Mark Anthony Conditt's blog. (austin bomber)

[Eko]

Pretty much exactly what you would expect from a conservative.
"There are a couple things wrong with your argument that I would like to correct. First, falling in love is a choice. When you "fall in love" you become infatuated with your significant other, and you will eventually fall out of love.

Second, yes, the government shouldn't tell them whom they can and cannot marry, but we shouldn't even have this problem! Homosexuality is not natural. Just look at the male and female bodies. They are obviously designed to couple. The natural design is apparent. It is not natural to couple male with male and female with female. It would be like trying to fit two screws together and to nuts together and then say, "See, it’s natural for them to go together."

In addition, political protection of a sexual practice is ludicrous. I do not believe it is proper to pass laws stating that homosexuals have 'rights.' What about pedophilia or bestiality? These are sexual practices. Should they also be protected by law? If homosexuality is protected by law, why not those as well? "
http://definingmystance.blogspot.com/?m=1

[Hassin Bin Sober]

1. Typical

Hates gay marriage and abortion. Wants to outlaw them.

But wants to do away with sex offender registrations.

Hmm.

[dawg day]

2. So often these young men hate love

It's probably an indication that they are quite emotionally immature, and yet are trying to sound cynical.

He also seems to think that it's okay to prohibit sexual practice by law-- just not to "allow' it by law.

Oh, well, no wonder he became a bomber. Like all these types, frankly, he's not very bright at all, but thinks he's smarter than anyone else and can't understand why no one obeys him.

[lapfog_1]

3. not surprised

there will be more about race and religion and other topics

the question will be how did he pick the targets? People he knew personally or picked at random or just because they fit one of his "bad people" categories... did he switch to a different triggering and delivery mechanism just to throw off the police?

[MissB]

4. He was - what- 17? when he wrote that. And homeschooled.

He may well have been a hateful person- his apparent actions bear out that. But- I read those words through the eyes of a homeschooled 17 year old and I get that he didn’t have much of a chance.

No excuse for his actions. Plenty of folks grow up in those situations and end up fine citizens.

Glad he took the final action he did.

[Eko]

5. I think its obvious that he was a hateful person.

He blew up people.

[MissB]

6. I can assume that.

I don’t know. He clearly wasn’t all puppies and rainbows. His photo from that timeframe showed a perfectly normal kid, not at all different looking than my oldest child. I can’t possibly understand what causes someone to blow people up. Wish he would’ve started with him.

No manifesto yet?

[Eko]

7. Hate causes people to blow other people up.

[MissB]

8. Nah. I hate several people, but I dont blow them up.

Clearly it’s more than that. If hate makes people blow others up then the entire world would be a wasteland.

As usual, if only he’d started with himself.

[Eko]

9. If it wasnt hate then what could it have been?

[MissB]

16. People have different opinions.

You’ve chosen hate as the answer. I’m not saying thats wrong, I’m just doubtful that hate is the only thing that turned him.

Folks come up with answers like mental illness or evil or disagreement with government. It’s pretty unknowable what drove him unless we have a manifesto that reveals his thoughts.

[Eko]

17. Why are you doubtful?

What leads you to believe this?

[MissB]

19. I believe strongly that folks have different opinions about a variety of topics.

You’ll have to be more specific about your question - what do you think I’m doubting and what is “this” you refer to. If you’re asking why I doubt it was hate that was the only driver, I can reiterate the above posts that you’ve probably read already.

I get that you’re disgusted that he killed people. News flash: so am I. I don’t have answers as to why he did- I’m merely pointing out that a simple black/white answer isn’t going to cover his probable many issues. None of his issues is an excuse for what he did. I just disagree that it’s so simple as to say “hate” is why he did it.

[Eko]

20. There are two problems with what you are saying.

First, no one here has stated that it was hate that was the only driver, just the main one. Second, from all the evidence we have now, and I know it is small, there are no reports that he had a mental illness, none from his family, school or co-workers. There is no evidence that he disagreed with the government enough to do this and if so why not bomb the government? Here is a quote from him on his blog, " The reasons I am taking this class is because I want to understand the US government, and I hope that it will help me clarify my stance, and then defend it.". As for evil, evil is another word for hate. Whom did he attack? Diverse people. Who did he attack in his blog? Diverse people. Its entirely possible all of this is wrong, but we can only go on what information we have now to come to a conclusion, if you said it is too early to come to a conclusion I would agree with you, but you didn't do that, you said "Clearly it’s more than that.". Clearly its not. There is no information available that supports that conclusion at all. If you do have information to support that then feel free to share it. I have no problem being wrong, but telling me that because you believe it when all available evidence points away from that is clearly not right. I appreciate the conversation, and if I am coming across as a jerk then I apologize.
Thanks,
Eko.

[MissB]

21. You are arguing something completely different

And I’m not sure why. I’m arguing it isn’t black and white and you are arguing the various possibilities and trying to discard them. That’s fine- again, we have a different opinion. I didn’t read but a few sentences of your post above this one because it’s clear that you are trying to argue something vastly different than what I’m trying to convey. Since it’s clear we don’t agree, how about we just amicably agree to disagree what his motives are. You think they are clear and I do not.

Not my hill to die on.

[exboyfil]

10. Well his grandma loved him

You have got that.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/21/us/austin-suspect-what-we-know/index.html

[Ilsa]

11. I wish that would be preserved for law enforcement,

in case they want it for some reason, and then removed from access on the internet. That family is grieving, and they don't need to be tempted to look at what's online about their son.

[Eko]

12. I can see where you are coming from,

But I think the people of Austin who were afraid to open packages that he terrorized and most especially the ones who were bombed and their families should be able to look it up on the net at any time they want. Not to mention the millions of Americans who wondered if their package was a bomb. He was a terrorist.

[misanthrope]

13. The first paragraph excerpted isn't entirely wrong

There is an amount of willingness that certainly is a component of infatuation, sometimes recognized, other times subconscious. To deny that is willful ignorance. It's also beside the point.

However, that shouldn't be an excuse to hate someone else for their motivations and actions when it comes to their personal life and romantic existence. Not when it involves consenting adults and that stops when you attempt to conflate homosexuality/bisexuality with pedophilia or bestiality.

[Eko]

14. There is also an amount of willingness

for people to want to be free.

[Eko]

15. I cant believe some of the posts I am getting here.

The dude killed people, quit making excuses. He was a terrorist. WTF? I am disgusted.

[blake2012]

18. Im right there with you! Fascinating how people make excuses