Barack Obama: “Boston Bombers will feel the full Weight of Justice”

Obama is muslim, I bet whoever did it is hiding in his attic. 🙄

As if on cue…witness Bolt’s wishful conclusion jumping…quick, before he ‘rearranges’ it.

Not the convolution of updates…& a penchant for always assuming his favourite foes first.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/boston_marathon_bombed/

The Pavlovian responses in his comments thread are even greater illustration of a mindset.

Pavlov rang his bell.

You couldn’t help but salivate.

Could be a Cathlick…..

Accidental explosion in a gas main: 10 to 1
Ammunition cache explosion: 50 to 1
Mossad: 250 to 1
One or all of the following: Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades | Al-qaeda-Al-queda | Fatah-Fateh | Fatah Constitution | Hamas: 1 to 1

I still think it’s the Cathlicks……

Definitely a Cathlick…….the multiple explosions, designed to maximise panic……got Cathlick written all over it. Also someone was heard to yell out “Peace be with you!!!!!”

Strange, IPA, that atheists and agnostics have not been associated with terrorists acts (in my lifetime and knowledge) … but always happy to be enlightened …

Happy to oblige.

Plenty of killing in the name of religion.

Killing in the name of unreligiosity, not so much.

Plenty prepared to kill in the name of their leftist religion. And all of the murderous communist regimes were militant atheists. They are the greatest mass murderers of all time!

“Pretty sure that killing was done in the name of communism, not atheism.”

So do we all agree that leftism is responsible for killing more people than any orher religion or ideology in the history of the world?

3 to 1 odds that this nutcase believes in a bit of Chomsky .

So Chomsky as a child had a billycart that used ball bearings for wheels .

And he wrote about it

I doubt that Ukrainians, Latvians, Lithuanians etc considered themselves “of Stalin”.

Back to the ball bearings etc. and its straight out of the ‘how to’ manual found in Palestine.

‘The explosives used in the deadly Boston Marathon bombing were contained in 6-liter pressure cookers and hidden in black duffel bags on the ground, a person briefed on the investigation told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

‘One of the explosives contained shards of metal and ball bearings, and another contained nails, the person said.’

Huffpo

‘While pressure cooker bombs are more commonly utilized in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Nepal; they have been seen before in domestic terror attacks, including the 2010 attempted bombing in Times Square.’

Huffpo

It also takes a fair bit of hubris to keep prefixing ‘communist’ with ‘atheist’.

The communist regimes you speak of were driven by communist ideology, not fucking Atheism .

Stalin, for instance, carried out his terrors against a far broader spectrum than just the religious. Doctors & other intellectuals were on his list, among others; anyone who his megalomaniacal paranoia considered to be a threat, really. Not just individuals, entire ‘occupations’.
It had fuck all to do with wanting to stamp out religion.

Your demonising of the left with your examples holds some water, splatter. But attempting to cite atheism as a strong motivator in the killing tells me you are full of shit.

It is amusing how repulsed by atheism defenders of religion become. To the point of irrationality.

You’re wasting your time Ol’Sancty. All you’re gonna get is “Look over there, a squirrel!”

“The real issue here is the role of religion and other irrational belief systems in sanctioning killings.”

Indeed.

So where were those killings done in the name of not believing in made up shit again?

Atheism had fuck all to do with it.

Yes I can.

So where are these monolithic institutions of atheists?…there are none.

So what atrocities were committed in the name of Atheism? precisely.

If you are still trying to conflate communism with atheism, you are a desperate obfuscator.

Seems like some of you are suggesting that religion is necessary to have morals or compassion. Obviously, that is total bilge.

Y’all love to spank the moosies, but get cut up defending your own myth clubs. I think the lot of you are as wrong as eachother.

http://www.news.com.au/world-news/other-bombings-you-may-not-know-about-but-should/story-fndir2ev-1226622408360

Nice.

Where did I do that?

Now you really are getting desperate.

So, does that mean you are indeed still trying to conflate atheism with communism?

Also, seeing as how you badgered TB for answers…

So where are these monolithic institutions of atheists?…

So what atrocities were committed in the name of Atheism?

So where were those killings done in the name of not believing in made up shit again?

You didn’t answer my questions at all, btw.

So what atrocities were committed in the name of Atheism? precisely.

“The ability to choose your own beliefs and live your life accordingly is fundamental to human freedom and is what made the US (despite its other shortcomings) such a radically great country at its foundation.”

I tend to agree, but I think they’ve bastardised it all along the way with American Exceptionalism.

“Once regimes believe that religion is the opium of the people AND they decide that religion is to be banned then I think it is reasonable to attribute the consequent persecution of religious people to the atheism of the persecutors.”

I agree that banning religion is unwarranted & unrealistic.
I don’t think that the oppression of the religious under those regimes was borne from atheism though. As I said above, Stalin, in particular, persecuted a broad spectrum of groups of the population, not out of spite for religion but because of paranoid fears that they were an organisational threat to his absolute power. It was a trademark of his rule, which he conducted beneath a whole lot of Marxist PR rhetoric.

I still think it’s a long bow to conflate communism & atheism. But I do concur with most of your above comment.

I should say, if it does turn out to be Islamic extremism behind the recent bombings, then I utterly condemn it; I hold no love for radical religion of any stripe. That said, anyone who would see innocent civilians as legitimate targets, for whatever reason, stands condemned; it shouldn’t even have to be said.

My initial comment on this thread was only to point out that reflexively assuming it was muslims, before the smoke has even cleared & any detail is known, is a trait found amongst those who are likely to see evil moosies everywhere.

I well remember similar conclusion jumping from Bolt & kindred minions as details of the horrific slaughter of Breivik began to be made public. That started with a bombing too.
When it became apparent that Breivik was in fact a far right loon, with a far right loon’s manifesto in writing, then Bolt began obfuscating & calling him a lunatic etc (I think he was eventually proven sane?)…rather than associate him with much of the same dross about Islam & immigration that Bolt pens himself (& potentially influences people like Breivik).

It reminds me of snacty’s bizarre assertion that when christians do bad things, they’re not really christians…even though the individuals are certainly strongly claiming to be christians. To follow that logic, there’s no such thing as a bad christian…which is patently bullshit.

Alan Jones reckons this act of terror was carried out by a radical right wing foreign student.

That’s good enough for me

Especially coming after he yesterday successfully drew a link between child swimming pool drownings and the Federal Government carbon tax.

The persecution of all kinds of groups began immediately after the bolshies took power.

Was that because of atheism too? I say no. Bolshevism/Marxism, whatever you want to call it, was much bigger than being irreligious. I’m sure you know this. It was, at its heart, a class conflict.

Trying to attribute the millions dead under communism to some sort of strong atheist influence is totally disingenuous.
It does little to deflect from those who kill in the name of their religion, a feature of many bloody conflicts throughout recorded human history.

Interesting debate, humans kill each other all the time and even mass murder remains popular in the 21st century.

Whether for political or religious reasons, any excuse to misbehave, homo sapiens are little more than glorified apes.

And recent research suggests we don’t learn from our mistakes because of a flaw in the brain, which adds weight to TB’s theory that history repeats itself.

Strangely, I was baptised too; Lutheran.

It was done by paternal grandparents before I was old enough to understand or object.

If I could unholy myself, I would. 😆

As you’d know, having read the books, it’s not that predictable.

I’m 3 eps into Season 3 at the moment. Can’t wait for the Red Wedding!

Khaleesi is just about to ‘buy’ The Unsullied in Astapor…happy times, death & conflagration ahead!

Poor Old Jeeor Mormont. 😦

Ya don’t have to be communist to be an atheist, but ya have to be atheist to be a communist.

Stalin began to pull down the churches and religious nutters went underground, only to resurface with the demise of Communism.

Communists are not necessarily atheist, but it would have helped.

“religious nutters went underground”

The religious nutters were anti-communist, hence their need to go underground.

“you don’t have to be an atheists to be communist … that’s your assumption”

That’s the opposite of what I said. The rest of your babble is just as meaningless.

“The Commies killed the religious because they were religious.”

Errr…and what about the larger proportion of the population put to death because they were things other-than-religious?…or are you now contorting it into everyone-ever-killed-by-a-commo-was-religious-and-they-were-killed-solely-because-they-were-religious?

* shakes head

“Atheism is key to Communism.”

Getting more desperate as the day got longer I see Theo Hobson snacty? 😯 …outstanding hyperbole of the year, indeed!

“The Commies were more religiously motivated than the IRA. I’m sorry if it doesn’t fit the narrative, but there are cnts among the atheists too. And obviously greater intolerance, probably on a level with Islamists.”

Did some atheist recently upset you by pointing out the lunacy of blind subservience to unsubstantiable stories from beyond the Dark Ages, diddums.

Well trained by Pavlov, good godboy.

‘Greater intolerance’!…if that don’t beat all. 😆

“Their failure to understand human nature has resulted in the failure of their system.

Human nature is flawed. Man is not perfectible. Changing society will not lead to ‘socialist man’ and the withering away of the state. ”

I agree with all of that, but I think it has zero to do with any biblical notion of sin, original or otherwise.

Subjugating an entire population is never going to work, long term. It wouldn’t matter what ideology was trying it on.

Pretty fkn obvious.

“probably on a level with Islamists”

Radical Islam (not Islam as a whole, although I know you guys love to see it that way…cough, Pavlov, cough…) is the epitome of intolerant religious conservatism.

Atheism denotes no belief in god. Period.

Atheism is about as far away from radical Islam as you can get.

I love how myth defenders try & call other people religious as some kind of smear. I’m quite sure that the irony is lost on them.

Boston Explosion Timing Finally Explained

Law enforcement in Boston have released a possible explanation for the late timing of the two explosions which occurred during this week’s marathon.

(I-Newswire) April 17, 2013 – With a suspect in custody, police in Boston have announced what appears to be a suspicious connection between the placement and timing of the two bombs that grievously injured over a hundred people while killing several bystanders, and five people present in the area at the time of the blasts who reside in the same small town outside of the Boston area.

While details are limited, a spokesman with the investigation stated that a suspect currently in custody has revealed having a personal relationship with two women who finished the marathon at around three and a half hours, and fours hours, respectively. The blasts occurred as both women remained in the area of the finish line after having recently finished the marathon.

Both women are from a small community where the suspect is also a longtime resident. Both women are married, with their husbands present in the viewing area near the finish line. None of the four suffered injuries from the blasts, but all four are believed to have witnessed to it before fleeing the area.

Police caution that while the suspect they have in custody is being held with good reason, and the connection to the two women has been verified, they cannot at this time verify with certainty that the suspect was indeed involved in building or detonating the two bombs.

Boston police are warning the public not to attempt vigilante justice against the suspect if released or at any time in the future, as this may simply be a case of a mentally disturbed individual claiming credit for a terrorist act to serve personal delusions of grandeur or a persecution complex.

Other possible reasons for the suspect claiming responsibility could be the covert use of a “dummy terrorist” without any traceable connections to the actual terrorist organization responsible for the blasts, in which case public attacks against the “dummy terrorist” would only serve to conceal further the real culprit.

Seems odd that, if it was Islamic extremists, they haven’t publicly taken responsibility yet.

They are usually proud of such bloodletting inflicted upon the infidel…and not shy about advertising it.

“Agnostics also have no belief in god. Atheists have no belief in god but also believe that that god does not exist.”

I think that’s splitting hairs.

“Agnosticism is more rational.”

I dispute that. I think agnosticism is just seen as more ‘polite’ by myth defenders (who are irritated by atheists’ more absolute stance in their faces…most of them aren’t used to being confronted with having the legitimacy of their worldview being picked apart).

The faithful like to try & paint atheists as irrational as themselves. Unfortunately for them, they are the ones with the magical doctrines.

I consider myself to be an atheist, of course, if I was confronted by actual divinity here in the real world (& not just a vibe or a feeling of divinity [which is what a lot of the religious cite as ‘proof’…*GUFFAW]) I’d concede that I was wrong.
In my opinion, based upon experiences of life over decades, that possibility is so remote as to be negligible. I think most agnostics, the ones who bother to think about such things, probably share a very similar outlook; then there are those agnostics who don’t consider or give a toss about religion. It simply doesn’t influence their daily lives or thinking.

As I’ve said many times, I can comprrehend why people make a case for a Creator. It seems logical to them to fill the gaps in knowledge of our origins with that. I disagree, but there is some logic in that line of thought. So, I suppose that is a mildly agnostic stance.
However, the faithful go several steps further & invent reams of ritual & dogma to support their interpretation of what a creator/god is like. Every religion is different on the specifics, to the point of violence at times.
Here I am, happy to state, without qualification, that they are all self serving & wrong. If there were a creator, who in the first instance cannot be adequately explained, how is it that these sundry differentiable myth clubs claim to know its mind? That is the greatest arrogance of all.

Am I to believe that the christians here (& elsewhere) countenance for even a nanosecond that maybe Allah is right, or Vishnu, or Ra? Yet they are equally as convinced that their particular denomination represents the One True god.

We are able to look back & perceive that Zeus & Odin were a load of horseshit. Any of you doubt that? outside of keeping some respect for the incorrect beliefs of the ancients.
But get hung up & convinced of the legitimacy of certain flavours of christianity.

I just take that certainty one step further & categorically state that You Are All Wrong.
This is the most rational response of them all; if a little arrogant itself. It is honest and it is not self deceiving.

I seriously doubt that it was the NRA. They are dickheads, paranoid, frightened dickheads; but they’re not that stupid or determined to confect political mileage with the blood of innocent Americans.

“They are dickheads, paranoid, frightened dickheads”

Really? I’d be a gun owner (and possibly an NRA member) if I lived in the US.I’d be a gun owner here too if Howard hadn’t reacted as he did after Port Arthur.

I see absolutely no need for the population to be armed.

Most of the arguments for are simply pantswetting, imo.

Proponents seem to think that criminals, maniacs & invaders are going to intrude into their house .

I don’t think so.

It would, however, enable the potential killers. Not to mention, increase potential accidents related to mishandling of firearms by the untrained.

So, why do you desire to be armed? Is it out of what you perceive to be a desperate need for self defence? (serious question, not pisstaking)

For the record, I’m in the throes of teaching my daughter how to safely handle firearms. Beginning with the 4.10 (snake gun) & air rifle, on cans & bottles at minimal range. Then proceeding to a lever action .22 with iron sights & finally high powered scoped rifles (.222 & .30-06).
I suppose we are lucky that we have ready access & a farm to use them on.

People toting firearms in the city is fraught.

Also, I don’t “desire to be armed”. I would like to own a gun or guns (again).

Farmers don’t own firearms for self defense, so the mindset is completely different, to begin with.

If you’ve ever had to eradicate vermin, put down an animal with a blunt object or cut a throat with a knife you’ll understand what I mean by that.

The term ‘deperate’ suited my hyperbolic intentions, but it was a serious question.

“I would like to own a gun or guns (again).”

To what purpose? I don’t see ‘just because’ as being reason enough to wield lethal force. What type of firearm? Pistols, presumably?
Just curious. Not really my business, but seeing as how we’re off topic & on the subject. 😉

“To what purpose? I don’t see ‘just because’ as being reason enough to wield lethal force. What type of firearm? Pistols, presumably?
Just curious.”

Maybe I want to teach my offspring responsible gun handling.

I’d like to be free to own all kinds of guns, but as our laws stand that doesn’t leave a lot of choice. To me it’s as much a freedom issue as anything else. Therefore “just because” is a good enough reason.

Back to the NRA. That organisation represent the broad spectrum of gun owners from the farmer you describe above, to the sporting shooter, to the hunter, to the urban rifle-range user, to the city dwelling self-defender, to the single-issue second amendment advocate. All “dickheads, paranoid, frightened dickheads” according to you.

The NRA is a conservative political masthead, and the gun ‘mentality’ in the US is a little more irrational & rabid than here.

As for the difference between firearms in the city & rural areas, that you claim not to see.
Well, how about population density & proximity? Discharging firearms in a built up area is self evidently stupid.

I have no issue, as I said, with training people to safely use firearms; in fact, it is a good idea.
Neither do I object to gun clubs or pistol/rifle ranges. But I am dubious that the majority of those in metropolitan areas who covet, lust for & desire procurement of firearms want them solely for use in such controlled environments (btw, Chris Kyle was recently shot at a gun club in the loony US). I think they (not you) really want a firearm(s) in their homes, for wetting reasons, if they are honest; or because ‘packing heat’ is seen by them to be ‘tough’ [it’s the opposite].

“To me it’s as much a freedom issue as anything else. Therefore “just because” is a good enough reason.”

Yes, we should be able to own hand grenades, landmines & shoulder launched anti-aircraft missiles too! 😯 …just because.

I don’t believe you’ve made a good case for arming the population.

And, we aren’t living in the US, thank fuck. The horse has well & truly bolted there; the situation is far beyond reasonable control.
So I’m not sure that quoting Obama has much relevance to what’s going on here…although I concede that a disparaging remark I made about uberparanoia amongst the NRA-wetters was what got us to this point in discussion.
Notice that I was actually praising the NRA faintly with my remark. They are not so fucked up as to have orchestrated the Boston bombing.

“But I am dubious that the majority of those in metropolitan areas who covet, lust for & desire procurement of firearms want them solely for use in such controlled environments (btw, Chris Kyle was recently shot at a gun club in the loony US). I think they (not you) really want a firearm(s) in their homes, for wetting reasons, if they are honest; or because ‘packing heat’ is seen by them to be ‘tough’ [it’s the opposite].”

Yes there would be a variety of reasons. But you either allow people to own a gun for whatever reason they wish, like the USA, or you don’t, like here. Like I said, if I lived in the USA I’d be a gun owner, and because of the second amendment wouldn’t need a reason other than “just because”.

Which is why I think ‘just because’ isn’t good enough.

I know that there are sane, balanced & reasonable individuals like you. You can’t tell that just by looking at people though.
Even measured people are prone to emotion & anger & fear & loss of self control…& it’s at those times that there shouldn’t be ready access, in the home, or a holster on the hip, to firearms.
It’s unnecessary…&, in my view, the cons outweigh the pros.

Anyway, now I’ll come down from my Ivory Tower & head out the farm & shoot holes through anything I like…& there’s nothing the metroscum can do about it! mwahahahahaha…

Not with ‘just because’, leastways.

Barry O’Farrell wants to allow controlled culling in national parks, getting rid of imported vermin, but there is a backlash against shooters in the parks.

My view is that they should be permitted … if properly organised and away from bushwalkers.

I very much doubt that the USA founding fathers who travelled to meet by horse put together their constitution by candlelight had any idea that allowingg a muzzle loaded musket would be so controversial.

Something amusing just happened.
We have 3 cats. I’m elevated on the 3rd storey at the moment and
one of our cats just scratched on the screen door to get in from A
balcony.

I opened it and the cat suddenly disappeared.

I didn’t realise that as I opened the door he had his claws stuck and went with the door thro a void and ended up in a situation whee he was attached to a screen door 3 storeys up.

Anyway he survived

That’s it! It also probably explains why I get the dust examination every time I go through security.

I favour cats over most of the humans I know. I have one on my lap getting in the way as I type, right now.

Actually, come to think of it, I favour most animals over a great proportion of humanity. They know not malice, machination or manipulation.