Terror attack in Boulder Colorado

[hollydolly]

The wife and five children of the suspect who allegedly threw Molotov cocktails at pro-Israeli protestors have been arrested by authorities.

The family of Mohamed Soliman, 45, were taken into custody by agents with ICE and Homeland Security on Tuesday.

Soliman is an Egyptian national who overstayed his visa after entering into the US during the Biden administration.

The legal status and names of his wife and children have not been released.

The suspect's family are being processed for expedited removal, which would allow authorities to rapidly deport them without a hearing in an immigration court.

The arrests of Soliman's family were confirmed by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on X, where she shared a video saying they will be deported while Soliman's 'despicable actions will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.'

'We are also investigating to what extent his family knew about this horrific attack,' Noem said. 'If they had any knowledge of it or if they provided any support to it.


The terror suspect is now facing 16 counts of attempted murder and federal hate crime charges after allegedly launching the makeshift flamethrowers on Sunday, wounding at least 12 people.

The suspect has lived with his wife and five children in Colorado Springs, a city about 100 miles south of Boulder, for the past three years. The Egyptian national also previously spent 17 years living in Kuwait.

When reporters arrived at Soliman's home after the attack, toys seeming to belong to small children could be seen outside. The ages of his five children that have now been arrested are not known.

The affidavit says that he plotted the firebombing for over a year, but waited until after his daughter's graduation to conduct the attack.

Soliman also worked as an Uber driver and had passed the company´s eligibility requirements, which include a criminal background check, according to a spokesperson for Uber.

Boulder terror suspect's wife and FIVE kids are arrested

 

[January]

You’re romanticizing pre-colonial life. The notion that Native American tribes lived in some utopian harmony before Europeans arrived is ahistorical. Many tribes were in near or constant warfare with each other, raiding, enslaving, and conquering long before Columbus showed up. That doesn't excuse colonial atrocities, but let’s not pretend the Americas were one big peace circle until white people landed.

well, I didnt actually claim or pretend that. Strawman argument - you are arguing against something nobody claimed

things were certainly vastly better for indiginous people before white people arrived and I dont know of any atrocities murdering unarmed women and children such as Mitch described before white people arrived- but vastly better isnt Eden and I didnt say it was

nevertheless the indiginous people of almost every colonised every country fared much better before arrival of white people ( I put almost because perhaps there are exceptions) - so, yes, my statement that it worked quite well stands. Certainly far better than after the arrival


The idea that there is some uni cultural Eden that worked so well compared to multicultural societies, which is what my comment was originally in response to, is a romanticised version of a utopia that didnt exist.

 

[SeaBreeze]

I've enjoyed my back and forth with JB Vaughn. You're actually pretty unpleasant and I suggest we put each other on "ignore." LOL.

Do whatever makes you happy, I don't really care.

 

[oslooskar]

well, I didnt actually claim or pretend that. Strawman argument - you are arguing against something nobody claimed things were certainly vastly better for indiginous people before white people arrived and I dont know of any atrocities murdering unarmed women and children such as Mitch described before white people arrived- but vastly better isnt Eden and I didnt say it was nevertheless the indiginous people of almost every colonised every country fared much better before arrival of white people ( I put almost because perhaps there are exceptions) - so, yes, my statement that it worked quite well stands. Certainly far better than after the arrival
The idea that there is some uni cultural Eden that worked so well compared to multicultural societies, which is what my comment was originally in response to, is a romanticised version of a utopia that didnt exist.

January, you’re walking a fine rhetorical line. You said things “worked quite well” before Europeans arrived and that indigenous people were “vastly better off” pre-contact. Then you deny romanticizing the past when that’s exactly what your phrasing suggests. Saying “I didn’t claim Eden” after implying a golden age is like saying you didn’t call it paradise, just that it was wonderful until the white devils showed up.

And your assertion that atrocities like the killing of unarmed women and children didn’t happen before European contact simply doesn’t hold up. From the Haudenosaunee torturing captives to the Aztecs ritually sacrificing thousands, including women and children, the pre-colonial world was no stranger to brutality. The Mongols, who were distant genetic cousins to Native Americans, committed genocides across Eurasia two centuries before Columbus. Violence, conquest, and cruelty were global, not exclusive to Europeans.

Colonialism was brutal, yes. But pretending pre-contact societies were peaceful until Europeans came along isn’t nuance, it’s historical amnesia dressed up as moral clarity.

If your argument is simply that colonization made things worse for indigenous people, that’s a fair and widely accepted point. But if you're going to dress that up in vague nostalgia about how well everything “worked” before the arrival of outsiders, expect people to ask, “Worked for whom and compared to what?”

 

[January]

as usual you are reading implications into what I said that are not there and I know how discussions with you end up

This is tangential to topic of OP and even tangential to my original point about multiculturalism - so will leave it there.

feel free to start another thread on indiginous peoples before colonisation if you wish

 

[oslooskar]

as usual you are reading implications into what I said that are not there and I know how discussions with you end up This is tangential to topic of OP and even tangential to my original point about multiculturalism - so will leave it there. feel free to start another thread on indiginous peoples before colonisation if you wish

January, when someone says societies "worked quite well" before colonization, they’re implying a contrast, usually moral or functional, with what came after. If that wasn’t your implication, fine. But don’t fault others for reading between the lines when your phrasing invites it.

As for being "tangential," I was directly addressing your point about pre-colonial societies and cultural contributions. A discussion about multiculturalism that ignores the historical realities of all cultures, including indigenous ones, isn’t much of a discussion. But you’re free to bow out if it’s getting uncomfortable.

I’ll take your suggestion and consider starting another thread. Unlike some, I don’t mind following an argument to its logical end.