• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

American Who Recently Visited Pakistan Eyed in Times Square Bomb Plot

SgtRock

SgtRock

Cancel Cancel Culture and Woke Supremacy
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
7,025
Reaction score
2,896
Location
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Source: Fox News (fair and balanced)
Date: May 3, 2010

The person is a naturalized American citizen who was in Pakistan for several months and returned to the United States recently, investigative sources told Fox News.

The latest developments seem to support investigators' suspicions that there was a foreign connection behind the failed car bomb attempt in New York City, senior Obama administration officials told Fox News, shedding light on the growing body of evidence.

Sources say that evidence includes international phone calls made by the person of interest, who has not been identified publicly. The Associated Press identified the person as a man of Pakistani descent, citing unnamed law enforcement sources.
Click to expand...

FOXNews.com - American Who Recently Visited Pakistan Eyed in Times Square Bomb Plot
 
Areopagitican said:
Just when you thought FoxNews would stop crowing about Islamo-Fascism...
Click to expand...

AP, ABC, and even MSNBC are reporting this as well. Even the white house pres secretary Robert Gibbs even used the T word today. He had better be carefull. I thought the Obama administration did not use such language.

Press Briefing 5/3/2010

Q How would you characterize what happened in Times Square? Was that an act of terrorism?

MR. GIBBS: I think anybody that has the type of material that they had in a car in Times Square, I would say that that was intended to terrorize, absolutely. And I would say that whoever did that would be categorized as a terrorist, yes. We don’t know who’s responsible and that’s what we’re looking at now.

Its a good thing he didn't use the words Islamic terrorist. We couldn't have that, might offend muslims.
 
Last edited:
AP source: Man tied to Pakistan sought in NYC bomb
By TOM HAYS and COLLEEN LONG, Associated Press Writers Tom Hays And Colleen Long, Associated Press Writers 1 hr 14 mins ago

NEW YORK – The search to find out who planted a car bomb that fizzled out in crowded Times Square took an international turn Monday as law enforcement officials said they were seeking a potential suspect who had recently traveled to Pakistan and had used cash to buy the SUV from a Connecticut man.

Authorities identified the buyer of the SUV used in the botched bombing after interviewing the registered owner of the vehicle. One of the officials told The Associated Press that the potential suspect is a man of Pakistani descent who recently traveled to Pakistan.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is at a sensitive stage.
Click to expand...

Print Story: AP source: Man tied to Pakistan sought in NYC bomb - Yahoo! News
 
Official: Suspect in custody in NY car bomb attack - Yahoo! News


A suspect in last weekend's failed car bomb attack on Times Square was taken into custody late Monday while trying to leave the country, a law enforcement official said.

The suspect, a Pakistani, was identified at midnight Monday at John F. Kennedy International Airport and was stopped, said the official, who spoke to The Associated Press early Tuesday on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

The suspect was identified as Faisal Shahzad, but his hometown wasn't disclosed. He was being held in New York.
Click to expand...
 
Ah finally, now you guys can take out your "death to Islam" signs.
 
Cilogy said:
Ah finally, now you guys can take out your "death to Islam" signs.
Click to expand...

I hope they didn't racial profile.

How many terror attacks is that on our homeland since Obi has taken the reigns?

.
 
Last edited:
SgtRock said:
Its a good thing he didn't use the words Islamic terrorist. We couldn't have that, might offend muslims.
Click to expand...

At this point, we don't know his motives, so it would be premature to call him an Islamic terrorist. His religion may not be his motive. Law enforcement isn't going to refer to him as an Islamic terrorist until it is clear that his religion played a role in his actions. Hence, neither is the mainstream media.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
At this point, we don't know his motives, so it would be premature to call him an Islamic terrorist. His religion may not be his motive. Law enforcement isn't going to refer to him as an Islamic terrorist until it is clear that his religion played a role in his actions. Hence, neither is the mainstream media.
Click to expand...

You're right! He could be one of those Pakistani Baptist terrorists! :rofl
 
Catz Part Deux said:
At this point, we don't know his motives, so it would be premature to call him an Islamic terrorist. His religion may not be his motive. Law enforcement isn't going to refer to him as an Islamic terrorist until it is clear that his religion played a role in his actions. Hence, neither is the mainstream media.
Click to expand...

Ya sure thing. I swear the lengths some people are willing to go to defend lunatic theists never ceases to amaze me.
 
Your right, or he could be a pakistani jew. Why are people affraid to call things what they are? must we walk on egg shells even here on a internet forum.

Faisal Shahzad is an ISLAMIC TERRORIST. There I said it. I must be some kind of islamophobe:roll:
 
Catz Part Deux said:
At this point, we don't know his motives, so it would be premature to call him an Islamic terrorist. His religion may not be his motive. Law enforcement isn't going to refer to him as an Islamic terrorist until it is clear that his religion played a role in his actions. Hence, neither is the mainstream media.
Click to expand...

Law enforcement in this administration are NEVER going to call him an Islamic terrorist.

They'll probably call him a "misunderstood and oppressed person with middle eastern roots".
 
Gill said:
Law enforcement in this administration are NEVER going to call him an Islamic terrorist.

They'll probably call him a "misunderstood and oppressed person with middle eastern roots".
Click to expand...

I could understand that if they were not fighting for Allah's cause. They themselfs tell us in the communications that they are fighting a holy war or jihad against us. So call them what they are, Islamic Jihadist
 
zimmer said:
I hope they didn't racial profile.

How many terror attacks is that on our homeland since Obi has taken the reigns?.
Click to expand...

Let's be honest for change ok! If we are to play the "blame it on the POTUS in charge at the time of the incident " game it would take a mega number of terrorist incidents to surpass 9 11 when Bush II was at " the reigns".
 
SgtRock said:
Your right, or he could be a pakistani jew. Why are people affraid to call things what they are? must we walk on egg shells even here on a internet forum.
Click to expand...

A terrorist is a terrorist. Does it really matter what their particular brand of motivational ideology is? I don't recall those whackjobs who bombed abortion clinics and barged into churches to shoot parishioners being labelled as 'Christian terrorists' by any news organization I read. However, if we're gonna start compartmentalizing terrorists by their religion, might as well be fair about it, eh? So call 'em Islamic terrorists if they're claiming to act in the name of Islam. Just make sure you call 'em Christian terrorists when they claim to act in the name of Christianity.
 
Singularity said:
A terrorist is a terrorist. Does it really matter what their particular brand of motivational ideology is? I don't recall those whackjobs who bombed abortion clinics and barged into churches to shoot parishioners being labelled as 'Christian terrorists' by any news organization I read. However, if we're gonna start compartmentalizing terrorists by their religion, might as well be fair about it, eh? So call 'em Islamic terrorists if they're claiming to act in the name of Islam. Just make sure you call 'em Christian terrorists when they claim to act in the name of Christianity.
Click to expand...

Yes it matters because islamic terrorist have declared war on the United States. They are our enemy whom we are at war with. We must identify them as the enemy or we can never win the war. Islamic jihadist declared holy war against the United States. How can we expect to defeat them if we refuse to identify them as who THEY claim to be and who THEY are. Simple enough for you. Years of military service and a propensity for plain speak have made it easy for me. I hope you find this post useful.
 
Gill said:
Law enforcement in this administration are NEVER going to call him an Islamic terrorist.

They'll probably call him a "misunderstood and oppressed person with middle eastern roots".
Click to expand...

What do we gain from a fighting the terrorist perspective my calling any Abdulh who commits a terrorists act against us an "Islamic terrorist" ? Does it help us prevent those attacks ? Does it help us find those people ? Does it make them go away a die ?

NO NO NON and HELL NO !! All that it does is give the people who need to label somehing a an emotional word or phrase that they can chant, mumble, bark out and cover up their impotence in being able to personally strike back.

Our parents and Grandparents had the DIRTY JAPS and those NAT ZEES to blame.

Se we have our Islamo fascio terro Muslimo illegal Hispano Blacko pirates terrorists to balme !!
 
texmaster said:
You're right! He could be one of those Pakistani Baptist terrorists! :rofl
Click to expand...
And until we get a better understanding of his racial views, we shouldn't rule out the white supremicist thing, either.
 
How could he possibly be Pakistani? Pakistan is an ally in the War on Terror(tm).
 
SgtRock said:
Yes it matters because islamic terrorist have declared war on the United States. They are our enemy whom we are at war with. We must identify them as the enemy or we can never win the war. Islamic jihadist declared holy war against the United States. How can we expect to defeat them if we refuse to identify them as who THEY claim to be and who THEY are. Simple enough for you. Years of military service and a propensity for plain speak have made it easy for me. I hope you find this post useful.
Click to expand...

So does that make Eric Rudolph a Christian terrorist, or an anti-abortion terrorist?

God. The yuck-yuck crowd is in rare stupid form today.
 
Taylor said:
And until we get a better understanding of his racial views, we shouldn't rule out the white supremicist thing, either.
Click to expand...

Thats good point. The KKK is huge in Pakistan :D
 
F107HyperSabr said:
What do we gain from a fighting the terrorist perspective my calling any Abdulh who commits a terrorists act against us an "Islamic terrorist" ? Does it help us prevent those attacks ? Does it help us find those people ? Does it make them go away a die ?

NO NO NON and HELL NO !! All that it does is give the people who need to label somehing a an emotional word or phrase that they can chant, mumble, bark out and cover up their impotence in being able to personally strike back.

Our parents and Grandparents had the DIRTY JAPS and those NAT ZEES to blame.

Se we have our Islamo fascio terro Muslimo illegal Hispano Blacko pirates terrorists to balme !!
Click to expand...

Says the person who jumps at every opportunity to call law-abiding protesters "teabaggers". :roll:
 
SgtRock said:
Your right, or he could be a pakistani jew. Why are people affraid to call things what they are? must we walk on egg shells even here on a internet forum.

Faisal Shahzad is an ISLAMIC TERRORIST. There I said it. I must be some kind of islamophobe:roll:
Click to expand...

Gill said:
Law enforcement in this administration are NEVER going to call him an Islamic terrorist.

They'll probably call him a "misunderstood and oppressed person with middle eastern roots".
Click to expand...

SgtRock said:
I could understand that if they were not fighting for Allah's cause. They themselfs tell us in the communications that they are fighting a holy war or jihad against us. So call them what they are, Islamic Jihadist
Click to expand...

SgtRock said:
Yes it matters because islamic terrorist have declared war on the United States. They are our enemy whom we are at war with. We must identify them as the enemy or we can never win the war. Islamic jihadist declared holy war against the United States. How can we expect to defeat them if we refuse to identify them as who THEY claim to be and who THEY are. Simple enough for you. Years of military service and a propensity for plain speak have made it easy for me. I hope you find this post useful.
Click to expand...

Taylor said:
And until we get a better understanding of his racial views, we shouldn't rule out the white supremicist thing, either.
Click to expand...

It's completely irresponsible for law enforcement sources to speak to the motivation of the terrorist until they've had an oppportunity to interview/interrogate him. This is not a matter of being afraid to label someone what he is, but a matter of professional standards dictating how information is shared with the media.

This guy could be many things. He could be mentally ill. He could be acting politically in regards to the disputed territory between India and Pakistan. He could be religiously motivated. At this point, you're operating off of his last name and country of origin to make statements that could have zero basis in fact. Unlike you guys, law enforcement officers and the media have a professional obligation to handle information properly.

Don't let their job requirements get in the way of your preconceived notions about how we're dhimmis cowering to the Islamic menace, though.

Carry on with the ridiculousness, you have it well-covered.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
It's completely irresponsible for law enforcement sources to speak to the motivation of the terrorist until they've had an oppportunity to interview/interrogate him. This is not a matter of being afraid to label someone what he is, but a matter of professional standards dictating how information is shared with the media.

Don't let it get in the way of your preconceived notions about how we're dhimmis cowering to the Islamic menace, though.

Carry on with the ridiculousness, you have it well-covered.
Click to expand...

You're right Cat. Lets continue to ignore the obvious just like you did with that Islamic terrorist who murdered those soldiers in Texas. :roll:
 
texmaster said:
You're right Cat. Lets continue to ignore the obvious just like you did with that Islamic terrorist who murdered those soldiers in Texas. :roll:
Click to expand...

Basis for this claim? Feel free to link to evidence that I ignored the obvious in the Ft. Hood shooting.

We had several incidents when I was working for a police agency that were potentially terrorist situations. We had (potentially multiple) gunmen involved in a shooting incident in a television station in our area. We had a gunman (but at the time, we weren't sure how many people were involved) walk into a geneology library and shoot several people. We had several animal rights terroristic bombings in our community along with acts terrorism committed by a polygamist sect.

You never really know until you've had the suspect in hand for a few hours what their exact motivations were.

Law enforcement is never going to classify motives for a crime like these without having some time with the suspect(s). And, that's how it should be.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom