• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

General political discussion

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is actually a good thing to bring up for debate to stir the pot a bit. Because, in this case, Fartbango is correct.

The four attacks, Hood, Boston, San Bernadino and Orlando are all cases of domestic terrorism. None of the fuckers were trained, equipped or financed by any outside organization. They were independent actors who used Islam as an excuse and, in all but one case, it is debatable if Mohammedanism was the primary motivating factor.

It brings to question how should we classify true foreign-based terrorism. ISIS, in these cases (except Hood as that pre-dated ISIS), had nothing to do with these people outside somewhat claiming credit for their actions and the sort-of, kind-of lip service paid them by the perpetrators. Compare and contrast that to Al-Qaeda's attacks, and attempted attacks on the US.

If ISIS tweeting a thanks at anyone that kills in the name of Allah, even if they had no hand in the matter, is the criteria for classifying foreign versus domestic terrorism, should we then also classify Dylann Roof's attack in Charleston as foreign terrorism because of his expressed admiration for Rhodesia and being inspired by an Austrian-born former German corporal?

Is an idea that inspires the same as material support? Should we re-evaluate what we consider foreign terrorism because the nature of terrorism itself is evolving?

Shouldn't we consider that ISIS/AQ/radical Islam are deliberately urging these kind of lone wolf attacks, and that the perpetrators are actually listening to/being inspired by those urgings? In the case of Major Hassan, for example, there was clear evidence that he not only was inspired by Anwar Al-Awlaki, but even communicated with him directly.

That contemporaneous communication with forwign leadership, either two-way or even one-way, is not an element present with respect to Dylann Roof.

Radical Islam is inherently a transnational ideology that isn't defined by national borders, but rather by the beliefs of its adherents, no matter where they are. Still, the organizational and religious core of that movement, and all of its most influential leadership, is overseas. And because of modern technology, they don't need to be co-located with recruits/jihadis to inspire them, or even to "sign them up", nor do those recruits need to be co-located in order to accept those orders/directives.

I think if the leadership and direct inspiration is overseas, and actively encouraging such attacks, then we ought to take those domestic jihadis at their word in terms of their motivations/loyalties, and consider them agents of an overseas authority.
 
Last edited:
Shouldn't we consider that ISIS/AQ/radical Islam are deliberately urging these kind of lone wolf attacks, and that the perpetrators are actually listening to/being inspired by those urgings? In the case of Major Hassan, for example, there was clear evidence that he not only was inspired by Anwar Al-Awlaki, but even communicated with him directly.

Radical Islam is inherently a transnational ideology that isn't defined by national borders, but rather by the beliefs of its adherents, no matter where they are. Still, the organizational and religious core of that movement, and all of its most influential leadership, is overseas. And because of modern technology, they don't need to be co-located with recruits/jihadis to inspire them, or even to "sign them up", nor do those recruits need to be co-located in order to accept those orders/directives.

I think if the leadership and direct inspiration is overseas, and actively encouraging such attacks, then we ought to take those domestic jihadis at their word in terms of their motivations/loyalties, and consider them agents of an overseas authority.

Time for me to crash at PST, but, perfect for debate.
 
Shouldn't we consider that ISIS/AQ/radical Islam are deliberately urging these kind of lone wolf attacks, and that the perpetrators are actually listening to/being inspired by those urgings? In the case of Major Hassan, for example, there was clear evidence that he not only was inspired by Anwar Al-Awlaki, but even communicated with him directly.

That contemporaneous communication with forwign leadership, either two-way or even one-way, is not an element present with respect to Dylann Roof.

Radical Islam is inherently a transnational ideology that isn't defined by national borders, but rather by the beliefs of its adherents, no matter where they are. Still, the organizational and religious core of that movement, and all of its most influential leadership, is overseas. And because of modern technology, they don't need to be co-located with recruits/jihadis to inspire them, or even to "sign them up", nor do those recruits need to be co-located in order to accept those orders/directives.

I think if the leadership and direct inspiration is overseas, and actively encouraging such attacks, then we ought to take those domestic jihadis at their word in terms of their motivations/loyalties, and consider them agents of an overseas authority.

The changing nature of technology and communication does lend itself to your argument.

However, I would say there is still a significant difference between active support and inspiration and state-sponsored terrorism, non-govermental terror and lone-wolf attacks. This is actually an old argument. Back in 1900 nations were grappling with the question of whether or not anarchists acting out of nationalist/classist agitation was the same as foreign nations actively supporting agents that committed acts of terror. For example the difference between Luigi Lucheni or Gavrilo Princip.

I guess the primary difference lies in the response and accountability. One can attack a state for actively supporting terror, one can attack a group like Al-Qaeda, and those that harbor them, for training and financing terrorists. One cannot attack and idea or a call to action. That said, ISIS is the exception perhaps. We are already attacking them, but it wasn't due to terror attacks. The terror attacks started after we started dropping bombs.

Of course, the major hurdle here is the fact that most were US citizens. The threshold for establishing a citizen as a foreign agent is well pretty concrete and they do not meet it.
 
It's amazing how many shootings happen in no-gun zones. Extremely safe places.

Much spectacle.
 
It's amazing how many shootings happen in no-gun zones. Extremely safe places.

Much spectacle.

Wasn't a no gun zone. Checked guns in bags, picked up luggage at baggage claim, went to bathroom, came out and shot people.
 
Wasn't a no gun zone. Checked guns in bags, picked up luggage at baggage claim, went to bathroom, came out and shot people.

Depending on the myriad of places that other passengers were going and the rules and regulations regarding guns for those places, it's likely not many people would have been able to be armed in that situation.

It's entirely, in essence, a no gun zone.

I know you're against guns and you know I'm 100% for guns so this won't go anywhere lol.
 
Predictable as always, state-level Republicans have made Bathroom Bills and LGBT discrimination legislation, er, pardon, Religious Freedom Acts, their top priority as legislative sessions begin.

It is like clockwork every four years. Run on jobs, healthcare reform, lower taxes and as soon as they win majorities and the opening session starts they go right after the fags and trannies. Can't help themselves I suppose.

One would think with how badly Obama destroyed the country they would have different priorities.


First Days of 2017 Bring New 'Bathroom Bills'

liberace_at_home_a_l_zpsnx7oelcy.jpg


"In the first days of 2017, legislators in five states have introduced so-called "bathroom bills" restricting access to public accommodations.

Legislative moves this week in Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Texas and Virginia represent the latest efforts at the center of a broader public debate over transgender rights. Additionally, lawmakers in Alabama, South Carolina and Washington filed so-called bathroom bills last year for introduction during the upcoming sessions.

Since 2013, at least 24 states have considered restricting access to restrooms, locker rooms and other facilities on the basis of biological sex, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures...."



http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/06/politics/bathroom-bill-state-legislation/index.html
 
Call me bigoted, but taxpayer money paying for a murderer/kidnappers sex change doesn't seem quite right
.
California pays for inmate's gender reassignment surgery

Reuters
January 6, 2017
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Reuters) - A transgender California prison inmate who was born male but identifies as female underwent gender-reassignment surgery paid for by the state this week in what is believed to be the first such case in the United States, her attorneys said Friday.

The state had promised to refer inmate Shiloh Quine, then 56, to a surgeon and pay for the procedure as part of a 2015 settlement making the state the first in the United States to offer inmates a regular path to such treatment.
Quine, who is serving a term of life without the possibility of parole after convictions in 1981 for murder, kidnapping and robbery, had the surgery on Thursday, said Jill Marcellus, a spokeswoman for the Transgender Law Center, which negotiated the settlement.

Under its terms, the state agreed to allow inmates who are transgender or have gender dysphoria access to clothing, toiletries and other items consistent with their gender identities. For those like Shiloh whose doctors agree that surgery is medically appropriate, the state will pay for the procedure. The cost was not specified.

Transgender Law Center Executive Director Kris Hayashi said that by providing Quine's surgery, the state was setting an example that would help others obtain needed care.

"For too long, institutions have ignored doctors and casually dismissed medically necessary and life-saving care for transgender people just because of who we are – with devastating consequences for our community," said Hayashi.

Under guidelines adopted in 2015 after the state's settlement with Quine, prisoners seeking to change their biological sex would need to be evaluated by medical and mental health professionals, and present their cases to a six-member committee of doctors, psychologists and psychiatrists.

Committee members would vote on whether the surgery was warranted, and a committee chair who is a medical administrator in the prison system would hold a tie-breaking vote.

They would also have to live for a year in their preferred gender roles and undergo hormone therapy.

Quine will be transferred to a women's prison after she is released from the hospital, said Terry Thornton, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation....



The daughter of Quine's victim said she objects to inmates getting taxpayer-funded surgery that is not readily available to non-criminals, regardless of the cost.

"My dad begged for his life," said Farida Baig, who tried unsuccessfully to block Quine's surgery through the courts. "It just made me dizzy and sick. I'm helping pay for his surgery; I live in California. It's kind of like a slap in the face."

Quine and an accomplice kidnapped and fatally shot 33-year-old Shahid Ali Baig, a father of three, in downtown Los Angeles in February 1980, stealing $80 and his car during a drug- and alcohol-fueled rampage

California was legally required to pay for the operation, corrections spokeswoman Terry Thornton said. "The Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution requires that prisons provide inmates with medically necessary treatment for medical and mental health conditions, including inmates diagnosed with gender dysphoria," Thornton said in a written statement.

Corrections officials fought for years to avoid paying for sex-reassignment surgeries. In one high-profile case, the state paroled Michelle-Lael Norsworthy in 2015, just one day before a federal appeals court was to hear her request for state-funded surgery.

Joyce Hayhoe, a spokeswoman for the federal court-appointed official who controls California's prison medical care, said the cost of sex-reassignment surgeries could approach $100,000, including procedures and medications before and after the operation. The Transgender Law Center said that figure is exaggerated.

A portion of the state's expense will generally be reimbursed by the federal government, sometimes up to 95 percent, Hayhoe said.

Since the state approved its policy, officials have received 64 other inmate requests for sex-reassignment surgeries, and four have been approved.

Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which supports crime victims, said there are not enough operations to make a big dent in the corrections budget, though he does not think the state should fund them.
http://abc7.com/news/california-prisoner-receives-gender-reassignment-surgery/1690794/
 
It is something worth debate. Is it medically necessary?

I would say no...
I mean, im a big proponent of mental healthcare because I think it's a population that's severely underserved medically. And I'm honestly not 100% sure either way if gender assignment surgery should ever be indicated as a medically necessary treatment for mental illness (not much strong data behind it). But either way...

When someone's a convicted murdered, their rights don't matter to me anymore


Sidebar: I think it's disgusting that LGBTQ groups are publicizing this piece of shit as some type of moral victory for the nation
 
Depending on the myriad of places that other passengers were going and the rules and regulations regarding guns for those places, it's likely not many people would have been able to be armed in that situation.

It's entirely, in essence, a no gun zone.

I know you're against guns and you know I'm 100% for guns so this won't go anywhere lol.

I don't think I ever said I was against guns. I have called for steps to improve gun safety. I think we ca both agree that someone who tells the FBI they are hearing voices telling them to fight for ISIS, where the FBI is concerned enough to take them to a mental hospital, really shouldn't be traveling with guns a few weeks later
 
RE: Ann Coulter. Meh, she has always sucked. January 5th would be 14 days away from inauguration, so it's difficult for me to choose this as a "tipping point" for Coulter, who's already "tipped" in my book.

Still fairly gross that some folks took it as a "dog whistle" to bring out their alt-right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top