visas and immigration from Saudi Arabia like he has for some other Muslim countries. Better safe than sorry. I am reminded that after Bush and Obama's foreign policies had created millions of mid-east refugees, Obama opened our doors to 10,000 of the refugees he helped create per year. Hillary, not to be outdone, wanted to raise the number of refugees she helped Obama create to 65,000/year; a 550% increase. Hillary really deserves some sort of sado masochistic reward for helping wreck these people's lives and then wanting to dump them on us. Trump instead went in the right direction and reduced mid-east refugees and hasn't overthrown more counties to create more refugees; an ounce of prevention being worth a pound of cure. Yes, I condemn Trump for being so Saudi friendly but I condemn Bush, Obama, Hillary and the rest who create wars, refugees, and bring much larger dangerous groups here much more. I haven't forgotten the 3,000 who died on 9/11, who killed them, and why Bin Laden said he did it. Perhaps, someday, Saudi Arabia will have a kinder, gentler version of Islam and we could then relax our immigration policies with respect to Saudi Arabia as we did with Japan after WWII.
Yep, look over there instead of here; believe us or your LYING eyes!
Got to love the politics that continue to keep people vulnerable and blinded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
The problem with the refugees program is the UN decides on how many to allocate per country.
In the US,Catholic charities is paid millions to handle the resettlement process,the problem is once they stick them in an apartment and hook them up for the year with a substance that get no further assistance when it comes to assimilation.
So if a refugee ends up with the wrong people for support they could easily go down that road because they have no other choice.
Think about it,come from a foreign country and something as simple as grocery shopping where you cannot read the product labels let alone figure out what is inside.
There free classes in the United States to learn any language in the world except English.
You have to pay to learn the very language that we expect them to speak,they do not have the resources.
Trump criticized for rush to defend Saudis after pilot kills three at US navy base: 'He’s a spokesman for Saudi Arabia’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a9237806.html
I would call Trump's very muted response to this terrorist attack ON American soil that killed THREE American service members to be very very different from his lightning quick reactions to previous terror attacks on foreign soil, where he was quick to label the attacks as "terrorism" just hours after the fact [[before even preliminary investigations could be conducted) and where he denounces the perpetrators in the most callous terms, calling them things like "animals" and "losers". Of course, he didn't do any of that here, and the White House was still not definitively calling this incident "terrorism" as of this weekend. It seems there is no rush to judgement when it comes to the Saudis, and they magically get the benefit of the doubt. Just like with Khashoggi.
Examples below where Trump had no problem sounding off on terror attacks overseas using the strongest language and within hours of the attacks, even when those attacks didn't kill anyone and before there were any investigations performed:
Feb. 3, 2017: A man armed with a machete attacked soldiers near the Louvre in Paris. He’d expressed sympathy for the Islamic State in posts published online. Trump offered a response on Twitter.
“A new radical Islamic terrorist has just attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris,” he wrote. “Tourists were locked down. France on edge again. GET SMART U.S.”
One soldier was wounded in the attack.
Sept. 15, 2017: A man who claimed to have been trained by the Islamic State attempted to detonate a bomb on a subway in London. It didn’t completely detonate.
“Another attack in London by a loser terrorist. These are sick and demented people who were in the sights of Scotland Yard. Must be proactive!” Trump wrote shortly after the attempted attack. “Loser terrorists must be dealt with in a much tougher manner. The internet is their main recruitment tool which we must cut off & use better!”
British authorities, including May, criticized Trump for speculating about the motivation of the attacker before details had been determined.
May 12, 2018: After a French citizen born in Chechnya attacked pedestrians with a knife in Paris, the Islamic State claimed credit. One person died. The next day, Trump offered thoughts.
“At some point countries will have to open their eyes & see what is really going on,” he wrote. “This kind of sickness & hatred is not compatible with a loving, peaceful, & successful country! Changes to our thought process on terror must be made.”
Aug. 14, 2018: A Sudanese refugee drove his car into pedestrians near Parliament in London, wounding three people.
“Another terrorist attack in London,” Trump wrote the same day. “These animals are crazy and must be dealt with through toughness and strength!”
^^^^^^^ That!
And did you notice how easy it was for the guy to buy a handgun in Florida with a hunting permit?
How did the guy get a hunting permit as a Saudi National?
Almost as easy as buying a van in Canada and running people over ehQuote:
Originally Posted by canuck
You do not need a hunting permit to buy a gun in Florida,you need a hunting permit to hunt,it does not matter if you use a gun,spear,bow and arrow,choice of weapon is irrelevant.
Hey genius, as a non-U.S. citizen, he took advantage of a KNOWN loophole that allows non-citizens here on a valid visa to purchase guns and legally possess them as long as they have a hunting permit as well. Why someone would need a Glock 45 to go hunting, I do not know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...se/4392107002/
So in this case yes, smart guy, as a foreign citizen he DID need a hunting license to purchase a gun in the state of Florida. Like I said, a known loophole that was intentionally exploited by a terrorist to allow him to easily and legally obtain a gun for the express purpose of murdering Americans. Can we close that loophole, or will the NRA bleed out of their assholes in unbridled rage if anyone dares suggest that foreigners who get a Florida hunting license shouldn't be allowed to buy whatever guns they want, no questions asked?
I suspect I already know the answer to that question. 'Murica.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
Hey genius,I live in Florida and I can go buy a gun in less then 10 minutes with NO ID.
Granted nobody selling guns would ever sell a gun to a foreigner unless it is a drug dealer or the like.
Just like I can buy or steal a van and run a bunch of people over,just like I can buy a knife and stab a bunch of people just like I can buy a quart of gasoline and throw a moltoliv cocktail into a crowd.
I can do all of that WITHOUT an ID.
Only a self determined genius would think that the can dig thier way out of this by closing loopholes.
How about the closure of the vetting process loopholes,or maybe even not allow foreigners in US military installations.
You are an American,maybe but doubtful,but no Americans can just walk on to a US military installation without proper clearance and ID,he should have never been on the base to begin with.
They do not need to be trained on our soil.
How about closing the loopholes of open borders and unfettered and unvetted illegal immigration?
Funny how how you are quick at becoming a genius when it come to the loopholes of things you do not agree with.
Where you can go buy a gun without showing ID, in under 10 minutes no less? Name the store. Can you? You're full of shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Wrong again, Richard. Do you even bother to try to learn the facts of this case, or do you just 100% pull everything you say out of your own asshole?Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/us/pe...nse/index.html
The hunting license allowed Alshamrani to purchase a gun and ammunition from a licensed Florida firearms dealer. And he did just that on July 20, buying the gun from a licensed dealer, the FBI said Tuesday, without naming the dealer.
I am beginning to think that you do not even live in this country let alone try and figure out how somebody can be so damn thick.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
You work really hard at it Hugh.
Where did I post the only option in the world in purchasing guns is at a store ?
How come you do not want to close the vetting process loophole,Saudi knew the guy was radicalized back in 2015 and he had been posting anti American crap,like yourself,on social media.
Just like yourself he should had never been allowed in the country had the proper vetting process been put in place.
No wonder you have advocated the whole no vetting or vetting was racist so hard because you like it when like minded Enter the country that have no business in the first place being here.
I posted it before and will post it again,that American blood is on your hands,no different then if you had pulled the trigger so stop acting like you actually give a crap.
I do not know how much they are paying you,but it is apparently nothing because they are getting thier monies worth.
Oladub, I just wanted to follow up with an update on this story for your own edification, and for that of Richard who claimed without a shred of evidence that this man was an ISIS terrorist.Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2019/12...atric-problems
The 35-year old homeless suspect, identified as Luis P, was apparently well-known to authorities and social services for years as having severe mental health issues that manifested in violence and had been previously committed to a psychiatric hospital after he attacked his mother. He was also implicated in a criminal incident in France where he randomly struck a stranger for no reason.
But feel free to hold out hope that he was a Muslim convert! We still don't know for sure, so you keep that healthy skepticism that the Dutch Media is telling us the real truth and isn't hiding his true Islamic allegiance! I would also like to point out that MY post on December 5 in which I speculate that the stabber was "most likely mentally ill" turned out to be...100% correct! Imagine that, Occam's Razor wins again.
P.S. Richard, still waiting on your proof that this was an ISIS terrorist attack...
P.S. AJ I am still waiting for you to show me where I claimed the attack in the Netherlands was an ISIS attack.
The thread started as London Bridge Terrorism ... again
Read it at the start of the thread.
At the time it was posted it had already been reported that the suspect was a known terrorist.
I did not write a terrorist attack also happened in the Netherlands because all they reported was it had not been ruled out.
To me not ruled out means,they do not know for sure,maybe it has a different meaning to you?
You sure like to take words and spin them into a yarn,are you sure you are not a seamstress?
Also another attack in the Netherlands with 3 stabbed but fortunately no deaths,they should call it what it is,ISIS backed terrorists.
That is what I posted,now place context in the thread title and the two links provided.
If I had worded it as also a terrorist attack in the Netherlands it would be like trying to impeach a president with no evidence.
Authorities are going to be cautious when useing the Terrorist word.
There is more at stake then the actions of a terrorist,public fear,tourism,the public taking actions against those who they think may be a terrorist.
In the future I will spell it out for you,precisely,slowly and step by step Sense you seem to be unwilling to look at the bigger picture or context of things.
The red car used in the getaway had windows,doors,tires,a motor,a transmission,seats,windshield wipers,headlights and 12,000 other identifying factors.
aj, Here is the first sentence of my post #10: "We still don't know the name, motive, or origin of the Hague knifer. What we do know about the Hague knifer was that the police said they didn't have reason to believe that this homeless male was a terrorist." In posts 14 an 16, I responded to your attempts to twist what I wrote. Thank you for allowing me "to hold out hope that he was a Muslim convert" although I'm still trying to decide if your attempt at mind reading is more arrogant or nonsensical.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
In post #10, I also wrote, "He could also have been crazy". Thatturned out to be...100% correct! Imagine that, Occam's Razor wins again." Imagine that -both of us being 100% correct although I went on to speculate about possible motives for going insane*. We do now know that the Dutch police have decided he was insane, although I suggested as much bck in post #10, and that his name was Luis P. Luis is a common French name. P is such a rare surname that no doubt the Euro press will be all over this story flushing out Luis P's origin now that they have his name. Being insane probably negates the need to determine motive though.
oladub:"He could also have been crazy"
aj:"most likely mentally ill"
*Note: "most likely" and "could have" are eerily similar coming from the two of us. Although neither suggested certainty, we should take full 100% credit for being right anyway!
So NOT ISIS then, right Oladub? You also said this, which you conveniently forgot to mention.
So what exactly were you hinting at with the completely-unfounded accusation that the Dutch authorities were "suppressing" [[your exact word) eyewitness descriptions of the suspect? I mean, I know EXACTLY what you were hinting at, but I want to see if you have the balls to be honest about it or if you'll pull your usual intellectually-dishonest bullshit. Ooooo he didn't "fit the stereotype" of a homeless person? He was young and physically fit? Must have been a military-age former Syrian Islamist rebel who snuck in and claimed asylum, right Oladub? Just be honest man, you're transparent as fuck and we all know what you were getting at when you said that, just be honest about it. That's what you WANTED it to be because it would suit your anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant narrative if it was, and your hopes were dashed.Quote:
Holland did a good job of suppressing eyewitness descriptions of him except for this- " He jumped very athletically over benches to get away. He looked like a cheetah,” one witness told NOS." So we know that the Hague knifer was somewhat athletic, probably young, and did not fit stereotypes of down on their luck homeless people not generally compared with cheetahs.
Whatever your fantasizes about my thoughts, the quote about athletically jumping over benches looking like a cheetah was that of an eyewitness when the authorities were trying to pass Luis P off as a homeless person. Where did I bring up ISIS or did you provide evidence to eliminate that possibility? I'm still agnostic on the matter because I still don't have enough information.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
I wasn't hinting. Unlike you, I didn't know and still don't know enough to come to a conclusion. Yes, Dutch authorities were and are apparently are suppressing information. I still don't even know more than the first name of the culprit, his motive, or anything about his background. Then they caught the guy and described him as 'homeless'. Now he's someone named "Luis P" who had been violent and crazy in France. The police scrubbed their first description of the assailant. Unlike you, I am not impressed with writing the story off without even a full name or motive. 'Move along there isn't anything to see here' isn't up to my standards. Suit yourself. It is odd that Luis P who was released from a psychiatric hospital for attacking his mother and "had committed assault after assault" in France somehow wound up in Holland doing more of the same. Your curiosity seems to lag promoting your narrative. I'm suggesting that there might be more of a story beginning with a name.Quote:
Originally Posted by aj3647
We already do know the [[Finnish) name of the guy, [COLOR=rgba[[0, 0, 0, 0.952941)]Keith Thomas Kinnunen [/COLOR]who killed two people in a Texas church and his possible motive. We have his photo. We know where he was from and the places he lived. He may have been angry that the church didn't provide him with cash. He was probably crazy and had a history of being homeless and committing crimes too. Our press coverage of Kieth K, or is it Kieth T, is running circles around news coverage of Luis P compared with the relative Dutch suppression of news concerning Luis P. Substituting thought police fantasies of what I may or may not be thinking for actual news might be your style but I prefers facts.
Your vocabulary is also backsliding. You again confuse the term 'immigrants' with 'illegal non-citizens'. One of my parents and all four of my grandparents were immigrants but they were also legal aliens [[legal non-citizens) prior to becoming citizens. Your sloppy definitions and defense of immigration laws wouldn't be able to make sense of my previous sentence. As to being anti-Muslim, I confess to remembering the 3,000 killed on 9-11, the expressed motives of their killers, and that some of the killers were illegal non-citizens or "immigrants" in aj Newspeak.
Are we safer today, this year, now, here in the US from a foreign act of terrorism than we were this time last year?
Setting aside Trump [[if possible) what priorities must be considered to prevent an attack?
And another over the weekend,this one had already been convicted and jailed for terrorism,released early and had a detail of 20 agents watching his every move.
But yet he still managed to grab a knife and stab 3 people before being shot to death by one of the undercover offices that was following him.