Mother of Paris suicide bomber says her son 'did not mean to kill anyone'

[jc456]

How is applying the sins of one person to another who didn't commit them based solely on relation 'moral'?

We are talking about family here. I cannot imagine a family not apologizing to another family if one of theirs harmed one of the others.

Apparently, family and morality seem to mean little to many today, and while I am not a 'family matters' kind of guy, the actions of those of my immediate family are by extension my responsibility.

To put it into terms you might understand, not having a family, if your boyfriend of many years killed someone while driving drunk, would you apologize?

My wife, and not necessarily. She is her own person, I am not responsible for her actions. I am not required to atone for her actions, and no school of mrality requires such a thing or if you does, you two little asswipes sure as hell can't find it so far.

you're one sick pup. That's for sure. Does she know you feel that way? So if she killed someone or you did you don't think she'd apologize. I think you'd be wrong. you, you're just a sick pup.

 

[jc456]

I never said she was responsible. Post up the post I did that. Or shut up about it. Atone is what she needs to do, it's what I said. She has a moral obligation.

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

I already answered so no need to be redundant, reread my post about society.

Go to post 77 and explain to us why one adult is responsible to atone or even apologize for the sins of another? We'll wait.

Meathead said it best in post 115. Go read it.

 

[Skylar]

You're going to fault a grieving mother for not being rational?

In this case, yes. Her piece of shit son strapped a bomb jacket to himself and killed innocent people. Anyone that would make excuses for her is also a piece of shit.

Anyone that would make such excuses would be wildly irrational and in denial. Which is exactly what I'd expect from a grieving mother who lost her son and learned that he committed a horrible act that hurt so many people.

Denial is not only plausible, its predictable.

Anyone that would make that type of excuse is a pure dumbass.

Denial proves she is.

So a grieving mother whose son is 4 days dead said something stupid and is in denial.

Um.....shocker?

Is she denying he's dead? Is she denying he did it? She's a dumbass.

She's a grieving mother who is irrational and in denial about what her son did. Neither of which is particularly surprising. Her child has been dead 4 days.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If she must atone then she is responsible. Now, show us where parents are responsible for the actions of their grown children? We're waiting.

no that is not what it means at all. you should look up what atone means.

atone

[uh-tohn]

• Examples
• Word Origin

verb (used without object), atoned, atoning.
1.
to make amends or reparation, as for an offense or a crime, or for an offender (usually followed by for):
to atone for one's sins.
2.
to make up, as for errors or deficiencies (usually followed by for):
to atone for one's failings.
3.
Obsolete. to become reconciled; agree.
the definition of atone

don't see one thing that says responsible, do you?

And that's because one person is responsible for another only for a short time, like a mother for a son, who is no longer responsible or can be called upon to atone for what her adult child did. You lose.

I never said she was responsible. Post up the post I did that. Or shut up about it. Atone is what she needs to do, it's what I said. She has a moral obligation.

#77, and she has a moral obligation to atone for another? Where did you get that from? Do tell.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

I already answered so no need to be redundant, reread my post about society.

Go to post 77 and explain to us why one adult is responsible to atone or even apologize for the sins of another? We'll wait.

Meathead said it best in post 115. Go read it.

So far he is as wrong as you are, and neither of your understand either morality or atonement.

 

[jc456]

don't see one thing that says responsible, do you?

And that's because one person is responsible for another only for a short time, like a mother for a son, who is no longer responsible or can be called upon to atone for what her adult child did. You lose.

I never said she was responsible. Post up the post I did that. Or shut up about it. Atone is what she needs to do, it's what I said. She has a moral obligation.

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

How is applying the sins of one person to another who didn't commit them based solely on relation 'moral'?

We are talking about family here. I cannot imagine a family not apologizing to another family if one of theirs harmed one of the others.

Apparently, family and morality seem to mean little to many today, and while I am not a 'family matters' kind of guy, the actions of those of my immediate family are by extension my responsibility.

To put it into terms you might understand, not having a family, if your boyfriend of many years killed someone while driving drunk, would you apologize?

paint by numbers has no idea what the basis of a society are. None, he is clueless to the bone.

society

[suh-sahy-i-tee]

• Synonyms
• Examples
• Word Origin

noun, plural societies.
1.
an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes.
2.
a body of individuals living as members of a community; community.
3.
the body of human beings generally, associated or viewed as members of a community:
the evolution of human society.
4.
a highly structured system of human organization for large-scale community living that normally furnishes protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for its members:
American society.
5.
such a system characterized by its dominant economic class or form:
middle-class society; industrial society.
6.
those with whom one has companionship.
7.
companionship; company:
to enjoy the society of good friends.
the definition of society


Show us where that says anything about morality? And if morality is required, where does such a morality require that one must atone for another?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And that's because one person is responsible for another only for a short time, like a mother for a son, who is no longer responsible or can be called upon to atone for what her adult child did. You lose.

I never said she was responsible. Post up the post I did that. Or shut up about it. Atone is what she needs to do, it's what I said. She has a moral obligation.

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

He was not a child so why must his mother atone for his actions? Do tell.

 

[jc456]

I never said she was responsible. Post up the post I did that. Or shut up about it. Atone is what she needs to do, it's what I said. She has a moral obligation.

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

He was not a child so why must his mother atone for his actions? Do tell.

I already explained it

 

[jc456]

How is applying the sins of one person to another who didn't commit them based solely on relation 'moral'?

We are talking about family here. I cannot imagine a family not apologizing to another family if one of theirs harmed one of the others.

Apparently, family and morality seem to mean little to many today, and while I am not a 'family matters' kind of guy, the actions of those of my immediate family are by extension my responsibility.

To put it into terms you might understand, not having a family, if your boyfriend of many years killed someone while driving drunk, would you apologize?

paint by numbers has no idea what the basis of a society are. None, he is clueless to the bone.

society

[suh-sahy-i-tee]

• Synonyms
• Examples
• Word Origin

noun, plural societies.
1.
an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes.
2.
a body of individuals living as members of a community; community.
3.
the body of human beings generally, associated or viewed as members of a community:
the evolution of human society.
4.
a highly structured system of human organization for large-scale community living that normally furnishes protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for its members:
American society.
5.
such a system characterized by its dominant economic class or form:
middle-class society; industrial society.
6.
those with whom one has companionship.
7.
companionship; company:
to enjoy the society of good friends.
the definition of society


Show us where that says anything about morality? And if morality is required, where does such a morality require that one must atone for another?

guess you missed the phrase in the 1st item, or other purposes. Morality one.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

He blew himself up because of stress ! Can you say D-E-N-I-A-L ?

Of course she is in denial. Who could think differently?

Who could think differently ? Well to begin with, she's a Muslim. That right there should give you a good idea of her sanity.

Muslims are insane? Do they believe in giants, talking bushes and donkeys? Oh right, that's you. My bad.

Not me, I'm not a Christian, but interesting that you would equate the two. Ummm, no it's not, it's exactly what I expect from a liberal.
Terrorism around the world today = Muslims. But, but, but the Crusades !

 

[Conservative65]

In this case, yes. Her piece of shit son strapped a bomb jacket to himself and killed innocent people. Anyone that would make excuses for her is also a piece of shit.

Anyone that would make such excuses would be wildly irrational and in denial. Which is exactly what I'd expect from a grieving mother who lost her son and learned that he committed a horrible act that hurt so many people.

Denial is not only plausible, its predictable.

Anyone that would make that type of excuse is a pure dumbass.

Denial proves she is.

So a grieving mother whose son is 4 days dead said something stupid and is in denial.

Um.....shocker?

Is she denying he's dead? Is she denying he did it? She's a dumbass.

She's a grieving mother who is irrational and in denial about what her son did. Neither of which is particularly surprising. Her child has been dead 4 days.

4 days or 4 years, it makes no difference. The mother of the Boston Marathon Bomber said her son was framed and innocent doing so more than a year after he did what he did. Is she irrational?

 

[Conservative65]

I never said she was responsible. Post up the post I did that. Or shut up about it. Atone is what she needs to do, it's what I said. She has a moral obligation.

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

He was not a child so why must his mother atone for his actions? Do tell.

If he was not a child, why is his mommy sticking her nose in it? Do tell.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

He blew himself up because of stress ! Can you say D-E-N-I-A-L ?

Of course she is in denial. Who could think differently?

Who could think differently ? Well to begin with, she's a Muslim. That right there should give you a good idea of her sanity.

Muslims are insane? Do they believe in giants, talking bushes and donkeys? Oh right, that's you. My bad.

Not me, I'm not a Christian, but interesting that you would equate the two. Ummm, no it's not, it's exactly what I expect from a liberal.
Terrorism around the world today = Muslims. But, but, but the Crusades !

Same crazy shit, different century.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

He was not a child so why must his mother atone for his actions? Do tell.

If he was not a child, why is his mommy sticking her nose in it? Do tell.

Because she was asked. A decent society would know enough not to ask, but that wouldn't newsworthy now would it...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Anyone that would make such excuses would be wildly irrational and in denial. Which is exactly what I'd expect from a grieving mother who lost her son and learned that he committed a horrible act that hurt so many people.

Denial is not only plausible, its predictable.

Anyone that would make that type of excuse is a pure dumbass.

Denial proves she is.

So a grieving mother whose son is 4 days dead said something stupid and is in denial.

Um.....shocker?

Is she denying he's dead? Is she denying he did it? She's a dumbass.

She's a grieving mother who is irrational and in denial about what her son did. Neither of which is particularly surprising. Her child has been dead 4 days.

4 days or 4 years, it makes no difference. The mother of the Boston Marathon Bomber said her son was framed and innocent doing so more than a year after he did what he did. Is she irrational?

Probably, but her behavior is entirely expected.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Show us where such a thing is written? it's certainly not in the definition. Did you just make it up yourself?

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

He was not a child so why must his mother atone for his actions? Do tell.

I already explained it

You've explained nothing, because you cannot. No adult is required to atone for another adult.

 

[Skylar]

Anyone that would make such excuses would be wildly irrational and in denial. Which is exactly what I'd expect from a grieving mother who lost her son and learned that he committed a horrible act that hurt so many people.

Denial is not only plausible, its predictable.

Anyone that would make that type of excuse is a pure dumbass.

Denial proves she is.

So a grieving mother whose son is 4 days dead said something stupid and is in denial.

Um.....shocker?

Is she denying he's dead? Is she denying he did it? She's a dumbass.

She's a grieving mother who is irrational and in denial about what her son did. Neither of which is particularly surprising. Her child has been dead 4 days.

4 days or 4 years, it makes no difference. The mother of the Boston Marathon Bomber said her son was framed and innocent doing so more than a year after he did what he did. Is she irrational?

Nonsense. Grief, even for a lost child, fades with time to more managable levels. 4 days is immediate. 4 years isn't. You're expecting a grieving mother to react as if she isn't grieving for a lost child.

That's unrealistic.

 

[tigerred59]

Are there any intelligent muslims in this world.? Hang them all.

Mother of Paris bomber says her son did 'not mean to kill anyone'

nov 17 2015 The mother of a Paris suicide bomber says her son 'did not mean to kill anyone' - and claims he may have blown himself up because of stress, while a third son said his family were 'thinking of the victims'.

Ibrahim Abdeslam, 31, launched a solo attack outside the cafe Comptoir Voltaire, close to the scene of the Bataclan concert hall massacre on Friday night.

Today Ibrahim's mother suggested his suicide jacket may have gone off by accident and said he could have carried out the attack because he was 'stressed'.

The fact that she's of mind of how this kid was feeling, should make her a target of being investigated.

 

[tigerred59]

i already told you why. saying it again is redundant.

Show us where this is written, in what school of morality?

well for one, if you did own a gun, that gun is expected by law to be locked. If it isn't and your child used it in a murder you become directly responsible and go to jail most likely for not locking up the firearm. There are many laws and societal expectations from family. The cop in Fox lake, IL, his wife will be in a world of hurt for his mistakes and she did nothing but not say anything to anybody about what he was doing. Dude, you are just a clueless fk on an internet message board and you're lost. Completely lost.

He was not a child so why must his mother atone for his actions? Do tell.

I already explained it

You've explained nothing, because you cannot. No adult is required to atone for another adult.

Really? If she knew of her son's intent, she's just as guilty.