Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Name that Hate! US Attorney Carmen Ortiz’s “No True Scotsman” fallacy for Tsarnaev [Darleen Click]

What an insulting and grievously gratuitous exercise in dhimmitude:

Speaking to reporters Friday after the announcement of the death sentence decision for Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz made certain to clarify for Americans that Islam had nothing to do with the Tsarnaev brothers’ terrorism:

Even in the wake of horror and tragedy, we are not intimidated by acts of terror or radical ideals…

Make no mistake. The defendant claimed to be acting on behalf of all Muslims. This was not a religious crime, and it certainly does not reflect true Muslim beliefs. It was designed to intimidate and coerce the United States…

The defendant was an adult who came to believe in an ideology of hate, and he expressed those beliefs by killing, maiming, and mutilating innocent Americans on Patriots Day.

19 Replies to “Name that Hate! US Attorney Carmen Ortiz’s “No True Scotsman” fallacy for Tsarnaev [Darleen Click]”

  1. LBascom says:

    Them Muslims sure do seem confused about what their true beliefs are.

    This Ortiz chick should do a mosque tour and teach’em right. The current strategy of telling everyone else to submit to sharia blasphemy laws so as not to upset their peaceful intentions kinda messes up the narrative.

  2. sdferr says:

    Well duh, of course it wasn’t a religious crime insofar as it was an act of religious piety.

    Criminy and Crimeany, throw another rabbit into the briar patch, why don’t they?

  3. LBascom says:

    I lifted this from AoS.

    I like Rose way more than Maher, but Rose is way more confused about Islam.

  4. Drumwaster says:

    U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz made certain to clarify for Americans that Islam had nothing to do with the Tsarnaev brothers’ terrorism:

    Make no mistake. The defendant claimed to be acting on behalf of all Muslims….

    So she knew the bomber’s motive better than the bombers themselves?

    It was designed to intimidate and coerce the United States…

    Much like 9/11, but I’ll bet that the current Administration is going to Voxplain how that had nothing to do with Islam, either…

  5. Shermlaw says:

    Make no mistake. The defendant claimed to be acting on behalf of all Muslims. This was not a religious crime, and it certainly does not reflect true Muslim beliefs.

    I’d buy it, if 90 percent of Muslim clerics denounced this sort of behavior and preached such denunciations from their pulpits. But they do not. Instead, we get tepid exercises in moral equivalence which usually begins, ” . . . [Insert something about Jews or quotations from Edward Said here.]

  6. LBascom says:

    The word terrorist is practically synonymous with Islamist. We don’t want to declare a Holy war, so we fight a war on terror. Never mind the terrorists we fight are exclusively Islamist.

    The effort here is to play the language game by seperating ‘hate’ from the religion by claiming the part about infidels is a foreign “idealology” true Muslims don’t subscribe to. I happen to think that’s horseshit, but there ta go.

  7. cranky-d says:

    Islam has over a billion adherents, and over half of them are in favor of some flavor of sharia law enforced by government action.

    That’s a lot of “untrue” Muslims.

  8. John Bradley says:

    I’m hoping that the next Pope – after the current Idiot Marxist Troll has an unfortunate boating accident – calls for a New Crusade, to rid the Holy Land of the Mohammedan Scourge once and for all.

    Just for the head-popping, even if no one acts on it. That, and it’d serve as a fine opportunity to correct the misperception about what the original Crusades were.

  9. LBascom says:

    Yeah, what’s up with the pope? He seems to be confusing the kingdom of God and the world of men. It’s really disconcerting, even though I’m not Catholic.

  10. McGehee says:

    Anyone who thinks government can recreate Eden without even worse consequences than befell Adam and Eve, isn’t fit to be a strip-show tout, let alone Pope.

  11. 11B40 says:

    Greetings:

    God almighty, I sure do get annoyed by those non-religious ideology of hate crimes. Muslims, not so much. Oh well.

    These 21st Century lawyers sure do have a way with words and facts and laws.

  12. LBascom says:

    I can’t even get over the dude making climate the providence of man. I mean what’s next, declaring high tide a result of mans sin against nature that global government must address? It’s lunacy.

  13. gahrie says:

    The real solution is to eliminate Islam, but that would be difficult, costly, bloody and brutal. I don’t think Western Civilization has the will to do it. (And I’m not sure that this is a bad thing)

    So, we’ll end up doing what we have done for the last thousand years. Eventually we’ll get tired of the terrorism, call a crusade, send a bunch of volunteers over, to kill enough Muslims, and destroy enough infrastructure to give the West a generation or two of peace.

  14. Ortiz, Mosby, Lynch – they’re all just dullard Apparatchiks.

  15. geoffb says:

    Don’t forget to “Speak Truth to Power” too.

  16. happyfeet says:

    this US Attorney twat seems very intimidated by the idea that this was a religious crime

  17. bgbear says:

    We’re lucky that most of the World’s Muslims are too busy to pull this kind of crap.

Comments are closed.