Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Calling it a terror attack as opposed to a hate crime. [View all]deathrind
(1,786 posts)27. Agree 100% nt
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
98 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
ISIS "culture" condones hatred and violence against LGBT but but he wasn't religious.
JudyM
Jun 2016
#8
Yes, this is coming out now. First reports were the opposite, which is what my post was directed
JudyM
Jun 2016
#70
Reports that his lifestyle was not religious... "Chasing women," etc., that his family isn't
JudyM
Jun 2016
#22
Obvsly only based on what has been reported. Just how I'm putting it together. The loaded
JudyM
Jun 2016
#58
Because the religious are never hypocrites who do as they wish while judging others for doing the
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2016
#51
He's been on FBI watch list for being an ISIS sympathizer for several years.
PeaceNikki
Jun 2016
#32
That could as well be about hatred and violence. Reports are that he was not a practicing Muslim.
JudyM
Jun 2016
#40
If he pledged allegiance to ISIS, how can you say he's not particularly religious?
MadBadger
Jun 2016
#20
All the other data points/evidence they have on him. If you were going to go out and kill
JudyM
Jun 2016
#30
The definition is a planned attack to achieve ideological, religious, etc goals, not just
JudyM
Jun 2016
#52
Isn't that exactly what the gunman did? Planned attack. Check. Achieve ideological goal
Rex
Jun 2016
#53
It downplays the horror of homophobia. And is more convenient for conservatives and the MSM.
JudyM
Jun 2016
#59
Yes, the big discussion is about finding his terrorist roots, as opposed to his homophobic roots.
JudyM
Jun 2016
#74
Would the definition be important in determinig who gets to lead the investigatio?
annavictorious
Jun 2016
#54
It was a Muslim terror attack and for the group ISIS, what is confusing about that?
braddy
Jun 2016
#61
JudyM, calling it only a terror attack kinda erases the group of people that were terrorized
justiceischeap
Jun 2016
#64
Plus all the discussion in the press is about finding his terrorist roots. Nothing about the roots
JudyM
Jun 2016
#75
Yes, most people do not care about the LGBT community, even if they feel we should have rights,
JudyM
Jun 2016
#91
Yes, it doesn't fit and also amplification of the terrorist narrative. But he was foremost a bigot.
JudyM
Jun 2016
#72
As between Islamic terrorist and bigot. That was the context. He is certainly also a killer.
JudyM
Jun 2016
#87
IMO it's in fact a *critically important* distinction, for reasons expounded above by others as well
JudyM
Jun 2016
#92
Please read the rest of the thread for development of the idea, it's more layered than what's in
JudyM
Jun 2016
#89
President called it a terror attack. Good enough for me. I trust him to know
yeoman6987
Jun 2016
#96