Are there any good militias in the US??

[Enoch the Red]

My point was that real, under-estimated domestic threats are as dangerous as any feared, hypothetical foreign threats. We spent ten years fighting phantom Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, under the guise of "War on Terrorism". That's either a huge hoax or crime--perpetrated by our own government. It's disingenuous to blame Islamic extremism for practically everything, when our own extremists are being overlooked. Some of them are legislators or Politicians of Power, like Cheney or Rumsfeld.

No, you're doing that thing where you post something obviously and horrifically wrong and then try to pivot away when it's shown to be obviously and horrifically wrong. Saying that the unjustified killing of an unarmed woman, and tragic shooting of a 14 year old boy somehow constitutes domestic terrorism is appalling.

But please, point out where Lewk, or anyone in this thread, was blaming Islamic extremism for everything.

[GGT]

No, you're doing that thing where you post something obviously and horrifically wrong and then try to pivot away when it's shown to be obviously and horrifically wrong. Saying that the unjustified killing of an unarmed woman, and tragic shooting of a 14 year old boy somehow constitutes domestic terrorism is appalling.

But please, point out where Lewk, or anyone in this thread, was blaming Islamic extremism for everything.

9/11.

I'm not saying there aren't any home grown terrorists but... the comparison to Islamic Terrorism in terms of scale, scope and organization is ridiculous.

Instead of taking Lewk's post and my reply in context, you decided to jump down my throat for something I wasn't even saying.

[Enoch the Red]

Instead of taking Lewk's post and my reply in context, you decided to jump down my throat for something I wasn't even saying.

You implied that Ruby Ridge, Waco and mass shootings were all incidents of domestic terrorism, and it can be reasonably concluded based off of it being a response to what Lewk was saying that you believed them to be of a similar size, scope, and level of organization to the threat posed by AQ.

Of your examples, the OK bombing comes the closest in these categories.

[GGT]

You implied that Ruby Ridge, Waco and mass shootings were all incidents of domestic terrorism, and it can be reasonably concluded based off of it being a response to what Lewk was saying that you believed them to be of a similar size, scope, and level of organization to the threat posed by AQ.

Of your examples, the OK bombing comes the closest in these categories.

I wasn't just implying but stating that our domestic/internal problems, related to radical extremist groups, are just as dangerous and harmful as "Islamic Terrorism". I say that because our Achille's heel seems to be a denial of threats from extremists that live within our own borders. Or that the US could destroy itself from the inside, faster than any foreign nation could.

That's the brilliant evil of Bin Laden and AQ (or any terrorist group) that uses one fear seed to germinate --- and it festers as we destroy ourselves from within.

[Lewkowski]

Got a citation to back that up?

Who tried to assassinate President Reagan? Who blew up the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma? Who was involved in Waco or Ruby Ridge? Who's been responsible for mass killings in Malls, Schools, movie theaters, or places of worship? Certainly not "Islamic Terrorists".

Try again.

Lone crazies aren't terrorists. The crazy nut who goes shooting at people certainty isn't an organized threat. Every crazy gunman isn't a terrorist either - their murder spree has to be tied to a political gain for it to be an act of terrorism.

Now compare it to Islamic terrorism. LARGE organizations that had/have the backing of governments. Training grounds. The ability to make simultaneous attacks on multiple targets (9/11 for example). Compare that to random gunmen? Please not even close. That's like saying the school bully is equivalent to a serial killer.

[Lewkowski]

I wasn't just implying but stating that our domestic/internal problems, related to radical extremist groups, are just as dangerous and harmful as "Islamic Terrorism". I say that because our Achille's heel seems to be a denial of threats from extremists that live within our own borders. Or that the US could destroy itself from the inside, faster than any foreign nation could.

That's the brilliant evil of Bin Laden and AQ (or any terrorist group) that uses one fear seed to germinate --- and it festers as we destroy ourselves from within.

BTW - I am making a distinction between Islamic Terrorism and other forms of terror. There have been examples of terrorism throughout history but currently America and the west is being targeted by a specific brand of terrorism. And that is Islamic Terrorism. Are you suggesting otherwise?

No one is suggesting we ignore home grown crazies but we are arguing that AQ and like groups present a much larger threat. Like many leftists I'm sure you wish that every "militia" or group who has guns go under heavy government scrutiny. After all its not like Big Brother would ever misuse its power while investigating said groups...

[LittleFuzzy]

[QUOTE=GGT;134359]

Who tried to assassinate President Reagan? [quote]

A lone nut.

Who blew up the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma?

Two nuts who may have been affiliated with militias at points in their past but who were definitely alone when they perpetrated the largest *later the second-larget* terrorist attack in US history.

Who was involved in Waco or Ruby Ridge?

For the former it was a cult that could not in any way be properly described as a private militia. Ruby Ridge is definitely more militia-tinged but even with the militia ties it was all one family rather than a militia organization and most of the blame and responsibility for events there is on the Feds. Waco was a mess on all sides but Ruby Ridge was flat mishandled and was initiated by semi-abusive federal antics in the first place. That's the conclusion reached by militia groups, the media, the DoJ's OPR investigation, and the Senate subcommittee hearings.

Who's been responsible for mass killings in Malls, Schools, movie theaters, or places of worship? Certainly not "Islamic Terrorists".

I'm not aware of a single mass-killing of this sort in the US that was not performed by people acting on their own, in almost all cases people with significant mental problems.

[Aimless]

This is all I could find:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesti..._United_States

[LittleFuzzy]

Ok, so we may have one possible example, via the JDL. Not a militia but modern organized violence for political purposes.

One thing I think is quite clear though is that the authorities are certainly not ignoring the potential for domestic terrorism. The media might be but the organizations actually responsible like the FBI and ATF *and now much of the Homeland Security Department apparatus* certainly aren't. So I'm really not at all certain what GGT is trying to get at or point to.

[GGT]

My point was that our domestic/internal problems are just as dangerous, and cause as much damage/destruction/death as the general 'war on terrorism' or 'Islamic terrorism'. They're all related to extremists and militant radicals, whether lone actors or organized groups.

ie AQ doesn't represent the billions of Muslims around the world, just a faction of crazies. Gang violence or mafia-cartel violence doesn't represent any specific ethnic group or race, just a faction of crazies. Cyber criminals don't represent all IT geeks or hackers, etc....

Sure, we have federal agencies that monitor these things....and legislators that fund military/pentagon at disproportionate rates, compared to domestic programs that would benefit our society and nation at the community level (education, healthcare, infrastructure, police, fire). That's pretty much my take on our distorted priorities.

[LittleFuzzy]

My point was that our domestic/internal problems are just as dangerous, and cause as much damage/destruction/death as the general 'war on terrorism' or 'Islamic terrorism'. They're all related to extremists and militant radicals, whether lone actors or organized groups.

It's not actually true that they're just as dangerous. One reason why you pretty much only see the lone actors for home-grown terrorism is because it's not terribly hard to spot and stop groups conspiring to commit that sort of violence when they're in our own back yard. And the Oklahoma City bombing notwithstanding, the group activities have far greater potential to create mass-casualty events. As a consequence, terrorism planned for/organized outside of the US is in fact quite a bit more dangerous because it's harder to spot and stop. That's why international counter-terrorism gets more funding, manpower etc, because it requires more to get equivalent results. And not getting the results isn't exactly acceptable, to you or anyone else.

Of course, you think all violence is the same and separating it out in distinct categories is stupid/irrational, choosing only to look at the final results, people dead. But they're not the same. They happen for different reasons and in different ways and if we want to actually keep events from happening, if we want to stop attacks before they start we have to understand all the differences that really are there before the final results. Gang violence is not the same as the Giffords shooting is not the same the London Underground bombings is not the same as the JDL is not the same as Columbine. They all have radically different triggers, throw up radically different warning signs, and require different types of action to prevent.

Sure, we have federal agencies that monitor these things....and legislators that fund military/pentagon at disproportionate rates, compared to domestic programs that would benefit our society and nation at the community level (education, healthcare, infrastructure, police, fire). That's pretty much my take on our distorted priorities.

And yet whenever something does happen you get upset that it wasn't stopped and don't understand why authorities didn't see that particular attack coming. I know you're never going to understand this GGT but we can't get everything. We and the politicians need to pick and choose and prioritize. The first thing you need to do if you want our priorities to change is to keep quiet and not care when violence happens and convince the people around you to keep quiet too because if you do care and you do express that you wanted it prevented then you're asking for that to be prioritized more than it was at the time the event happened. Your feelings matter. They have political consequences.

[GGT]

<snip>

And yet whenever something does happen you get upset that it wasn't stopped and don't understand why authorities didn't see that particular attack coming. I know you're never going to understand this GGT but we can't get everything. We and the politicians need to pick and choose and prioritize.

The first thing you need to do if you want our priorities to change is to keep quiet and not care when violence happens and convince the people around you to keep quiet too because if you do care and you do express that you wanted it prevented then you're asking for that to be prioritized more than it was at the time the event happened. Your feelings matter. They have political consequences.

My feelings also have an intellectual basis, regardless of your misunderstanding or misguided interpretations. The LAST thing people need to do is keep quiet, or suppress their opinions, and simply hope the political process, or a long spanse of time.....susses out injustices or inequities.

Using the status quo to defend eventuality might have worked in previous centuries, but not today, and not in the future. Did you feel the same way, or say the same things after Matthew Shepard's homophobic murder? Just hide in your closet until other people take the risks, and demand the changes youwant?

[Veldan Rath]

Ah, the GGT Two Step (GGTTS)

[Lewkowski]

ie AQ doesn't represent the billions of Muslims around the world, just a faction of crazies. Gang violence or mafia-cartel violence doesn't represent any specific ethnic group or race, just a faction of crazies. Cyber criminals don't represent all IT geeks or hackers, etc....

Was someone forwarding the argument that Islamic Terrorists represented all Muslims? Islamic Terrorism is a specific term. Folks who believe in Islam AND are also terrorists. So if your Islamic but not a terrorist the term doesn't apply to those folks.

Now can we agree Islamic Terrorism is a threat and its an appropriate term to describe the threat that AQ and other groups represent?

[GGT]

Another reply would be a repeat of the paragraph you snipped, Lewk.

Not sure why my dance with Fuzzy was a two-step, but whatever.

[LittleFuzzy]

Another reply would be a repeat of the paragraph you snipped, Lewk.

Not sure why my dance with Fuzzy was a two-step, but whatever.

Two reasons. One, you completely missed the point I was making and if I attempt to belabor it you and I will quickly descend into our usual fight. Two, any reply I make to what you wrote that second post is going to be part of the Tangent Two-Step and I'd like to keep the topic somewhat on point.