malkav11 said:
Here's what I don't get: why would I be afraid of someone who fits the abortion clinic bomber profile...on a plane? I mean, aside from the fact that people randomly trying to talk to me about God and unborn babies completely out of any sane context being a good sign there's something wrong with their brain.

These people don't attack planes. Planes have nothing to do with abortion. They attack clinics, and doctors, and places like that. And I fucking -guarantee- that a guy like DJForce describes would scare people going into a clinic that provides abortions. Or that such a person might think provides abortions, for that matter, such as the many Planned Parenthood operations that do not.

The fact that they're not bombing planes isn't the point. The point is that in Djforce's mind, and in the minds of many neocons, they don't as terrorists. But they ARE terrorists, and they are an internal threat to national security and stability. They are just as violent, and they have the same "ends justifies the means" mentality. They just have different targets. They should be on the same gov't watchlists as the rest, and SHOULD be treated the same as a foreign terrorist. But, of course, in the eyes of the media and most of the country, since they're usually white people, and claim Christianity, nobody clamors for them to be waterboarded for the sake of gathering more information, despite the fact that they're extremists, just the same.

No, I get all that. I just don't get the thought process that defines terrorism entirely around planes.

Tigerwong

Baltimore, MD

February 2005

JAN 10, 2010 02:39 PM

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Maybe planes are being focused on because 9/11 is freshest in everybody's minds? I dunno. I mean there are WAY easier targets with much less security (or even none).

SergeantPsycho

USA

January 2007

JAN 10, 2010 03:07 PM

I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year! God help us.

mingol

Singapore

July 2005

JAN 10, 2010 03:25 PM

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Otoki

SUICIDEGIRL

Minnesota, USA

JAN 10, 2010 04:29 PM

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Nice.

baudot

Oakland, CA

February 2004

JAN 11, 2010 01:03 AM

Yes, but a man set fire to his underwear! C'mon people! Freak out a little! Flaming underwear!

SergeantPsycho

USA

January 2007

JAN 13, 2010 06:50 PM

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Well, then I guess the Christmas Bomber failing to kill anyone is clearly evidence of Obama's successful anti-terrorist effort.

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

JAN 13, 2010 06:52 PM

SergeantPsycho said:

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Well, then I guess the Christmas Bomber failing to kill anyone is clearly evidence of Obama's successful anti-terrorist effort.

That is exactly what it is.

Good of you to notice. 0 deaths = good.

SergeantPsycho

USA

January 2007

JAN 14, 2010 03:51 AM

FearTheReaper said:

SergeantPsycho said:

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Well, then I guess the Christmas Bomber failing to kill anyone is clearly evidence of Obama's successful anti-terrorist effort.

That is exactly what it is.

Good of you to notice. 0 deaths = good.

I wonder if we can apply that same logic to a neglegant parent whose toddler survives a lonely stroll through a busy free way.

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA

March 2004

JAN 14, 2010 04:57 AM

again, SP, the Christmas bomber's success can be laid at the feet of problems Bush created. can we blame Obama for this? yes, we can--because he hasn't yet fixed Bush's fuckups.

Toku666

Columbus, OH

May 2004

JAN 14, 2010 05:36 AM

SergeantPsycho said:

FearTheReaper said:

SergeantPsycho said:

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Well, then I guess the Christmas Bomber failing to kill anyone is clearly evidence of Obama's successful anti-terrorist effort.

That is exactly what it is.

Good of you to notice. 0 deaths = good.

I wonder if we can apply that same logic to a neglegant parent whose toddler survives a lonely stroll through a busy free way.

Can you find where you made these same comments about the shoe bomber? That situation was rather similar and occurred under the previous administration.

You're really stretching here. Negligent parent? Does it ever occur to you to try to hide any of your biases?

mydogfarted

Oakland, NJ

June 2003

JAN 14, 2010 05:47 AM

SergeantPsycho said:

FearTheReaper said:

SergeantPsycho said:

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Well, then I guess the Christmas Bomber failing to kill anyone is clearly evidence of Obama's successful anti-terrorist effort.

That is exactly what it is.

Good of you to notice. 0 deaths = good.

I wonder if we can apply that same logic to a neglegant parent whose toddler survives a lonely stroll through a busy free way.

Those are some fancy apples you got there. Here's a potato.

Coyotemike

USA

May 2006

JAN 14, 2010 07:12 AM

mydogfarted said:

SergeantPsycho said:

FearTheReaper said:

SergeantPsycho said:

mingol said:

SergeantPsycho said:
I actually think FTR is on to something here. Given his data, the rate of terrorist attacks per year has double from less 3 a year, to 6 a year!

... and the average number of deaths per year has dropped from 376 to 15.

Well, then I guess the Christmas Bomber failing to kill anyone is clearly evidence of Obama's successful anti-terrorist effort.

That is exactly what it is.

Good of you to notice. 0 deaths = good.

I wonder if we can apply that same logic to a neglegant parent whose toddler survives a lonely stroll through a busy free way.

Those are some fancy apples you got there. Here's a dead ferret.

Better analogy.

mydogfarted

Oakland, NJ

June 2003

JAN 14, 2010 07:14 AM

Coyotemike said:

mydogfarted said:
Those are some fancy apples you got there. Here's a dead ferret.

Better analogy.

Good call.