white supremacist opens fire at US Holocaust Museum

[Beskar]

As far as the second post goes, I actually kind of agree with him. I also saw it on the front page of the BBC news website first, which seems very strange to me. I work in DC and we have murders here every single week without fail. Few of those deaths even make the front page of the Washington Post, let alone front and center on most major news websites around the world. This is essentially another aspect of hate-crime laws: singling out individuals who commit crimes based on racial/religious/etc. motivations. I am personally very opposed to this, as I think it furthers the notion that we are not all the same in the eyes of the law. A murder is a murder is a murder. The motivations behind a particular murder should not be sufficient grounds to differentiate between a story buried 30 pages deep in a local paper and a story that gets front-page billing on international news websites.

I can certainly see the sensationalism in the notion of an anti-Semitic murder (which was clearly this guy's motivations), but that doesn't change the fact that it's inequitable coverage. There are plenty of murders all over the US every day that are motivated by race, but we Jews are always given extra-special treatment as a result of sensitivity over the Holocaust. I don't see what makes this nutjob any more news-worthy than the other random office shootings we get every month in the US. They are all equally tragic and should be treated the same. My life (Jewish) is no more valuable than my wife's (Christian). I would hope her murder would get as much attention as mine would.

Being honest, they the media always do stories like this. I remember the story in the top 10 about illegal drugs found in a game of GTA4 (18 rated) which a father bought for his 12 year old son saying he was greatly offended by it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7990927.stm

My post was more the very blunt nature of it. He saw nothing wrong in the idea of some nutjob going to a museum and blowing holes into security guards just comparing it to a storm in a tea cup. You could always obviously raise the point that he wouldn't definitely make that claim to the families of those involved saying that to their face. There is a fundamental difference to "I believe there are more pressing international news" to "Nothing wrong with a good ol' shot up, no one died, righty?".

It down to the question of "What is the value of a human life?", is the killing of an innocent merely a ripple of your tea while you bring the cup to your mouth. There is obviously a sense of personal detachment, but to completely shake it off as nothing at all, is a very disturbing thought. It goes back to the saying of Josef Stalin "the death of one is a tragedy, the death of millions is simply a statistic".

[Crazed Rabbit]

He saw nothing wrong in the idea of some nutjob going to a museum and blowing holes into security guards just comparing it to a storm in a tea cup.

Reading failure. :(

What sick pleasure do these bastards get out of this?

See Kukri's post above mine.

CR

[CountArach]

See Kukri's post above mine.

CR

Yeah... utterly insane.

"I'm a failure in life... I'm going to take someone with me."

[tibilicus]

Being honest, they the media always do stories like this. I remember the story in the top 10 about illegal drugs found in a game of GTA4 (18 rated) which a father bought for his 12 year old son saying he was greatly offended by it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7990927.stm

My post was more the very blunt nature of it. He saw nothing wrong in the idea of some nutjob going to a museum and blowing holes into security guards just comparing it to a storm in a tea cup. You could always obviously raise the point that he wouldn't definitely make that claim to the families of those involved saying that to their face. There is a fundamental difference to "I believe there are more pressing international news" to "Nothing wrong with a good ol' shot up, no one died, righty?".

It down to the question of "What is the value of a human life?", is the killing of an innocent merely a ripple of your tea while you bring the cup to your mouth. There is obviously a sense of personal detachment, but to completely shake it off as nothing at all, is a very disturbing thought. It goes back to the saying of Josef Stalin "the death of one is a tragedy, the death of millions is simply a statistic".

LOL!

Read what I wrote again, I didn't say anything along those lines. "Nothing wrong with a good ol' shot up, no one died, righty?".


Where did I say that or suggest that? You still refuse to respond to me directly yet still wish to make up lies about what I wrote. I fail to see how anything I said was "disturbing". You obviously failed to even determine the meaning from what I wrote. Seeming no one else has commented on it and no one else has an issue with it, it suggest your acting ridiculous and love throwing around false accusations?

Also pluck up the courage to respond to me directly before accusing me of crazy things, your neurotic, seek help.

[Beskar]

So your statement "No one died as far as I know, so it is all good" is not classified as condoning the attack?

Definition of condone is as follows according to the online dictionary: "To forgive, excuse or overlook (something); To allow, accept or permit (something); To forgive (marital infidelity or other marital offense)"

You did this with the reason "No one died", however, you still forgive/excuse/overlook the fact the person walked into the museum and let barrels blazing at security guards.

My "lie" was simply a parody version of your statement, and has the same meaning. The parody statement condones the attack because no one died. Therefore, it isn't actually a lie.

Please learn definitions, and while you are at it, look up the definition of neurotic, it would actually apply more to you in this incidence.

Regards.

[tibilicus]

So your statement "No one died as far as I know, so it is all good" is not classified as condoning the attack?

Definition of condone is as follows according to the online dictionary: "To forgive, excuse or overlook (something); To allow, accept or permit (something); To forgive (marital infidelity or other marital offense)"

You did this with the reason "No one died", however, you still forgive/excuse/overlook the fact the person walked into the museum and let barrels blazing at security guards.

My "lie" was simply a parody version of your statement, and has the same meaning. The parody statement condones the attack because no one died. Therefore, it isn't actually a lie.

Please learn definitions, and while you are at it, look up the definition of neurotic, it would actually apply more to you in this incidence.

Regards.

Did I mention I forgave and thought it was acceptable that some one went into a museum and started shooting at people? NO.

And yes, I know what neurotic means and you would come under the term neurotic. Your getting all hysterical and throwing around accusations about something I didn't even say! "It's all good" as in the situation is all good and luckily wasn't as bad as it could of been. For example "my friends daughter got hit by a car today but AFAIK she was hit at a slow speed and therefore wasn't hurt so it's all good" Therefore because my friends daughter wasn't badly injured and the situation wasn't a major one, the slang term "all good" could be used.



No one else seems to of uncovered the fact that I condone and support white supremacy but hey, you managed to dig away and it looks like I've been trumped!

[Beskar]

However, you never actually said "the situation could have got worse, its all good as far as I know as in no one died, luckily". You can't automatically assume by using slang/"bad English" that everyone would know exactly what you are talking about.

If you said that, then we wouldn't even have this conversation.

Using your example of friends daughter, remove your slang definition from it in this statement. "My friends daughter got hit by a car, it is all good." sounds like you have no remorse about that fact she got hit.

[tibilicus]

However, you never actually said "the situation could have got worse, its all good as far as I know as in no one died, luckily". You can't automatically assume by using slang/"bad English" that everyone would know exactly what you are talking about.

If you said that, then we wouldn't even have this conversation.

Everyone did understand, minus you.

Done here, PM if you have an issue with me in future.

[Ser Clegane]

PM if you have an issue with me in future.

And I would highly appreciate if there would not be any reciprocal accusations of being "neurotic".

Thanks