Now I'm not defending or disagreeing here - but all you know is what the CIA let the public know about the first case. And in the second case the trooper is not accused of a crime.
It's a logical fallacy to assume because they are different nationalities that is the reason for the outcomes.
I'm not about to defend the KKK in anyway, but they (as an organization) haven't been a threat to anyone in decades. Quite a few reporters (including someone from NYT, IIRC), have infiltrated them; virtually every report coming out of the organization is that they're too incompetent to hold a bake sale.
Exactly. I wouldnt want to meet them in a dark alley, but aside from prison I think skinheads-white supremacists are now, pardon my generalizing, more of a trashy punchline than an organized threat to society.
the KKK continues to be more of a threat in America than Al Qaeda because:
A. There's way more of them here than Al Qaeda operatives
B. They have a much much longer history of successful bombings, lynchings, arson, death, mass graves, death. Did I mention the people they kill and terrorize? The decades of documentation of whole swaths of geography that were terrorized into silence and complicity with mass death, beatings, and sham trials that made mockery of justice?
Oh but wait. White americans and the federal government have nothing to fear from the KKK. Only people of color. Whereas Al Qaeda is particularly mad at white America. Is that the difference?
The KKK has a longer history of mass death than militant Islam? I suggest you check your facts and I don't know, maybe about 2,000 years of history.
And if you look at that recent history you'll see a lot more than 'white' people in the graves of its killers across the US, Spain, UK, Turkey, Bali, Iraq, Indonesia, Sudan, Somalia, etc etc.
But that's not even getting to the part where you branded an entire religion by the actions of a few. It would be safe to say that all KKK members are terrorists, but it wouldn't be safe to say that all Muslims are terrorists.
Nex, nope. Squares should be immedieately considered un-hip and the bartender should ignore them and instead serve the cute girl with the ironic t-shirt and chunky glasses standing behind them.
And what links Tours and Constantinople have to do with Militant Islam? Or are you linking Militant Islam with any time that Muslims have shown any expansionist tendancies? If you're going to spew bullshit like that about a topic that you seem to be willfully ignorant on, you might as well say that the KKK stared in the 5th century with Christian Exapnsionists.
You are changing facts and definitions to suit your needs.
Militant Islam has its genesis with Fatah in 1959.
The KKK has its genesis with the Confederacy surrendering in 1865.
Once again facts come to the rescue of the ignorant.
P.S. I've just looked through the posts and realized that I showed up right after A BISCUIT. I'd like to mention that I am not him. I'd also like to say that I don't think that this sort of "obnoxious spamming" to be all that irritating. The haters have some serious sensitivity issues.
"It would be safe to say that all KKK members are terrorists, but it wouldn't be safe to say that all Muslims are terrorists."
Graham, it's not safe to say that at all. "KKK members are all idiots" is a pretty easy to defend statement, "KKK members are all terrorists" is a whole different kettle of fish.
Terrorist is a charged word, obviously, but I don't think the typical member of the KKK (and typical members are what an organization are built out of) would be considered a "terrorist" by an average American, regardless of race. tpcanci put forth the premise that "the KKK continues to be more of a threat in America than Al Qaeda", and I don't think the facts bear this out. They're a hate group, sure, but are they a terrorist danger? Not really. We can find examples of extremist crime from nearly all corners of the idiological map, but these incidents doesn't make the parent organizations "terrorist".
NOT A CAT, I had surgery earlier this week and have been enjoying the benefits of prescription pain meds. That distracted me from extoling the virtues of Ice Cube Fridays.
I'm going by the definition of "terrorist" not the loaded term "terrorist"
1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
The KKK at this point might be ineffectual terrorists, but they're terrorists none-the-less.
On the other side of definition: there are surely many Klan members that don't "use or advocate terrorism", unless we water terrorism down to "scaring people".
"Militant Islam has its genesis with Fatah in 1959."
I guess it comes back to this whole "definitions" thing, but I would say that the Hashshashin definitely had some serious moments of "terrorism" in the name of Islam, nearly a millennium ago. I'm not really sure how that differs from "militant Islam".
Sorry, but the danger posed to the country from terrorists like Al Qaeda is way beyond anything the KKK could dream of. Yes they are a horrible, evil org but they are not likely to cause mass damage to our society like AQ has in mind. To equate them is to show ignorance of actual threats, or just a desire to be politically correct.
It's a logical fallacy to assume because they are different nationalities that is the reason for the outcomes.
A. There's way more of them here than Al Qaeda operatives
B. They have a much much longer history of successful bombings, lynchings, arson, death, mass graves, death. Did I mention the people they kill and terrorize? The decades of documentation of whole swaths of geography that were terrorized into silence and complicity with mass death, beatings, and sham trials that made mockery of justice?
Oh but wait. White americans and the federal government have nothing to fear from the KKK. Only people of color. Whereas Al Qaeda is particularly mad at white America. Is that the difference?
Discuss.
http://kdrv.com/page/92740
And if you look at that recent history you'll see a lot more than 'white' people in the graves of its killers across the US, Spain, UK, Turkey, Bali, Iraq, Indonesia, Sudan, Somalia, etc etc.
But that's not even getting to the part where you branded an entire religion by the actions of a few. It would be safe to say that all KKK members are terrorists, but it wouldn't be safe to say that all Muslims are terrorists.
Constantiople 1450s
You are changing facts and definitions to suit your needs.
Militant Islam has its genesis with Fatah in 1959.
The KKK has its genesis with the Confederacy surrendering in 1865.
Once again facts come to the rescue of the ignorant.
Graham, it's not safe to say that at all. "KKK members are all idiots" is a pretty easy to defend statement, "KKK members are all terrorists" is a whole different kettle of fish.
Terrorist is a charged word, obviously, but I don't think the typical member of the KKK (and typical members are what an organization are built out of) would be considered a "terrorist" by an average American, regardless of race. tpcanci put forth the premise that "the KKK continues to be more of a threat in America than Al Qaeda", and I don't think the facts bear this out. They're a hate group, sure, but are they a terrorist danger? Not really. We can find examples of extremist crime from nearly all corners of the idiological map, but these incidents doesn't make the parent organizations "terrorist".
I'm going by the definition of "terrorist" not the loaded term "terrorist"
1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
The KKK at this point might be ineffectual terrorists, but they're terrorists none-the-less.
"2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others."
That leads us pretty quickly down the path to Al Qaeda, da yoof, Mexicans, the disabled, and nearly every other group in the world being terrorists.
I guess it comes back to this whole "definitions" thing, but I would say that the Hashshashin definitely had some serious moments of "terrorism" in the name of Islam, nearly a millennium ago. I'm not really sure how that differs from "militant Islam".