US worker beheads colleague after being fired

Gotta be trolling. Stop watching so much Fox news, homie. Media messing with you.
You tryna say something wrong with Fox News?
Its the most objective and reliable source of journalism and current events.
Get it right.
 
Last edited:
Gotta be trolling. Stop watching so much Fox news, homie. Media messing with you.

Before and after 9/11, a majority of what we now define as "terrorist" attacks in America were and have been committed by white, non-muslims. People like John Wilkes Booth, Patrick Prendergast,
The Unabomber, etc. Recently, people like Amanda and Jerad Miller, Frazier Miller (no relation,) Wade Page, etc. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States

The only difference between those attacks and the relatively small number of attacks carried out by "Islamic" extremists is that they don't fit into the narrative that some want to portray.

While you may automatically assume a Muslim is at fault when you hear the word "Terrorist," not everyone does. I'm more fearful of a suburban kid in a trench coat or a redneck with a confederate flag than I ever will be of a Muslim person.
LOL. It's one thing to acknowledge that non-Muslim people commit or attempt to commit acts of domestic terrorism. It's another thing to say that Islamic extremists perpetrate a "relatively small" number of them. 
 
Gotta be trolling. Stop watching so much Fox news, homie. Media messing with you.
You tryna say something wrong with Fox News?
Its the most objective and reliable source of journalism and current events.
Get it right.

annKmhB.jpg
 
LOL. It's one thing to acknowledge that non-Muslim people commit or attempt to commit acts of domestic terrorism. It's another thing to say that Islamic extremists perpetrate a "relatively small" number of them. 

In America, yes. Please prove otherwise or take a seat.
 
In America, yes. Please prove otherwise or take a seat.
Um, your original post was about "Terrorism in the United States."

You even posted the wikipedia link.

And within the wikipedia link YOU provided, your own theory was debunked.
 
This is definitley more of a "crazy person gets fired and kills coworker" thing than a "islamic extremist carries out terrorist plot against USA" thing.

I would be truly disgusted if the news cycle tried to play up the muslim aspect.
 
Um, your original post was about "Terrorism in the United States."

You even posted the wikipedia link.

And within the wikipedia link YOU provided, your own theory was debunked.

Did you actually read through that Wiki article in its entirety? Let's see the tally of terrorist acts attempted/committed by Muslims versus everyone else.

Sorry, you're coming off as a little stupid.
 
Last edited:
Did you actually read through that Wiki article in its entirety? Let's see the tally of terrorist acts attempted/committed by Muslims versus everyone else.

Sorry, you're coming off as a little stupid.
I did. Believe it or not, if you post a link on this website, it's live. Therefore, I'm able to read through it.

And sure. Let's look at acts of domestic terrorism and see if those committed by Muslims is "relatively small" as you contend 
laugh.gif


I'll ignore the last part.

Oh wait, check out this relatively small list of domestic terrorism acts perpetrated by Muslims
 
This is definitley more of a "crazy person gets fired and kills coworker" thing than a "islamic extremist carries out terrorist plot against USA" thing.

I would be truly disgusted if the news cycle tried to play up the muslim aspect.

trying to convert his employees to islam had NOTHING to do with islamic terrorism.... mhmmm... like always.

and Fort Hood was workplace violence as well.

At least some liberals are calling out the ridiculous deflection, moral equivalence, and deluded political correctness when it comes to this subject


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...nce_shouldnt_we_start_with_honor_killers.html
 
Last edited:
this dude just seems like he needed something to latch onto and chose islam or better yet his interpretation of islam as a way to legitimize his actions

consider that islam is the world's most populous religion. then consider that if it was religion that pushed people to do these things (islam in particular) these things would be happening at a more frequent rate, especially in this country

if you want to target religion and islam specifically for teaching and/or forcing people to commit these terrible acts then i'd venture to say you were most likely down that road of prejudice to begin with with and looking to point fingers from what you think is a heightened point of view
 
 
this dude just seems like he needed something to latch onto and chose islam or better yet his interpretation of islam as a way to legitimize his actions
This is how I feel. Islam was only a secondary motive but the media is treating it as thee motive.

Seems like a disgruntled worker and/or mental health case who didn't fit in anywhere so he chose religion. 
 
This is definitley more of a "crazy person gets fired and kills coworker" thing than a "islamic extremist carries out terrorist plot against USA" thing.

I would be truly disgusted if the news cycle tried to play up the muslim aspect.

trying to convert his employees to islam had NOTHING to do with islamic terrorism.... mhmmm... like always.

and Fort Hood was workplace violence as well.

At least some liberals are calling out the ridiculous deflection, moral equivalence, and deluded political correctness when it comes to this subject

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...nce_shouldnt_we_start_with_honor_killers.html

Trying to convert your coworkers is something that crazy people of all religions do.
 
Still waiting on the tally for the other side.

Oh wait...
I did. Believe it or not, if you post a link on this website, it's live. Therefore, I'm able to read through it.

And sure. Let's look at acts of domestic terrorism and see if those committed by Muslims is "relatively small" as you contend :lol:

I'll ignore the last part.

Oh wait, check out this relatively small list of domestic terrorism acts perpetrated by Muslims

So, 31 incidents. Cool. Let's see the tally for the other side. Here's a hint. The incidents from 1800-1970 ALONE outnumber 31 incidents.

I noticed how you conveniently forgot to post about that aspect. Want to copy and paste all of those links, or should I?

You're also forgetting that the definition of terrorism has expanded quite largely in the last decade or so. I see no mention of the acts of terrorism such as the attempted genocide of the native american people, or even the assassinations of people like Malcolm X and Dr. MLK Jr.

But keep on promoting Murdoch's agenda, homie. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Still waiting on the tally for the other side.

Oh wait...
So, 31 incidents. Cool. Let's see the tally for the other side. Here's a hint. The incidents from 1800-1970 ALONE outnumber 31 incidents.

I noticed how you conveniently forgot to post about that aspect. Want to copy and paste all of those links, or should I?

You're also forgetting that the definition of terrorism has expanded quite largely in the last decade or so. I see no mention of the acts of terrorism such as the Boston Tea Party, the attempted genocide of the native american people, or even the assassinations of people like Malcolm X and Dr. MLK Jr.

But keep on promoting Murdoch's agenda, homie.
laugh.gif
Oh now I see what I'm dealing with with you 

You're counting the days when people were attempting to assassinate presidents with muskets.

What relevance does that have with this discussion? When dude you responded to was referring to terrorism that predates 9/11, I don't think he meant when things looked like this:

And even if you really want to use the 1800's as your argument ( 
roll.gif
), the list I used is still not "relatively small."

Son really went back 200+ years ago for his argument. You're not even following the discussion sequence.
 
Last edited:
Oh now I see what I'm dealing with with you 

You're counting the days when people were attempting to assassinate presidents with muskets.

What relevance does that have with this discussion? When dude you responded to was referring to terrorism that predates 9/11, I don't think he meant when things looked like this:

And even if you really want to use the 1800's as your argument ( :rofl: ), the list I used is still not "relatively small."

Son really went back 200+ years ago for his argument. You're not even following the discussion sequence.

I said in America... As in, the entire history if America. I didn't know the 1700 and 1800s didn't count. Because you didn't read about those times, they don't exist? :lol: They had bombs back then too, playa. But let's downplay tradegies like killing groups of Chinese railroad workers with dynamite to prove your point. You seem to have a short memory, so I'll forgive you.

In the history of America, a list of 31 incidents is relatively small. Hell, events like what happened on Peoria Street in Chicago are acts of terrorism....I tried to allude to it, but just counting the Civil Rights era, I'm sure you could find a lot more than 31 incidents of what we define as terrorism..fire bombs, mass shootings, etc.

These things are not out of the discussion sequence. There wasn't even a defined discussion sequence. You're trying to impose those rules because you now realize what a stupid argument you had coming into it. "Oh, oh, it doesn't count if it was before TV was invented!" Its incredible, its almost like you're purposely disregarding a wealth of factual information to keep your perspective of the world true in your eyes.

Cognitive dissonance is a b***h, huh?
 
I said in America... As in, the entire history if America. I didn't know the 1700 and 1800s didn't count. Because you didn't read about those times, they don't exist?
laugh.gif
They had bombs back then too, playa. But let's downplay tradegies like killing groups of Chinese railroad workers with dynamite to prove your point. You seem to have a short memory, so I'll forgive you.

In the history of America, a list of 31 incidents is relatively small. Hell, events like what happened on Peoria Street in Chicago are acts of terrorism....I tried to allude to it, but just counting the Civil Rights era, I'm sure you could find a lot more than 31 incidents of what we define as terrorism..fire bombs, mass shootings, etc.

These things are not out of the discussion sequence. There wasn't even a defined discussion sequence. You're trying to impose those rules because you now realize what a stupid argument you had coming into it. "Oh, oh, it doesn't count if it was before TV was invented!" Its incredible, its almost like you're purposely disregarding a wealth of factual information to keep your perspective of the world true in your eyes.

Cognitive dissonance is a b***h, huh?
No point in having an argument about terrorism domestic terrorism with someone who's stuck in the days of butter churnin' and cholera.

I didn't deny historical acts or deny what an act of terrorism. Anyone is capable of planning and carrying out a terrorist act by definition.

I simply said that Islamic terrorism within the US confines is not some trivial matter you seem so adamant about. That's idiotic.

Like...it's a real thing 
laugh.gif




"bu bu bu but John Lee Taylor is 1752..."

Yeah I'm gonna worry about the present-future. 
 
Last edited:
No point in having an argument about terrorism domestic terrorism with someone who's stuck in the days of butter churnin' and cholera.

I didn't deny historical acts or deny what an act of terrorism. Anyone is capable of planning and carrying out a terrorist act by definition.

I simply said that Islamic terrorism within the US confines is not some trivial matter you seem so adamant about. That's idiotic.

Like...it's a real thing :lol:

Yeah I'm gonna worry about the present-future.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

I never said muslim terrorism wasn't real, nor did I ever downplay the very real threat of Muslim extremism. I said the number of terroristic acts perpetuated by Muslims throughout America is relatively small, I didn't know I had to actually say that includes things from before 1990.

Did you not say the article i posted disproved my point? :rofl: :rofl: But keep projecting what you thought I meant onto my argument... :lol:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom