plane crashes into side of Texas office building

You two just make yourself look bad when you don't have an answer to what is discussed and instead just come up with some nonsense about Muslims must be bad and that is the reason for the original post.
At least you could have looked at the link and you would have seen that the article is by GLENN GREENWALD, not a Muslim name.

 

gworld if you want to buy into this crap whereby muslims try to lessen the crimes of their bothers by comparing them to crimes of non-muslims go ahead.

 

What part of my post didn't you understand that the article was NOT by a Muslim? At least read the article by GLENN GREENWALD before coming up with some kind of auto response.

 

New is a muslim though.

 

That he is - and we all know why he was posting that.

Plus there is a bit of a difference between killing people for their beliefs like on September 11; it's not even like they went after the military - just innocent people.

The guy going for the IRS is a nut who did a terrible thing, but it's still different because he thought that these people were to blame - them SPECIFICALLY - not just randomly killing 100s of people because they had different beliefs, wouldn't cover their faces, wont pray to allah, etc.

Still terrible but also different - it's like a guy who murders 5 babies because he doesn't like children is entirely different to someone who kills one adult because they insulted him - still terrible, but very, VERY different.

 

We must give our thanks to 9/11 attackers for giving this innovation. After all, this is what they are good at!

 

Are you saying that if new posts the U.S. Constitution or human rights charter, your auto response will be those are stupid because it is posted by a Muslim?

 

No. I'm saying in this instance he is using the article in an attempt to lessen the crimes committed by his brothers by comparing them to crimes committed by other arseholes, like i already said.

 

- It's just become a malleable, all-justifying term


This is perfectly correct - conservatives / Christians have changed from using "communist" to "terrorist" to justify their own brand of malicious bigotry that is no different than the bigotry of the Muslims that inflict oppression / obedience to people by physical coercion. The use of air drones to target and kill specific individuals by the US gov't is out of control and only perpetuates acts that they then refer to as terrorism than solving the issues.

 

If when a black kills a white, you call it murder and when a white kills a black, call it accident then you lose all kind of moral authority and respect for laws.

You are correct, except for 10th times, this is not new posting, it is an article by GLENN GREENWALD.

 

Gworld. I'll explain it one more time and if you still ha e trouble understanding I'll see if my two year old Neice can draw you a picture with her giant crayons.

The author of the peice has one motive. To write a sensationalist piece that will get the blow hards ranting, his intention wasn't to try and lessen the crimes commited by new's brothers. New, on the other hand, has a different intention. His intention is to lessen the crimes by his brothers by comparing them to vaguely similar crimes commited by nonmuslims.

So what is it gworld? Are you going to stop pretending that you don't get it or do I have to get the crayons out?

 

At least you finally understood that the author was GLENN GREENWALD and not NEW which by itself is a step forward but I wonder if you got it by yourself or your 2 year old niece helped you.

The interesting is that you still have NOTHING to say about the article or make an argument against his logic and you can only make assumption about author's motive and condom his motive.

 

The Sword of Omens, Gives Sight beyond Sight
and facts beyond facts

Thunder Thunder ThunderCats

 

Well... although the article by this Glenn is clearly a non-intellectual junk, as one would expect from new, this is one of the rare cases when I do agree with him:
The word "Terrorism" is pretty much undefined and largely abused according to political stance.

 

Glen GreenWald

I forget Chaos, what is your "intellectual" achievement?

 

You did not forget, I never mentioned my achievements. I think that modesty is a virtue. If I will mention them I will sound too arrogant, since my list of achievements is very very long, unless you really insist I prefer not to.

Or, instead of being an ass, you could have just asked:
"why do you find the article by Glenn to be non-intellectual?"

Another severe failure or your comprehension capability is that you concluded that I find Glenn the person to be non-intellectual. But this is not what I said, but rather pointed my finger on his article.
Did you even read new's article or went straight to Wikipedia to "prove" that its not junk?
Having said that, Dude Glenn's rewards and praises in Wikipedia does not exclude the possibility that he is a dork. I can bring several examples for other cases where junk is presented in Wikipedia like something very serious instead of what it really is. But I'm saying nothing on Glenn in particular, this is the first article of his that I read and it doesn't look too good so far. I hope he did better in other publications.
Great people make mistakes too, happens. Even Einstein rejected quantum mechanics, a theory that if not correct the computer that you use right now would have never been made possible, with the stupid famous sentence: "god does not play dice"

 

blah, blah, blah to hide your ignorance. I suppose if you decide to list your achievements, it can even be as long as one sentence.
Why don't you try to discuss the article instead of just making BS statements?

 

oh, and that, I am sorry to tell you but popularity does not indicate on exceptional intellectual level, but on the contrary. Take TV for example where very high "rating" means "the lowest common denominator". In Israel the "big brother" get rating of 32%, the history channel - 1.2% Is the first more intellectual than the second?

 

Because you did not try to start any kind of discussion on the article. your post was 100% about me and Glenn.
This was exactly the point of the post you answered with "blah blah blah" you moron.
Waste of time. Going back to work. Laters.

 

Still nothing of substance to say, it must be because of your great "intellectual" capacity.