How is anyone supposed to take the NYT seriously when they rush out a notification that the attacker’s motives weren’t clear? I swear, at some point, we’re all going to be told that smoke has nothing to do with fire.
How is anyone supposed to take the NYT seriously when they rush out a notification that the attacker’s motives weren’t clear? I swear, at some point, we’re all going to be told that smoke has nothing to do with fire.
My jaw dropped when I saw the headline about not knowing the attacker's motive. Rushdie is a man who has literally had a hit called on him, a hit order that is still active, and there are millions of people who would like the reward of performing the hit. If the attacker had been someone other than a young Muslim male, there might be some cause to wonder if there was another motive. Considering the identity of the attacker, the motive is 99.99999% clear.
Marie - I think I know the story you're referring to. The father must be mentally ill. It's just not normal behavior. I think mentally ill people attach religion as a motive to do what their mental illness compels them to do. That father will most likely spend the rest of his life in prison among people he would not choose to spend 5 minutes with. It makes no sense.
The concept of an "honor killing" is widely accepted in Islamic cultures. A person who would kill their own child is clearly not mentally well-balanced, but their culture provides an easy outlet in the most violent form possible. In another culture, parents might cut off contact with a child who is behaving in ways they consider shameful, but killing that child is not acceptable, so they don't.
Unfortunately it’s many stories and it’s not mental illness.
I worked with a woman from Baghdad some years ago. She was married off to an Islamic man in the US who seriously abused her, as in come to work bruised.
I and others tried to convince her to leave him. She lives in the United States!
She was terrified of her father killing her if she left her “chosen spouse.” Not an ocean’s distance would ease her fear of being murdered by her own father for leaving an abusive husband.
Eventually we all gave up, but not before she told us about schoolmates whose fathers had killed them for “disgracing the family” or “being unclean.”
Of course not, we are only allowed to rush to judgment when they know all the facts. Such as Jacob Blake was unarmed, Nick Sandmann and the Covington kids were racists and that Kyle Rittenhouse was a racist murderer. But, defining a woman, knowing how many genders there are or whether correlation exists between gay men having promiscuous sex and monkey pox are Herculean tasks they are not capable of lol.
How is anyone supposed to take the NYT seriously when they rush out a notification that the attacker’s motives weren’t clear? I swear, at some point, we’re all going to be told that smoke has nothing to do with fire.
I stopped taking the New Woke Times seriously when they jumped on the bandwagon to invade Iraq 20 years ago.
My jaw dropped when I saw the headline about not knowing the attacker's motive. Rushdie is a man who has literally had a hit called on him, a hit order that is still active, and there are millions of people who would like the reward of performing the hit. If the attacker had been someone other than a young Muslim male, there might be some cause to wonder if there was another motive. Considering the identity of the attacker, the motive is 99.99999% clear.
It’s the same when an Islamic father murders his young daughter.
“Why would he do such a thing??”
Seriously?
Marie - I think I know the story you're referring to. The father must be mentally ill. It's just not normal behavior. I think mentally ill people attach religion as a motive to do what their mental illness compels them to do. That father will most likely spend the rest of his life in prison among people he would not choose to spend 5 minutes with. It makes no sense.
The concept of an "honor killing" is widely accepted in Islamic cultures. A person who would kill their own child is clearly not mentally well-balanced, but their culture provides an easy outlet in the most violent form possible. In another culture, parents might cut off contact with a child who is behaving in ways they consider shameful, but killing that child is not acceptable, so they don't.
Unfortunately it’s many stories and it’s not mental illness.
I worked with a woman from Baghdad some years ago. She was married off to an Islamic man in the US who seriously abused her, as in come to work bruised.
I and others tried to convince her to leave him. She lives in the United States!
She was terrified of her father killing her if she left her “chosen spouse.” Not an ocean’s distance would ease her fear of being murdered by her own father for leaving an abusive husband.
Eventually we all gave up, but not before she told us about schoolmates whose fathers had killed them for “disgracing the family” or “being unclean.”
That’s how one recognizes intellectual bankruptcy.
Of course not, we are only allowed to rush to judgment when they know all the facts. Such as Jacob Blake was unarmed, Nick Sandmann and the Covington kids were racists and that Kyle Rittenhouse was a racist murderer. But, defining a woman, knowing how many genders there are or whether correlation exists between gay men having promiscuous sex and monkey pox are Herculean tasks they are not capable of lol.
They needed to consult with Schumer to see what he says about the motive.
🤣