LAX Gunman's Wife Is Fucking Retard
 

From MSNBC:

Okay. I will be the first to admit that there is definitely some racism in America against Arabs. I will admit that, in some places, Muslims are looked down upon and treated in a racist manner.

But I am goddamn tired of hearing the relatives of murderers go on and on about how their loved ones are being framed because they're Muslim or they have brown skin. Come the fuck on!

Mohammed Atta's father is a good example. He sits in Egypt and spouts venom about how his son has been set up, how it's the Israelis, how his son would never do that... nevermind the martyrdom documents in his luggage! I'm all about being skeptical but when there's hard evidence to prove someone's involvement, why the fuck do you need to create all these stupid conspiracy theories? Yes, yes, I'm sure you're grieving because you loved your son... and maybe you're even in denial that he <b>could</b> have done this. But let's not ignore facts! And let's certainly not blame someone else. Holy Christ am I tired of seeing this shit.

Then I read about it in newspapers and on news sites - some suicide bomber's parents are in denial because their son would <b>never</b> do that. Nevermind the fucking video where he claims responsibility and talks of martyrdom! Yes, <b>of course</b> Israel doctored the video and made it look like he did it! How silly of us not to see that!

So here we are again and this fuckwad's wife is claiming that he's been set up. Let's just ignore the eyewitness testimony of some twenty or thirty others that saw this shitface shooting people. Yes, it was probably all an optical illusion enacted by those fucking kikes! He's being framed! Can't you see this?

I don't see this nearly as much with other religions or people from different areas of the Earth... it's always Middle Eastern Muslims. What the fuck gives?

I <b>want</b> to like them, and I <b>want</b> to sympathize, but it's really hard when they can't take any fucking responsibility for their actions as a whole. They come off sounding like a bunch of fucking whining nancies that condone murder.

[ Edit - Typo! ]

My understanding of the denial in situations like this is that some Muslims (believing that they are on God's right hand) cannot believe that a loved one would do something so heinous. In addition, b/c we are the great satan, some believe that we are making shit up to persecute them.

I guess the truth hurts. *shrugs*

It goes back to the culture differences again, and this time I got tables.

Our culture:

http://cellar.org/2002/guiltculture.gif

Their culture:

http://cellar.org/2002/shameculture.gif

Source: http://www.doceo.co.uk/background/shame_guilt.htm

The thing is, in the shame culture, what other people believe is more important than what actually happened. If other people believe you're innocent, then you ARE in effect innocent. So the instinct is to deny at all costs, because the truth is not really so important... even to you, internally.

Could have sworn I posted this link before the last time "shame culture" came up, but I can't find it searching so I'll post it.

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/20...ngewiesche.htm

<i><b>The Crash of EgyptAir 990</b>

Two years afterward the U.S. and Egyptian governments are still quarreling over the cause—a clash that grows out of cultural division, not factual uncertainty. A look at the flight data from a pilot's perspective, with the help of simulations of the accident, points to what the Egyptians already know: the crash was caused not by any mechanical failure but by a pilot's intentional act</i>

When Dave posted that MSNBC story, that (the Egypt Air crash) was the first thing that came to my mind.

Even with that, our relations with Egypt seem to have stayed solid. But with Mubarak's recent comments and now this, I hope they don't sour any further.

Re: LAX Gunman's Wife Is Fucking Retard
 

That is the first step to racism. Because she cannot think logically means that all Arabs are illogical? There is a big difference between SHE and THEY. Once you merge the two together, you are ready to incite riots in the street.

When Egyptian Air 990 crashed, my Arab friends could not believe it. First the co-pilot would have violated his own religious beliefs. Second, the translation we read in the paper was not accurate to what was on the voice recorder in Arabic. They had good reason to be suspicious of that crash.

We know that seven astronauts were murdered on the Challenger. Facts now make that obvious. But the majority still call it an accident, despite the facts. Since so many Americans are wrong, then are all Americans murders? Be very careful about condemning a whole people just because a few get public attention by making statements in direct contradiction to facts.

We don't even have a clue as to why this LA shooting occurred. Do not condemn a whole people because one's wife makes claims when almost no relevant facts are available. Let her deny and just assume she is a classic emotional thinker who is comfortable with opinions - facts be damned. That has nothing to do with how anyone regards any other Arabs, or Africans, or Eurasians, or Cambodians, or Serbs.... The use of 'THEY' rather than 'SHE' is how racism starts.

I'd actually submit that racism starts with parents indoctrinating their children in the home, but that's just me.

waitaminit
 

The Challenger? Murder? What did I miss here?

Brian

Re: waitaminit
 

yeah, me too. i watched a documentary a while back about it and dont remember anything implying that.

also, i can almost understand this womans attitude (please note i said understand, not justify). i think i would have a very difficult time believing one of my loved ones was capable of something like this. she is probably in serious denial, and is lashing out at the perceived enemy. if i was told my wife shot a bunch of people up, i dont think i could believe it, at least at first, even when presented with hard facts proving she did.

~james

it would be proof they had the wrong person

Re: waitaminit
 

I thing the only thing you missed is what it really means when someone feels moved to tell us "we all know" something and blithely assert what the "facts" are.

Corporate terminal idiocy is still not grounds for a murder charge, (although sometimes it seems like it ought to be). I'm referring here to the management group-think committed by Morton Thiokol management under pressure from NASA Marshall management to aprove a launch in weather conditions that originally caused Thiokol engineers and engineering management to recommend <b>against</b> launch until the weather was warmer.

I suppose someone could make an argument that those events rise to the level of "reckless disregard".

The sources of information I use for my understanding of STS-51L are <i>Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident</i> (USGPO 1986), Richard Feynman's delightful book <i>What Do <b><u>You</u></b> Care What Other People Think?: Further Adventures of a Curious Character</i>, (Norton, 1988) (in particular, Appendix F, <i>Personal Observations of the Reliabilty of the Shuttle</i>) and Edward Tufte's <i>Visual and Statistical Thinking: Displays of Evidence for Making Decisions</i> in his masterpiece <i> Visual Explanations</i> (Graphic Press, 1997).

That said, I do regard baldly stating "we all know they were murdered" to be classic trollbait.

I think the central question we should be focusing on now, in light of dham's tagline, is *why* he is "fuckin Yoda". Couldn't Yoda get a date?

[<i>edited for typos and to insert the last-minute Yoda crack</i>]

I thought about making the same crack in the thread where it originated, but I decided I'd run with it and play along. Hence the new user title.

Glad ya like it. Good on ya mate, as Jag would say.

OK Maggie, what have we learned about unwarranted personal attacks? Even if tw is folically challenged, calling him "baldy" isn't gonna solve anything.

I think she meant "baldly".

Indeed I did. Now that' it's generated two posts, I'll fix it.

I knew that.. my sarcasm is never as obvious in my posts as it seems to me as I'm typing it.

For what it's worth, <b>I</b> knew you were goofing. That's why I didn''t bother to fix it right away.

It's interesting to compare the two accident investigations; Egypt Air and STS-51L. Very different accidents, very different political situations, very different outcomes. But the core procedures were pretty much the same.

It wasn't that clear to me ...
 

Whatever your intention, Maggie, I think it's obvious that it was badly stated. ;)

Re: waitaminit
 

Point a gun at someone, plug the trigger, it fires and kills. But the safety was on. Therefore it was only an accident?

Fly a plane into rising cumulus clouds. The plane gets ripped apart. Was that too an accident?

When every engineer says don't launch. When they cannot find a single engineer to say launch, but launch anyway, then is that also an accident? And then when top management executes a serious coverup of that decision process, do we still call it an accident - or murder?

Christie McAullife told her mother not to worry because Challenger was launching that next morning no matter what. Her mother wishes she had asked what Christie meant by that statement. There is a long list of questions, including numerous calls from the White House that no one admits to making, that to this day remains part of the question - why was Challenger launched when disaster was immenent? Did that documentary discuss any of this?

Challenger was lauched by management desicions that qualify as murder in the third degree - a total disregard for human life. But making the case for murder and prosecuting those involved in the coverup was not politically acceptable. Still launching Challenger is equivalent to pointing a gun with safety on, and pulling the trigger. So do we call it an accident - be politically correct - or call it what it really was - negligent homicide - murder?

Re: Re: waitaminit
 

<B>mur · der</B> <I>n.</I>
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

From dictionary.com, as provided by <I>The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition</I>

So, while "murder" doesn't <I>have</I> to mean with premeditated malice, the term usually implies it. When you say "murder", most people think of an act planned out beforehand and performed with malice.

So you see, "murder" isn't a good choice of words here. Perhaps "manslaughter":

<B>man · slaugh · ter</B> <I>n.</I>
The unlawful killing of one human by another without express or implied intent to do injury.

Hey, that sounds a lot more like what you're describing! So, to answer your question, "do we call it murder?", the answer is, no, most people would not call it murder. Yes, I realize there are different degrees of murder, but those aren't the connotations that come to mind when one uses the word "murder".

Re: Re: waitaminit
 

I would think she meant that her mother shouldn't worry because they were going to launch whether she worried or not.
Yes, every conspiracy theorist comes equipped with a long list of questions, it's <i>de riegur</i>.
Yes, that's pretty amazing. Everybody knew that disaster was imminent.

Actually, there's very little question as to why the launch was approved, and if you'd read the source documents, (instead of Popular Mechanics or Tin-Foil Hat Quarterly or whatever you're using) you'd be much less mystified. The management bullied their technical people into silence because they were tunnel-vision focused on their goal: a successful launch.

This is a very common phenomenon and should not be a big-ass mystery to anyone. Pilots die every day because of it; we call it "get-homeitis"....discounting evidence of danger under condition of uncetainty in service of achieving a goal. Your example of an airplane flying into "rising cumulus clouds" (did you mean a thunderstorm?) is exactly that. Since the decision maker is onboard, why not call that suicide?

That's at least as sensational.

Re: Re: LAX Gunman's Wife Is Fucking Retard
 

tw, as much as you've been throwing out conspiracies recently, this was a nice point you made.

Discovery Channel has a great documentary on the Challenger, which references the information Maggie posted (about the decision-making). Even if it was negligence, I certainly don't see it as murder.

Re: Re: Re: waitaminit
 

When we talk about man, we are talking about man and woman. Some words take on such dual meanings. Murder comes in three degrees. Manslaughter is murder in the third degree. Murder in the 1st degree is murder. Forgot what murder in the second degree is.

However Tobias' point is accurate and (hopefully) does clarify any confusion.

I don't remember if it was Feynman's book that notes a Challenger type accident almost happened exactly one year earlier. Engineers cited this previous near miss and an exact same launch condition during Challenger. But top management was so negligent as to not let any engineers even participate in a vote to launch. Management that ignores a 100% recommendation - by everyone who knows technology - not to launch should be held accountable to manslaughter charges. Management than then participates in a coverup should have been charged additionally. We didn't do that either.

We did learn of thousands of other potential failures of which, if I remember, 200 required repair before the shuttle flew again. On that list were most every problem cited to me by fellow engineers about 1 years before Challenger exploded. The problems were so well known that even engineers not working on the Shuttle program knew of them. And yet we kept launching without any effort even to get those problems solved. Management failure which is why management should have been held accountable for those completely unnecessary deaths. It was not an accident. It was blatant negligence that resulted in seven deaths. Was that in the documentary?

Returning to the original point, one should not condem a whole people only because some or even many are in error or have a different interpretation of same facts. Just because some Americans intentionally sent seven astronauts to what became their death does not make all Aemricans murders (manslaughters). Just because one Arab wife, in grief, blames government for murdering her husband does not make all Arabs evil or anti-American.

However, those who would routinely merge 'She' with 'They' can easily meet the definition of racist. Such has been reason to inspire street riots. Just because Atta's father is in denial, or Egypitians mistrust the government's translation on Egypt Air 990, or the man's wife is distraught does not make all Arabs murders or evil. It is dangerous to blame all for the opinions or actions of just a few.

Re: Re: Re: Re: waitaminit
 

<blockquote>
Accident Ac"ci*dent, n. F. accident, fr. L. accidens,
-dentis, p. pr. of accidere to happen; ad + cadere to fall.
See Cadence, Case.
1. Literally, a befalling; an event that takes place without
one's foresight or expectation; an undesigned, sudden, and
unexpected event; chance; contingency; often, an
undesigned and unforeseen occurrence of an afflictive or
unfortunate character; a casualty; a mishap; as, to die by
an accident.
</blockquote>

The Thiokol and NASA managers diid not *intend* to blow up STS 51-L, but by pressuring their employees to concur on a launch recommendation when there arguably should not have been one, they were indeed guilty of negligence. However, that does not disqualify the event as an accident.

(One interesting sidelight here is that the "field joint" that failed on the SRB was required so that the SRBs could be shipped from Morton Thiokol in Utah to the KSC on railroad cars. Another bidder on the SRB's proposed making them as a single unit, and would have delivered the SRB's on barges. But Morton Thiokkol is in Utah, and Orrin Hatch chaired the Senate comittee on Space and NASA at the time....)

Now then...the law in Pennsylvania is:

<blockquote><i>...from the Pennsylvania Code:</i>

§ 2501. Criminal homicide.

(a) Offense defined.-A person is guilty of criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowlingly, recklessly or negligently causes the death of another human being.

(b) Classification.-Criminal homicide shall be classified as murder, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter.
§ 2502. Murder.

(a) Murder of the first degree.-A criminal homicide constitutes murder of the first degree when it is committed by an intentional killing.

(b) Murder of the second degree.-A criminal homicide constitutes murder of the second degree when it is committed while defendant was engaged as a principal or an accomplice int he perpetration of a felony.

(c) Murder of the third degree.-All other kinds of murder shall be murder of the third degree. Murder of the third degree is a felony of the first degree.

§ 2503. Voluntary manslaughter.

(a) General rule.-A person who kills an individual without lawful justification commits voluntary manslaughter if at the time of the killing he is acting under a sudden and intense passion resulting from serious provocation by:

1. the individual killed; or
2. another whom the actor endeavors to kill, but to negligently or accidently causes the death of the individual killed.

(b) Unreasonable belief killing justifiable.-A person who intentionally or knowingly kills an individual commits voluntary manslaughter if at the time of the killing he believes the circumstances to be such that, if they existed, would justify the killing under Chapter 5 of this title (relating to general principles of justification), but his belief is unreasonable.

(c) Grading.-Voluntary manslaughter is a felony of the first degree.
§ 2504. Involuntary manslaughter.

(a) General rule.-A person is guilty of involuntary manslaughter when as a direct result of the doing of an unlawful act in a reckless or grossly negligent manner, or the doing of a lawful act in a reckless or grossly negligent manner, he causes the death of another person. Involuntary manslaughter is a misdemeanor of the first degree.
</blockquote>

Some other states have a "reckless indifference" or "depraved heart" murder provision, usually in connection with comission of an illegal act. Negligence when *not* breaking the law does not rise to this standard.

So...I can't see "murder" here, no matter how incenced we may be..

Only a misdemeanor? No wonder running from the police in a high speed car chase has so little consequences.