J-HALEY wrote:I ask you where are the peaceful muslims STOPPING their fellow muslims from attacking our embassy's? What do you think would happen if americans stormed an islamic conutry's embassy here in the states? I think you know the answer to that, and that my friends would be how a PEACEFUL COUNTRY DEALS WITH IT'S OWN MILITANTS! Peaceful Muslims BULLSH!T!
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Prote ... 861603.php
Hey Jeff. I'm curious again.
When someone around here gets murdered and the killer goes to trial, one of the most prominent parts of the investigation is establishing motive. Regardless of how much physical evidence exists, they take really great care in establishing the exact motive and the circumstances surrounding it.
I see this as smart, of course, because by establishing the motive, they can determine whether the crime was pre-meditated, accidental, or more of a anger or passion-fueled blow up; and by establishing that, they can not only have a better idea of exactly how "evil" the person really is and can sentence the person appropriately, but also to inform the public as to how these things happen, so that the general populace can be informed and be better equipped to avoid such circumstances.
What always bothered me about "terrorists" - especially middle eastern terrorists, is that this part of the equation is always skipped. Even with the IRA terrorism of the 70's and 80's in Ireland and the UK, there was at least the establishment of motive. But in the middle east, all we ever hear is really unbelievable sh*t about they hate freedoms, infidels, etc..
Muslims make up 25% of the worlds religious population, and yet, this is a small fraction, less than 1% that actively engage in terrorist activities. Hell I will even give them 2%, but that means 98% of muslims are peaceful and not terrorists. I don't think I can say any other religion has any less percentage of fundamentalism, with exception to maybe buddhism and possibly hinduism.
So .. getting back to the point- If you were a detective charged with establishing motive for a criminal trial against a terrorist, how deep would you dig and how many questions would you try to find answers to? What if you found information to suggested that history plays a role- would you dig into it and really vet as much information as possible to make the best possible detailed report for the prosecutor?