The Terrorists Have Won

[tony4moroney]

The TSA protect us from terrorist babies now

The family of an infant from American Samoa who died Friday morning at Honolulu Airport after his mother and a nurse were detained by immigration officials in a locked room plans to file a wrongful death lawsuit.

The Honolulu Medical Examiner's office today identified the infant as 14-day-old Michael Futi of Tafuna, American Samoa's largest village located on the east coast of Tutuila Island. Autopsy findings for cause and manner have been deferred.

Attorney Rick Fried of Cronin, Fried, Sekiya, Kekina & Fairbanks is calling a 1 p.m. news conference tomorrow to announce the lawsuit. Fried today would only say the child, who had come to Hawai'i for heart surgery, died after being detained by airport immigration following a flight from American Samoa.

According to police, the child became unresponsive at 5:50 a.m. Emergency Medical Service personnel dispatched to the airport U.S. Customs checkpoint at 6:15 a.m. took the child to a hospital emergency room where efforts to revive Futi were unsuccessful.

It is unknown how long immigration officials detained the mother, nurse and child in the room and the reason they were held up.

LINK

[Memorize]

Have fun

[public-enemy1]

At 2/13/08 12:06 AM, Memorize wrote: Have fun

In Pakistan...so what....

[SadisticMonkey]

At 2/13/08 12:06 AM, Memorize wrote: Have fun

Praise Jesus! The war on terrorism is over! Extremist Muslims have gone and are no longer blowing the shit out of each other and everyone else, treating women like shit, scaring governments into making laws taking away freedoms of people and going ape-shit over stupid cartoons and teddy bears!
Phew, I thought it would never end, but according to that link, I was obviously wrong.

[Memorize]

At 2/13/08 12:30 AM, public-enemy1 wrote:

In Pakistan...so what....

I have proof of an area, you don't.

Now go throw yourself in a ditch.

[public-enemy1]

At 2/13/08 04:14 AM, Memorize wrote: I have proof of an area, you don't.

...congratulation?

[JudgeDredd]

At 2/12/08 11:51 PM, tony4moroney wrote: The TSA protect us from terrorist babies now

And before anyone (Memorize) says it, this has NOTHING to do with carrying infant milk bottles on planes, or islamic women feigning pregnancy for oversize strap-on bombs.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/13/08 07:34 AM, JudgeDredd wrote:

At 2/12/08 11:51 PM, tony4moroney wrote: The TSA protect us from terrorist babies now

And before anyone (Memorize) says it, this has NOTHING to do with carrying infant milk bottles on planes, or islamic women feigning pregnancy for oversize strap-on bombs.

Not this time around.

[Slizor]

Err......what does this topic have to do with terrorists? I was under the impression that terrorists would "win" when they achieve their goals, be that an independent state or the removal of Western forces from Islamic lands....not the death of a child in an airport.

[AapoJoki]

At 2/13/08 12:06 AM, Memorize wrote: Have fun

Even if every single Muslim in the world denounced Osama Bin Laden, it would not stop the hatred against America and the west. Terrorism is not centered around him, it's centered around religious extremism.

[JudgeDredd]

At 2/13/08 07:51 AM, Slizor wrote: Err......what does this topic have to do with terrorists? I was under the impression that terrorists would "win" when they achieve their goals, be that an independent state or the removal of Western forces from Islamic lands....not the death of a child in an airport.

I think you know the answer.. but i'll say it anyway..

Those two goals cannot be achieved by either peace or war of insurgants (lose-lose) against western superior technology. The weapon of terror is about the fear of the irrational mind.. when one's perspective is so wrought with fear that even a mother with her ill baby are considered a credible threat, because the potential for suicide is everpresent. This irrational logic becomes like a cancerous growth as it feeds on other rational minds, spreading fear and irrational behaviour ever wider..

The "freedoms they hate" (in this scenario) are the freedoms you are likely to lose before you say "enough!", and something in your mind snaps. In war they call it 'shell shock', and increasing levels of suicide of American troops are one such evidence of it's affect on the outwardly rational mind. In civil life we call it rage ..like road rage. When patience utterly collapses. A falling-down of the human spirit. Not too different when facing the two unachieveable goals you stated.

.

[RommelTJ]

All I have to say is: Treat others as you would like them to treat you.

Would you like to have your baby detained at the airport?

[poxpower]

At 2/13/08 12:15 PM, RommelTJ wrote: All I have to say is: Treat others as you would like them to treat you.

unless they don't treat you as you would like them to treat you.

[The-Hydra-of-Spore]

At 2/13/08 02:37 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 2/13/08 12:15 PM, RommelTJ wrote: All I have to say is: Treat others as you would like them to treat you.

unless they don't treat you as you would like them to treat you.

What if they treat you better than they treat themselves?

I just wanted to join in...

[SadisticMonkey]

At 2/13/08 12:15 PM, RommelTJ wrote: All I have to say is: Treat others as you would like them to treat you.

Yeah, but random women don't particularly like it when I walk up to them and stick my hands down their pants.

[Extremewookie]

That's a terrible, sad story.

[Slizor]

Err......what does this topic have to do with terrorists? I was under the impression that terrorists would "win" when they achieve their goals, be that an independent state or the removal of Western forces from Islamic lands....not the death of a child in an airport.

I think you know the answer.. but i'll say it anyway..

Those two goals cannot be achieved by either peace or war of insurgants (lose-lose) against western superior technology. The weapon of terror is about the fear of the irrational mind.. when one's perspective is so wrought with fear that even a mother with her ill baby are considered a credible threat, because the potential for suicide is everpresent. This irrational logic becomes like a cancerous growth as it feeds on other rational minds, spreading fear and irrational behaviour ever wider..

The "freedoms they hate" (in this scenario) are the freedoms you are likely to lose before you say "enough!", and something in your mind snaps. In war they call it 'shell shock', and increasing levels of suicide of American troops are one such evidence of it's affect on the outwardly rational mind. In civil life we call it rage ..like road rage. When patience utterly collapses. A falling-down of the human spirit. Not too different when facing the two unachieveable goals you stated.

Are you high and watching heroes? Seriously, that was such a Mohinder rant about random things that made very little sense. I think your argument is that the terrorists have won because people are "terrorised" to the point where shit like that can happen. However, terror is only a means to an end for terrorists, not an end in itself. Terrorists don't have the ultimate aim of terrorising people, they have (mostly) tangible political goals that they feel are not represented/possible in mainstream politics. For the terrorists to consider that they have won they would have achieved these goals.

[MortifiedPenguins]

Agreed.

Terrorists controlling a Nation-State, Page Two of the New York Times.

But by DEAR GOD HIMSELF, A CHILD HAS DIED. OH lordy lord.

We have lost, the terrorists have won, life is pointless.

Thank you for opening my eyes.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 2/13/08 10:37 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

But by DEAR GOD HIMSELF, A CHILD HAS DIED. OH lordy lord.

We have lost, the terrorists have won, life is pointless.

Americans have gotten so scared (TERRORIZED) of Terrorism that we would allow a young, innocent boy to DIE rather then allow in potential terrorists.

Yes, that is certainly the terrorists winning.

In fact, go watch the Twilight Zone episode The Monsters Are Do On Maple Street. It's a good insight of just how Terrorism (well... ok, they are martians in the episode, but still...) "wins".

[Imperator]

At 2/13/08 10:37 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: Agreed.

Terrorists controlling a Nation-State, Page Two of the New York Times.

But by DEAR GOD HIMSELF, A CHILD HAS DIED. OH lordy lord.

We have lost, the terrorists have won, life is pointless.

Thank you for opening my eyes.

Americans are an amazing breed sometimes......

I like the news shows. Sometimes it's like:

"The XYZ group have killed 27,000 and displaced 13 million"
"Up next, are we eating too much garlic as a people? Find out after these messages!"

Sometimes it's just amazing what people group together and what importance they place over others.....

"3 nuclear weapons were stolen"
"Up next, Kittens: Why are they just so darn fluffy wuffy?"

[SolInvictus]

At 2/13/08 10:56 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: Yes, that is certainly the terrorists winning.

to win, one has to achieve a goal. terror is not the goal of the terrorists, it is their tool.

[LordJaric]

At 2/13/08 11:00 PM, Imperator wrote: Sometimes it's just amazing what people group together and what importance they place over others.....

Yes, the media sucks.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 2/13/08 11:18 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

to win, one has to achieve a goal. terror is not the goal of the terrorists, it is their tool.

I would say damning an enemy is a sub-goal of defeating/killing him.

Also, on the track of "Twilight Zone Episodes relevant to terrorism"... "The Fear"

[Memorize]

At 2/13/08 07:52 AM, AapoJoki wrote:

At 2/13/08 12:06 AM, Memorize wrote: Have fun

Even if every single Muslim in the world denounced Osama Bin Laden, it would not stop the hatred against America and the west. Terrorism is not centered around him, it's centered around religious extremism.

Please...

If the polls indicated a more favorable outcome and approval of Osama, what would you or the world be saying? Why, the topic starter here for example would plaster it all over this topic in order to justify his topic title.

But since that's not happening and we're having a much more positive reaction from the people of Pakistan to rid themselves of the terrorist group, you come up with excuses in order to downplay any success.

Ex. Iraq and Patraeus.

[cellardoor6]

How you manage to tie this into to a much larger political issue is hilarious.

How do you know the baby died due to what TSA officials did?

[SolInvictus]

At 2/13/08 11:48 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: I would say damning an enemy is a sub-goal of defeating/killing him.

well to be fair they aren't trying to kill all Westerners, or destroy America for that matter (though i'm fairly certain they wouldn't mind), but rather establish a united Muslim state and expel the infidels armies from Muslim land (troops stationed in allied countries, not just Iraq and Afghanistan).

they probably have a few other things on their to-do list.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 2/14/08 12:37 AM, SolInvictus wrote:

but rather establish a united Muslim state and expel the infidels armies from Muslim land (troops stationed in allied countries, not just Iraq and Afghanistan).

It's alot easier to accomplish that with weakened enemies.

[RommelTJ]

At 2/13/08 10:44 AM, JudgeDredd wrote: perspective is so wrought with fear that even a mother with her ill baby are considered a credible threat, because the potential for suicide is everpresent.

The American people only believe what their media tells them, and as far as Dick Cheney is concerned, that is A-Ok.

[JudgeDredd]

At 2/13/08 08:36 PM, Slizor wrote: Terrorists don't have the ultimate aim of terrorising people,

..yet, as their name suggests, their goal is to spread terror.

..they have (mostly) tangible political goals that they feel are not represented/possible in mainstream politics.

Look, perhaps in the 70's and 80's that was true of the odd hijacking, but today's terrorists aren't exactly hanging around for a political anything. If a political outcome was their purpose, it would only be to draw America into a potentially endless unwinnable conflict, which is exactly what Bush has (upto this point) delivered them.

Except.. unless you are meaning the Iraqi insurgants, which we're often told, pretty much include former members of Saddam's Baathist Party, whom as we speak, are being re-admitted back into the Iraqi parliment. Yeah, their goal has always been political! As a matter of fact, America could have just posted that US $30 million on Saddam's head from the start, and with a bit of luck and timing, have bypassed the whole messy war entirely.

.

[Mr-Miyamoto]

< First page