Now Houston in the news for 'mass shootings'... (insurance, lawyers)

[KathrynAragon]

Originally Posted by Augiec

You said the bolded portion repeatedly during the course of this thread. Why is being a Muslim an accusation? It was only later when you changed your wording to "said or implied." Would I accuse someone of being a Buddhist, or a Hindu, or a Jew?

If Jews or Buddhists or Hindus were regularly committing terrorist attacks, and someone committed a mass murder and you said "Well, they're probably Jewish/Buddhist/Hindu/Fill in the blank" then yes, I'd call that an accusation.

And I did not accuse anyone of being any particular religion, and I did not accuse anyone of being motivated by any particular religious extremism.

[Augiec]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

What it does mean is that I find the connection to be ironic, considering that in all likelihood the Houston shooter was NOT a radical Islamist.

This last part makes sense. After going through 5 pages of this thread, that original meaning got lost somewhere in the noise.

This is anecdotal as well, but I know about 10 people named Desai and all of em are Hindu

Also considering the reports the shooter was found to be wearing Nazi paraphernalia, and had Nazi stuff in his condo, I don't know what religion he actually practiced. I thought Nazis were resoundingly atheist.

[KathrynAragon]

Originally Posted by Augiec

This last part makes sense. After going through 5 pages of this thread, that original meaning got lost somewhere in the noise.

This is anecdotal as well, but I know about 10 people named Desai and all of em are Hindu

Also considering the reports the shooter was found to be wearing Nazi paraphernalia, and had Nazi stuff in his condo, I don't know what religion he actually practiced. I thought Nazis were resoundingly atheist.

Who knows? He was a nutjob - we at least know that. I can't find any reference to him practicing any religion.

[bilz987]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

If Jews or Buddhists or Hindus were regularly committing terrorist attacks, and someone committed a mass murder and you said "Well, they're probably Jewish/Buddhist/Hindu/Fill in the blank" then yes, I'd call that an accusation.

And I did not accuse anyone of being any particular religion, and I did not accuse anyone of being motivated by any particular religious extremism.

No, that is not an accusation. That is an assumption. An accusation implies of guilt. So when you say "I did not accuse anyone of being Muslim", you are saying that being Muslim is a fault, not that being a terrorist is a fault.

[texas7]

Originally Posted by txdemo

I really need to work on my satire.

Lol and I need to work on catching your satire. Was a good one.

[KathrynAragon]

Originally Posted by bilz987

No, that is not an accusation. That is an assumption. An accusation implies of guilt. So when you say "I did not accuse anyone of being Muslim", you are saying that being Muslim is a fault, not that being a terrorist is a fault.

Why don't you find someone who has really thick hair and offer to split it for them?

Context is everything. We're clearly talking about the question of whether or not the Houston shooter was motivated by radical Islamist teachings. Last time I checked, radical Islamists were Muslims.

Lest you twist off about that, please note that I did NOT say that all Muslims are radical Islamists. However, all radical Islamists are Muslim. See the difference?

So no - I wasn't accusing this mass killer who perpetrated a terrorist attack of SOME sort, to be a Muslim - you know, the unsavory radical type who kills people because of religious ideology. The sort that's been making headlines now for years. That sort.

We're not talking about Houston demographics or cuisines. We're talking about a mass killer.

Who by the way, is probably not Muslim - of any sort.

Which is what I've been saying.

I don't understand why pointing out the truth of the origin of his last name as ironic is so offensive. If I said "Oh, that's typical of those Desais - you know, they're all a bunch of radical Muslims," THAT would be offensive. But to point out that it's IRONIC that his last name has roots in Islamic converts from India should invoke the opposite response.

It would be like me painting a a fleur de lis on my front door on Bastille Day and someone pointing out that ironically my last name is Louis.

[KathrynAragon]

Oh look - an Indian Muslim imam named Desai.
About » Askimam

That took me about 30 seconds to find.

Look, once again, I am NOT SAYING THAT NATHAN DESAI IS A MUSLIM. In fact, I personally don't think there's any strong evidence pointing to him adhering to ANY religion. But please quit acting as if the name Desai doesn't have a historical tie to Indian converts to Islam. Sorry, but it just does.

Siraj Desai is a Muslim judge of Indian heritage:
http://mg.co.za/article/2007-05-12-c...j-desai-at-jsc

Do these guys have ANYTHING to do with Nathan Desai? I highly doubt it - other than sharing the same last name. But don't act as if my assertion that the last name Desai has ties to Indian converts to Islam has no validity.

I didn't pull it out of thin air - or anywhere else for that matter.

[bilz987]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

Why don't you find someone who has really thick hair and offer to split it for them?

Context is everything. We're clearly talking about the question of whether or not the Houston shooter was motivated by radical Islamist teachings. Last time I checked, radical Islamists were Muslims.

Lest you twist off about that, please note that I did NOT say that all Muslims are radical Islamists. However, all radical Islamists are Muslim. See the difference?

So no - I wasn't accusing this mass killer who perpetrated a terrorist attack of SOME sort, to be a Muslim - you know, the unsavory radical type who kills people because of religious ideology. The sort that's been making headlines now for years. That sort.

We're not talking about Houston demographics or cuisines. We're talking about a mass killer.

Who by the way, is probably not Muslim - of any sort.

Which is what I've been saying.

I don't understand why pointing out the truth of the origin of his last name as ironic is so offensive. If I said "Oh, that's typical of those Desais - you know, they're all a bunch of radical Muslims," THAT would be offensive. But to point out that it's IRONIC that his last name has roots in Islamic converts from India should invoke the opposite response.

It would be like me painting a a fleur de lis on my front door on Bastille Day and someone pointing out that ironically my last name is Louis.

.

"Accusing" someone of being Muslim is bigoted, even in this context.
"Accusing" someone of being a radical Muslim or a terrorist is not.
No splitting hairs.

[texas7]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

Just for the record -and I'm not saying this guy is Muslim, because who the heck knows at this point -but the surname Desai is a surname associated with Indians who are converts to Islam.


People of India Gujarat Volume XXI Part Three edited by R.B Lal, P.B.S.V Padmanabham, G Krishnan & M Azeez Mohideen pages 1105-1109

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Patel

why of course not, nothing like that. Just bringing the religion up first and that you think his surname is attached to that religion to be informative. Like wink wink hint hint.

[Jack Lance]

With all this back and forth concerning the possibilities of this mans ethnic and religious background, don't you think it may be time to just wait and see what the investigation turns up on this. I presume this will all be looked into and eventually made public, don't you think ?