|
Muslim man in Dallas kills daughters; for acting like Americans
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 4 2008, 11:56 AM (2,529 Views)
|
|
Sgt. Jaggs
|
Jan 5 2008, 10:42 PM
Post #16
|
How about a Voyager Movie
- Posts:
- 4,792
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #90
- Joined:
- December 28, 2003
|
Don't post it Jag..don't just don't...... (biting lip emoticon here)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
| |
|
somerled
|
Jan 5 2008, 10:47 PM
Post #17
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 6 2008, 07:55 AM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Or they were killed by fanatical christians or white suprematists in order to motivate ethnic hatred for political reasons ?
Or maybe by Mossad in revenge for something that happened in Israel maybe ? ... further checking (google and it also says so in the story) ... he's an Egyptian , so maybe this one can be rejected.
Or maybe this is part of some blood feud (revenge killings) ?
Maybe he has been caught and is being held incognito or has been rendited elsewhere ? (to Egypt ?)
Or maybe they were just killed for something more mundane : a robbery or car jacking gone wrong ?
Or maybe he refused to do help with or engage in some terrorist attack and his daughters were killed by al Quaeda in revenge or to pressure him (by threatening the rest of his family) ? He maybe actually be a hero who sacrificed his daughters to save thousands or millions of people in the USA .
Lots of other possible reasons .
So how goes the man hunt ?
|
|
|
| |
|
captain_proton_au
|
Jan 6 2008, 01:46 AM
Post #18
|
A Robot in Disguise
- Posts:
- 26,700
- Group:
- Help Desk
- Member
- #58
- Joined:
- September 15, 2003
|
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 5 2008, 03:55 PM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Its implicitly implied in the article that police have ruled out the father was a victim at the scene cos they now view him as a fugitive.
If it had been a robbery gone wrong or third party influence, there would have been evidence of a struggle at the scene, or some of the fathers blood. Police would then be searching for the guy or asking for help for info from the public, it wouldnt be called a manhunt.
This doesnt rule out all scenarios except that this is a case of 'honour' killings, but it does narrow things down considerably.
Who exactly in this thread is presuming guilt anyway?
Hearing the story, stereotyping, thinking to ones self that its probably a case of 'honour' killings, and if so let the father burn in hell; is presuming the likeliness of guilt. Presuming guilt suggests an initial stance that cant be swayed given further evidence
|
|
|
| |
|
somerled
|
Jan 6 2008, 02:25 AM
Post #19
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 6 2008, 04:46 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 5 2008, 03:55 PM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Its implicitly implied in the article that police have ruled out the father was a victim at the scene cos they now view him as a fugitive. If it had been a robbery gone wrong or third party influence, there would have been evidence of a struggle at the scene, or some of the fathers blood. Police would then be searching for the guy or asking for help for info from the public, it wouldnt be called a manhunt. This doesnt rule out all scenarios except that this is a case of 'honour' killings, but it does narrow things down considerably. Who exactly in this thread is presuming guilt anyway? Hearing the story, stereotyping, thinking to ones self that its probably a case of 'honour' killings, and if so let the father burn in hell; is presuming the likeliness of guilt. Presuming guilt suggests an initial stance that cant be swayed given further evidence
Someone points a gun at you at close quarters , like in a car , are you going to struggle with them ? I don't think so , you do what ever they tell you to do in the hope they wont pull the trigger.
|
|
|
| |
|
ImpulseEngine
|
Jan 6 2008, 10:40 AM
Post #20
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 9,851
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #7
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 6 2008, 01:46 AM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 5 2008, 03:55 PM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Its implicitly implied in the article that police have ruled out the father was a victim at the scene cos they now view him as a fugitive. If it had been a robbery gone wrong or third party influence, there would have been evidence of a struggle at the scene, or some of the fathers blood. Police would then be searching for the guy or asking for help for info from the public, it wouldnt be called a manhunt. This doesnt rule out all scenarios except that this is a case of 'honour' killings, but it does narrow things down considerably. Who exactly in this thread is presuming guilt anyway? Hearing the story, stereotyping, thinking to ones self that its probably a case of 'honour' killings, and if so let the father burn in hell; is presuming the likeliness of guilt. Presuming guilt suggests an initial stance that cant be swayed given further evidence
You're mincing words. Presuming the likeliness of guilt is no better.
|
|
|
| |
|
8247
|
Jan 6 2008, 12:17 PM
Post #21
|
Apparently we look like this now
- Posts:
- 16,246
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #75
- Joined:
- October 14, 2003
|
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 6 2008, 10:40 AM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 6 2008, 01:46 AM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 5 2008, 03:55 PM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Its implicitly implied in the article that police have ruled out the father was a victim at the scene cos they now view him as a fugitive. If it had been a robbery gone wrong or third party influence, there would have been evidence of a struggle at the scene, or some of the fathers blood. Police would then be searching for the guy or asking for help for info from the public, it wouldnt be called a manhunt. This doesnt rule out all scenarios except that this is a case of 'honour' killings, but it does narrow things down considerably. Who exactly in this thread is presuming guilt anyway? Hearing the story, stereotyping, thinking to ones self that its probably a case of 'honour' killings, and if so let the father burn in hell; is presuming the likeliness of guilt. Presuming guilt suggests an initial stance that cant be swayed given further evidence
You're mincing words. Presuming the likeliness of guilt is no better.
Oh come on, IE...Are you telling me that you have never once in your entire life called a prime suspect guilty before the trial? OJ? Timothy McVeigh?
|
|
|
| |
|
ImpulseEngine
|
Jan 6 2008, 02:45 PM
Post #22
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 9,851
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #7
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- 8247
- Jan 6 2008, 12:17 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 6 2008, 10:40 AM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 6 2008, 01:46 AM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 5 2008, 03:55 PM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Its implicitly implied in the article that police have ruled out the father was a victim at the scene cos they now view him as a fugitive. If it had been a robbery gone wrong or third party influence, there would have been evidence of a struggle at the scene, or some of the fathers blood. Police would then be searching for the guy or asking for help for info from the public, it wouldnt be called a manhunt. This doesnt rule out all scenarios except that this is a case of 'honour' killings, but it does narrow things down considerably. Who exactly in this thread is presuming guilt anyway? Hearing the story, stereotyping, thinking to ones self that its probably a case of 'honour' killings, and if so let the father burn in hell; is presuming the likeliness of guilt. Presuming guilt suggests an initial stance that cant be swayed given further evidence
You're mincing words. Presuming the likeliness of guilt is no better.
Oh come on, IE...Are you telling me that you have never once in your entire life called a prime suspect guilty before the trial? OJ? Timothy McVeigh?
Yes I am.
I have certainly had opinions about how I thought a trial would turn out before the court judgment was made, but never would I decide they are in fact guilty and make statements like "I hope the guy fries" without guilt being proven beyond reasonable doubt.
There is a large difference between this case and the "before the trial" times of OJ and McVeigh besides. In those two examples, there was a lot more pre-trial evidence to base an opinion upon than there is right now in the killing of these two daughters.
Tell me, are you presuming Amina Yaser Said's guilt? If so, based upon what?
|
|
|
| |
|
8247
|
Jan 6 2008, 02:52 PM
Post #23
|
Apparently we look like this now
- Posts:
- 16,246
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #75
- Joined:
- October 14, 2003
|
I'm not on the jury, so I have every right to say what I want. If something else turns out to be true, and he was not the one who killed his kids, then whoever did needs to fry. But, I am suspect I won't have to post a retraction on this one.
|
|
|
| |
|
Minuet
|
Jan 6 2008, 04:44 PM
Post #24
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
- Posts:
- 36,559
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- May 19, 2003
|
- somerled
- Jan 5 2008, 10:47 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 6 2008, 07:55 AM
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 4 2008, 11:07 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 4 2008, 09:34 PM
It's also quite disgusting IMO that some people seem ready to jump all over this guy over a mere possibility - apparently simply because he's Muslim. Is "innocent until proven guilty" only good enough for some people...?
The girls were found dead in their fathers Taxi, the father is nowhere to be found Do you really find it 'disgusting' that most of us would presume he's prime suspect? Most likely to be the perpertrator?
Is that truly the only possibility that you see? How about someone else attacked the three of them in the father's taxi. He killed the daughters because they were simply in the way. He really wanted the father so now he has taken the father off somewhere for whatever purpose. That's why the father is missing. That's just one plausible alternative. Or how about the father was framed for his daughters' deaths because someone wanted revenge on him for something we don't know about. That's another plausible alternative. What I find disgusting is the presumption of guilt because he's a Muslim who possibly doesn't like Americans; not him being a suspect or even a primary suspect. I admit the situation looks highly suspicious, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty or anti-American.
Or they were killed by fanatical christians or white suprematists in order to motivate ethnic hatred for political reasons ? Or maybe by Mossad in revenge for something that happened in Israel maybe ? ... further checking (google and it also says so in the story) ... he's an Egyptian , so maybe this one can be rejected. Or maybe this is part of some blood feud (revenge killings) ? Maybe he has been caught and is being held incognito or has been rendited elsewhere ? (to Egypt ?) Or maybe they were just killed for something more mundane : a robbery or car jacking gone wrong ? Or maybe he refused to do help with or engage in some terrorist attack and his daughters were killed by al Quaeda in revenge or to pressure him (by threatening the rest of his family) ? He maybe actually be a hero who sacrificed his daughters to save thousands or millions of people in the USA . Lots of other possible reasons . So how goes the man hunt ?
Stupidest list I have ever seen. Your bigotry shows in your listing things that NEVER happen.
|
|
|
| |
|
captain_proton_au
|
Jan 7 2008, 02:51 AM
Post #25
|
A Robot in Disguise
- Posts:
- 26,700
- Group:
- Help Desk
- Member
- #58
- Joined:
- September 15, 2003
|
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 6 2008, 01:45 PM
- 8247
- Jan 6 2008, 12:17 PM
Oh come on, IE...Are you telling me that you have never once in your entire life called a prime suspect guilty before the trial? OJ? Timothy McVeigh?
Yes I am. I have certainly had opinions about how I thought a trial would turn out before the court judgment was made, but never would I decide they are in fact guilty and make statements like "I hope the guy fries" without guilt being proven beyond reasonable doubt.
What about Osama Bin Laden? He has yet to face trial
|
|
|
| |
|
ImpulseEngine
|
Jan 7 2008, 01:09 PM
Post #26
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 9,851
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #7
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- captain_proton_au
- Jan 7 2008, 02:51 AM
- ImpulseEngine
- Jan 6 2008, 01:45 PM
- 8247
- Jan 6 2008, 12:17 PM
Oh come on, IE...Are you telling me that you have never once in your entire life called a prime suspect guilty before the trial? OJ? Timothy McVeigh?
Yes I am. I have certainly had opinions about how I thought a trial would turn out before the court judgment was made, but never would I decide they are in fact guilty and make statements like "I hope the guy fries" without guilt being proven beyond reasonable doubt.
What about Osama Bin Laden? He has yet to face trial
He's admitted his own guilt.
|
|
|
| |
|
RTW
|
Jan 7 2008, 01:17 PM
Post #27
|
Vice Admiral
- Posts:
- 7,678
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #543
- Joined:
- February 12, 2006
|
Why are so scared to apply the principles of Occam's Razor when talking about this? Sure, it would be wrong for a jury to do so, but we're not on the jury. Why is this man getting so much benefit of the doubt where others haven't?
|
|
|
| |
|
STC
|
Jan 7 2008, 01:44 PM
Post #28
|
Commodore
- Posts:
- 4,421
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #1,245
- Joined:
- April 16, 2007
|
- RTW
- Jan 7 2008, 06:17 PM
Why are so scared to apply the principles of Occam's Razor when talking about this? Sure, it would be wrong for a jury to do so, but we're not on the jury. Why is this man getting so much benefit of the doubt where others haven't?
Occam's Razor basically says that the simplest, most obvious explanation is usually the correct one. Sounds nice but that doesn't always work in practice.
I don't think people are 'scared' to apply Occam's razor. To be honest, just by my own judgement, this does sound like its probably an honour killing. Though we shouldn't rule out other possibilities - IE is quite right to remind us of innocent until proven guilty.
What interests me more is why people feel the need to post these stories? We all know about honour killings. We all think they are horrific. We all think that killing is horrific - period (someone please correct me if I've made an incorrect assumption about you
).
|
|
|
| |
|
RTW
|
Jan 7 2008, 01:55 PM
Post #29
|
Vice Admiral
- Posts:
- 7,678
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #543
- Joined:
- February 12, 2006
|
Maybe it's just semantics but murder is horrific. Killing can be, but sometimes the alternative is even more horrific.
|
|
|
| |
|
8247
|
Jan 7 2008, 02:11 PM
Post #30
|
Apparently we look like this now
- Posts:
- 16,246
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #75
- Joined:
- October 14, 2003
|
- STC
- Jan 7 2008, 01:44 PM
- RTW
- Jan 7 2008, 06:17 PM
Why are so scared to apply the principles of Occam's Razor when talking about this? Sure, it would be wrong for a jury to do so, but we're not on the jury. Why is this man getting so much benefit of the doubt where others haven't?
Occam's Razor basically says that the simplest, most obvious explanation is usually the correct one. Sounds nice but that doesn't always work in practice. I don't think people are 'scared' to apply Occam's razor. To be honest, just by my own judgement, this does sound like its probably an honour killing. Though we shouldn't rule out other possibilities - IE is quite right to remind us of innocent until proven guilty. What interests me more is why people feel the need to post these stories? We all know about honour killings. We all think they are horrific. We all think that killing is horrific - period (someone please correct me if I've made an incorrect assumption about you
 ).
Why do I keep posting these stories?
Because at least once a month, I hear someone saying that Islam is a religion of peace, and how dare we generalize.
But, what I don't hear is Muslims condemning these actions, or the actions of terrorists.
|
|
|
| |