Hacker News Reader

Comment by ucee054 | Hacker News Reader

You assert Breivik was a single crazy but you ignore the fact that his kahanist buddies in outfits like the JDL are well funded organized groups.

You also ignore that in terms of the domestic terror threat, according to the FBI organized jewish loons are a larger threat than yemeni moslem loons - and that jewish loons aren't being locked up indefinitely

http://forums.anandtech.com/archive/index.php/t-2135229.html

You also ignore that when the US was in a similar situation, during the McVeigh episode, the US did not respond towards the militiamen by locking them up without trial. They used normal law enforcement procedures. And McVeigh was not a lone wolf. That lot are organized and well funded

But if you didn't ignore these parallels, you'd be forced to see that there is an alternative called "the rule of law". And you wouldn't like that. You prefer the policy "lock up the towelheads and throw away the key".

And you call me a hatemonger.

View on HN

Just so I get your position right:

1. Al Qaeda can be described as 19 brown people -- not thousands of members (and hundreds of millions in finances) with repeated attempts at mass murder through terrorism.

2. If the Western world wasn't racist -- Breivik should have gotten as much attention as al Q, despite his whole gang (he, himself) being in jail.

3. This attention of Breivik is merited because: Two groups of crazies in USA, which did some terror a few decades ago, might have similar opinions as Breivik (according to you).

(One of those groups even have a different religion and the other group's members could hardly find Norway on a map.)

I'm sorry, my position is still that you're either a really pathetic troll or some sick hatemonger. But I did stop laughing, your existence is too depressing.

No you idiot. I was replying to rmc when he said Breivik was a lone nut job. I gave another example of McVeigh, who was definitely not a lone nut job, and pointed out that the same rule applies. And so the McVeigh example invalidates rmc's point by itself. Are you really that stupid that you keep missing the point?

You suggested that others should do as Norway did, re Breivik.

So, as usual, it was pointed out to you that Norway was a very different situation since Breivik was in jail, there is no big organisation that promise more terror.

Then you went troll and described 9/11 as "19 brown people" and started talking about unrelated crazies on another continent of Breivik -- decades earlier.

Edit: That you lie about what you wrote yourself means that you're an unusually sad troll and not a mental case. That makes me happy, believe it or not. Please get a life instead. If you go to a gym/psychologist it should be ok in the end.

And no, Al Qaeda is not some James-Bond baddy organization with hundreds of millions in finances, you pulled that out of your ass.

Al Qaeda is a common name used by lots of different little local terrorist groups to make themselves seem menacing. eg if the Al Shabab boys in Somalia want to make themselves seem badass, they call themselves "Al Qaeda in Somalia"

But facts don't matter to you because you are a complete fraud.

So we'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and pretend that you are talking sense. We'll pretend that you were referring to Osama Bin Laden's organization in 2001. His actual organization, not the one in your fever dreams.

That organization had hardly any people outside of Afghanistan. And didn't use much money. Their entire budget for the attack was 19 air tickets and some box cutters.

The facts about the attack are also that it was small. Large for a terrorist attack, but small in the grand scale of things. 2 or 3 buildings knocked down, and about 3000 people killed.

We'll throw in the US embassy bombings and the attack on the USS Cole as well.

And you are saying this grand total justifies extraordinary rendition, suspension of habeas corpus and the Geneva conventions, the Patriot act etc etc etc. while the Korean war didn't?

Mao's China and Kim Il Sung's Korea put together, with their legions of commandos (and now their nukes) were a threat.

Are you trying to say a few thousand suicide bombers are a bigger threat? Such a bigger threat that we have to give up civil liberties for them that we did NOT have to give up when at war with China?

Are you really that stupid?

I skimmed enough to see that you didn't argue against my description of your position.

So I take it the description was accurate.

I note that you lie about what I wrote, which was: All (functioning) democracies tend to ignore human rights and laws when its citizens are threatened with terrorism.

I removed the rest and references. You phantasize something without me having to help anyway...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com