#45663
Profile photo of
Anonymous
Survivalist

So what does it mean that two people with middle eastern names attacked a Christmas party?

It means exactly what we knew last night when I typed that: nothing except a name.

In no way am I attempting to minimize Islamic terrorism – I’ve got plenty of posts already on the SHTF Forum that confirm that unequivocally. I’m just not willing to go with every early report of an unconnected piece of information and run with it, fueling the rumor mill, and am even more concerned when the “news” media does it. Your comment had at least some advantage of additional hours of news reporting that I didn’t have when I made that comment – I just now (within the last ½ hour) had the opportunity to finally turn on the “news” and see what was being said (and NOT said) about all this. I stand on the statement, as written and intended, at the time I posted it.

The first thing I heard on the news this morning upon turning on the TV was that LE has “suddenly become silent” since last night, and that the next thing we’ll here will be at noon today (eastern or pacific not specified). Either way, that’s just either side of a half day from what I understand was the last (scheduled) briefing by LE last night. Why the silence? Did all of LE go home and take the night off before resuming their investigation this morning, so they just don’t have anything new to report until noon today? I hardly think so. What does it mean that we’re not hearing anything at all from LE thought? Same as the “middle eastern name” – nothing, at this point – we just don’t know.

All I AM seeing on every “news” channel (and we quickly scanned them all), is EXACTLY the same thing: “gun laws!” It doesn’t matter whether it’s CNN’s flavor, MSNBC’s flavor, Fox’s flavor – it’s all the same diet: “gun laws.” At least THAT causes me to draw some conclusions: collusion. The first thing the President talks about is “gun laws.” The media now parades politicians and candidates and “experts” in front of cameras to talk about “gun laws.”

How do we know Syed Farook wasn’t set up to pull this off, thinking he and his fiance/wife/whatever were going to be part of something larger, or would have more support, or protection, etc., but it was just another set up in order to advance the “gun laws” agenda? So what would “Syed Farook” mean then? Relatively little – just a tool to divert attention so we can cram more “gun laws” down the nation’s throat.

And on what basis are you labeling him a “Muslim jihadist” – yet? If he is, FINE! As I said in another post, I HOPE this is what it is, since it has to be something. What I hoped it was NOT was some crazy white guy(s), giving the “media” and their buddy Barack more “right wing extremist gun violence” and label it “militia” because more than one was involved. Since it happened, I at least don’t want it to turn out to be the latter. But how do you come up with a “Muslim jihadist” planning an attack on a Christmas party? How do you know that the “Christian” (Christmas) connection was even in this/their mind? Planned? That’s about the only thing we DO know. The rest is still speculation.

And that was my only point. If it’s Islamic terrorism, and not just some guy owning a related name, trumpet that from the highest building, and start screaming about “immigration laws,” not “gun laws.” But if the name just happens to seem to suggest something without any other information, I still say, “so what?” We don’t know yet, because THEY aren’t telling us.