General Discussion

backscatter712

(26,357 posts)

7. The whole point of using stochastic terrorism techniques is to make it hard to prove.

Mon Aug 6, 2012, 01:57 PM

Aug 2012

Bachmann, Beck and O'Reilly want to keep their own hands clean - they're far too cowardly to put their own asses on the line and risk a murder charge by being directly involved.

So Bachmann screeches about Muslim conspiracies to take over the government, Beck howls about Obama being a socialist, and O'Reilly says "Tiller the Baby Killer" over and over and over again.

Once the Sikhs (actually "collateral damage" because the killer Wade Page was not just a murderer, but a dumbass who mistook Sikhs for Muslims), Gabby Giffords and George Tiller get shot, then they all get to tsk-tsk, bemoan the violence and say "Nobody could have predicted it!" when their targets fall victim to psycho killers. And they move on to their next targets.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can we call it stochastic terrorism now? [View all] backscatter712 Aug 2012 OP

Can you see the red queen? slackmaster Aug 2012 #1

Is the Pope Catholic? n/t backscatter712 Aug 2012 #2

I think they do, whenever they see someone not white and not serving them. tblue Aug 2012 #26

Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life SidDithers Aug 2012 #39

Certainly seems to fit. And not JUST the attack on the Sikh temple, either. calimary Aug 2012 #3

Way beyond that. Basically, the NRA issued a General Call for Preemptive Action.... Junkdrawer Aug 2012 #4

they are some paranoid mf'ers spanone Aug 2012 #8

Only to an extent krispos42 Aug 2012 #65

And this NRA release is itself stochastic terrorism. n/t backscatter712 Aug 2012 #15

The NRA are as much paranoid tin foil hat conspiracy theorists... Initech Aug 2012 #25

+1 uponit7771 Aug 2012 #31

So increasing gun violence is just part of a fiendish plan to take our guns away? Patiod Aug 2012 #33

Yup, you do nadinbrzezinski Aug 2012 #52

My gun-loving brother-in-law was saying that. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #55

How about this Wayne.... Junkdrawer Aug 2012 #57

I think that's also the NRA trying to Dash87 Aug 2012 #62

The local stochastic terrorists are named Mark Belling and Charlie Sykes. Scuba Aug 2012 #5

No kctim Aug 2012 #6

The whole point of using stochastic terrorism techniques is to make it hard to prove. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #7

It is ridiculous kctim Aug 2012 #21

It may or may not be intentional. lapislzi Aug 2012 #28

That's pretty convienent then kctim Aug 2012 #35

You are obviously not paying attention. nt docgee Aug 2012 #37

Disagree. lapislzi Aug 2012 #46

So what happens if someone listening to the stochastic terrorism debate Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2012 #59

I am not missing the point at all kctim Aug 2012 #61

"Once is a tragedy, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action". MissMarple Aug 2012 #50

Nice try, strawman ozsea1 Aug 2012 #36

how have these crimes infringed on their rights? barbtries Aug 2012 #42

You don't know how false flags work? kctim Aug 2012 #63

Glad to see you've got the skinhead/neonazi camp's back. kestrel91316 Aug 2012 #44

You're wrong lapislzi Aug 2012 #10

One more point - Stochastic Terrorism doesn't even have to be conscious. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #12

A Conspiracy so vast and pervasive that even its adherents don't know they're part of it slackmaster Aug 2012 #16

+1 uponit7771 Aug 2012 #30

So what do you suggest? Missycim Aug 2012 #34

Seriously? lapislzi Aug 2012 #48

Why would you be at pains to deny that stochastic terrorism applies in this instance?... truth2power Aug 2012 #17

As defined here, yes kctim Aug 2012 #38

Totally. Different. Animal. lapislzi Aug 2012 #49

Not any different at all kctim Aug 2012 #58

It's a non-falsifiable theory that seems to change as it needs to. Brickbat Aug 2012 #18

Then why aren't right-wing establishments getting shot up, people murdered? Ikonoklast Aug 2012 #19

If left-wing talk show hosts incited such incidents, they'd be summarily executed meow2u3 Aug 2012 #40

You got that right. Ikonoklast Aug 2012 #45

Which is little different from the right-wing's usual rhetoric. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #54

I love Alex Jones ,we're just not orpupilofnature57 Aug 2012 #53

does the Ursidae defecate in the sylvan glade? KG Aug 2012 #9

I would reply in the affirmative. lapislzi Aug 2012 #11

After Aurora, yes, we can nadinbrzezinski Aug 2012 #13

Yes, and it's just getting started. BeHereNow Aug 2012 #14

Time to put MORE stickers on our cars. Nostradammit Aug 2012 #24

no way barbtries Aug 2012 #43

Yes, when a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee sees 'terrorists' sinkingfeeling Aug 2012 #20

There's a reason why it's called STOCHASTIC terrorism - it's random. backscatter712 Aug 2012 #22

Yes! malaise Aug 2012 #23

Shake the crazy tree frequently enough, and a NUT will fall out. JoePhilly Aug 2012 #27

Looking at the facts on its face? ***YES*** uponit7771 Aug 2012 #29

The speech from the right has become 'ELIMINATIONIST' LongTomH Aug 2012 #32

Looks like plain ol' hate to me...nt SidDithers Aug 2012 #41

Every time I read a Michelle Malkin piece I see it inciting the crazies. MissMarple Aug 2012 #47

That's what it is....so, Yes. (n/t) Iggo Aug 2012 #51

No not really RZM Aug 2012 #56

the idea that conservative pundits want to encourage people to shoot up temples is absurd arely staircase Aug 2012 #64

I'm not sure there's much overlap because the skinheads are so small in number RZM Aug 2012 #66

but who they make theor pitch too, which is the overlap im talking about arely staircase Aug 2012 #67

or a word people know nt arely staircase Aug 2012 #60