The terrorist attacks we don't care about

167891012»

Comments

  • i_lov_iti_lov_it Posts: 4,007
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    Wounded Knee...could be classed as a Terrorist attack?...absolutely disgusting that is
    Would killing aborigines be considered a terrorist attack?
    I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say with this?
    The Australians massacred aborigines for years just like the US did at Wounded Knee; would you consider aborigines being massacred a terrorist attack?
    I asked the question first ;)
  • mcgruff10mcgruff10 Posts: 28,495
    i_lov_it said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    Wounded Knee...could be classed as a Terrorist attack?...absolutely disgusting that is
    Would killing aborigines be considered a terrorist attack?
    I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say with this?
    The Australians massacred aborigines for years just like the US did at Wounded Knee; would you consider aborigines being massacred a terrorist attack?
    I asked the question first ;)
    No I don't think they were terrorist attacks in either instance.
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • i_lov_iti_lov_it Posts: 4,007
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    i_lov_it said:
    Wounded Knee...could be classed as a Terrorist attack?...absolutely disgusting that is
    Would killing aborigines be considered a terrorist attack?
    I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say with this?
    The Australians massacred aborigines for years just like the US did at Wounded Knee; would you consider aborigines being massacred a terrorist attack?
    I asked the question first ;)
    No I don't think they were terrorist attacks in either instance.
    It was definitely genocide though...I'm doing some research to see if exactly Wounded Knee was a terrorist attack...staying on topic with the title of the thread...
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,950
    edited May 2018
    I think it's commonly accepted that the US government committed genocide, and that all of the events that killed First Nations en masse, be it via slaughter or battle, were a part of that genocide.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • i_lov_iti_lov_it Posts: 4,007
    PJ_Soul said:
    I think it's commonly accepted that the US government committed genocide, and that all of the events that killed First Nation en masse, be it via slaughter or battle, were a part of that genocide.
    This we can agree on...
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 29,525
    Israel doing the things they are doing the past few days i'd consider to be terrorist acts ..
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,950
    edited April 2019
    Sri Lanka explosions: 137 killed as churches and hotels targeted



    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 Posts: 10,739
    PJ_Soul said:
    Sri Lanka explosions: 137 killed as churches and hotels targeted



    Gosh, that's awful.  All people wanted to do is worship and pray and celebrate Easter and every faith deserve to celebrate and pray in peace.  Just terrible.  
    Give Peas A Chance…
  • njnancynjnancy Posts: 5,096
    PJ_Soul said:
    Sri Lanka explosions: 137 killed as churches and hotels targeted



    Gosh, that's awful.  All people wanted to do is worship and pray and celebrate Easter and every faith deserve to celebrate and pray in peace.  Just terrible.  
    I heard it on the news and then came across this thread. Perfect example of the thread's focus. 

    I think that some people really care about these type of attacks and are emotionally invested in them and want to make a change -sometimes dedicating a thread on social media to spread awareness is the best that we can do at the moment. 

    I think there are some people who hear about it and think about the tragedy for a moment and then move on with their day, not out of callousness, but because they have so many other things to worry about that they need to attend to that they don't have the energy to focus on something so far out of their reach. Life is overwhelming to many of us and people choose different escapes. Some may come on line and can express their interest in their spare time, or there are a myriad of other less taxing things people can do in their down time, if they have any. 

    I think some people don't give a shit. They hear it, it's over there, let them all kill each other and make life easier for us (without realizing the terrorists would love to kill us the moment they had the means to do so, but are focussing on local places they have decided don't deserve to exist). This group sometimes have strong opinions based upon minimal information. 

    I think some people are unaware of most global affairs. They are also unaware of most domestic affairs. They just don't dedicate much brain space to news except for maybe a half hour local news show, but don't read newspapers or watch any other television news. They get info from friends or co workers or the TV in the break room or doctor's office and they form broad opinions from these snippets. Some don't even go that far. And there are many different types of people who could fall into this category. I know people who are completely uninterested in news, either it's all bullshit or they just have no interest. 

    Just think of the breaking all day news coverage of a fire at an historic church where no one was killed compared to the 50 second mention on the news that this incident received and the 2nd page blurb, optimistically perhaps below the fold,  it will get in major newspapers. 

    News is going to show people what people want to see. With a 24 hour news cycle, I think that these stories could be given more attention instead of an endless loop of what Trump tweeted as he watches Fox news down at his resort. Or the same information about the Mueller report (which is available free, on line, for all to read - don't really need someone explaining to me what obvious information MEANS). It should be given more air time as there is a lot going on and 24 hours  should afford the ability to do so. But obviously the marketing data shows that their viewers are not interested and it comes down to ratings. Perhaps a prime time personality might focus on these stories, but as a whole, there could be more information right now about the attack instead of the same information repeated over and over. 

    The BBC or other news shows will cover it, as will on-line sites. But most people aren't paying attention to that. They are watching their fave channel as they prepare for the holiday or for work and are not interested in immersing themselves any further into world events. We are very ignorant of world news compared with other parts of the world that are aware of what is going on over here. Current events is a subject that should be encouraged more in schools; I've always believed that. As well as civics so that people understand how their country really works. 

    Two more bombings - they've told people to stay in their homes and shutting down social media sites. 140 killed, expected to rise, 500 wounded - foreigners among the dead (I've always found this additional info to make the non-foreigner life less valuable and distasteful). Worst attack since the civil war 10 years ago. I don't understand the mindset of people who love to kill others in the name of some cherry picked religious/cultural view. It's a very sad situation and I hope they are able to stop what seems to be an on-going attack. People should be able to feel safe in at least one place. But Christians/Catholics are seen as infidels in the eyes of these very dangerous self appointed rule making assholes. 

    End of thought.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    This is awful, the hate that resides within some is astonishing.  The ones that carried out these attacks do not deserve to be called humans.
  • AnnafalkAnnafalk Posts: 4,004
    It’s so very sad to see all the grieving relatives devastated with sorrow. Their life’s are forever changed.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER Posts: 6,499
    This is a lot more sad than a cathedral burning to the ground in my opinion.  I would rather read about the Paris cathedral burning down 100x than another report of this kind of terrorism.  Funny how much more attention the stupid cathedral got...
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 Posts: 10,739
    edited April 2019
    Sri Lanka bombings were retaliation for Christchurch shooting, defense minister says

    https://trib.al/7EwYdOs?fbclid=IwAR0qHRNNIgVKkA4H-OzjaFPU0BBLDikly_dhAyczs1fwLh1C4uPHg4aj8gI

    What a fucking joke these assholes are...on both sides

    Cowards.  On both sides.  It's just religion, it's fucking fake...only naive people believe in those fairy tales...

    Let's find a deserted Island, one preferably in great white territory, ship all the religious nut cases there, and let them kill each...
    Post edited by Meltdown99 on
    Give Peas A Chance…
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,138
    edited April 2019
    From what I read the defense minister has  no grounds to make this claim.  It could be for the invention of the Easter bunny... people willing to strap bombs to themselves to kill innocent people will take any excuse given as long as they believe it to be god’s will. 
  • njnancynjnancy Posts: 5,096
    They had a heads up 2 weeks ago that this was in the works but the government couldn't put their differences aside to handle it. They had names, addresses, meeting places.....kinda like ignoring Osama Bin Laden planning to use planes to attack US. 

    They knew where to find them afterward cause they had all the info they didn't act on. Ridiculous. 
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 Posts: 10,739
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    Give Peas A Chance…
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 Posts: 10,739
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    You do not think a gang committing a drive-by shooting are not terroroist?  I think maybe it can be broken up, maybe drug traffickers shooting at each...maybe not?  But at this point, random gun violence fits the terror description for me. 
    Give Peas A Chance…
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    You do not think a gang committing a drive-by shooting are not terroroist?  I think maybe it can be broken up, maybe drug traffickers shooting at each...maybe not?  But at this point, random gun violence fits the terror description for me. 
    No, I don’t. Not if you go by the definition of terror attacks.
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 Posts: 10,739
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    You do not think a gang committing a drive-by shooting are not terroroist?  I think maybe it can be broken up, maybe drug traffickers shooting at each...maybe not?  But at this point, random gun violence fits the terror description for me. 
    No, I don’t. Not if you go by the definition of terror attacks.
     
    If you commit a drive-by with an AR-15 discriminately spraying bullets and the people in the vicinity are:  terrorized.  Whether they are the intended target or not, they intended on causing terror...
    Give Peas A Chance…
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,583
    edited June 2019
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    You do not think a gang committing a drive-by shooting are not terroroist?  I think maybe it can be broken up, maybe drug traffickers shooting at each...maybe not?  But at this point, random gun violence fits the terror description for me. 
    No, I don’t. Not if you go by the definition of terror attacks.
     
    If you commit a drive-by with an AR-15 discriminately spraying bullets and the people in the vicinity are:  terrorized.  Whether they are the intended target or not, they intended on causing terror...
    and where is the political component in your example?

    the political is a defining characteristic of a terrorist attack.

    otherwise is a criminal act slone in the eyes of the law, no matter how the victims affected felt in the moment.




    Post edited by mickeyrat on
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,583
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Posts: 12,845
    mickeyrat said:
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    You do not think a gang committing a drive-by shooting are not terroroist?  I think maybe it can be broken up, maybe drug traffickers shooting at each...maybe not?  But at this point, random gun violence fits the terror description for me. 
    No, I don’t. Not if you go by the definition of terror attacks.
     
    If you commit a drive-by with an AR-15 discriminately spraying bullets and the people in the vicinity are:  terrorized.  Whether they are the intended target or not, they intended on causing terror...
    and where is the political component in your example?

    the political is a defining characteristic of a terrorist attack.

    otherwise is a criminal act slone in the eyes of the law, no matter how the victims affected felt in the moment.




    Yes. Terrorism is defined by its political or ideological basis. If one applies the terrorism 
    label to any violent crime it completely loses its meaning. 

    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,950
    At least 4 dead in shooting in Australian city of Darwin

    https://trib.al/KvN9Mc2?fbclid=IwAR0JgUafWDwMoNat4LZhEcwzRTbgXNNCr7FIy0WL5M4lYaDBVnOzeDeA8jc

    At this point may be any multiple shooting deaths should be labelled a terror attack.


    I would not label gang shootings or intra-family killings as terrorist acts, to name just two. There is value in keeping the term for what it is designed to mean. 
     
    You do not think a gang committing a drive-by shooting are not terroroist?  I think maybe it can be broken up, maybe drug traffickers shooting at each...maybe not?  But at this point, random gun violence fits the terror description for me. 
    No, I don’t. Not if you go by the definition of terror attacks.
     
    If you commit a drive-by with an AR-15 discriminately spraying bullets and the people in the vicinity are:  terrorized.  Whether they are the intended target or not, they intended on causing terror...
    Actual terrorism is not defined by whether or not people were terrified or terrorized in the context you're using it. You can't just take words that have a meaning and change the meaning because you feel like it. It doesn't work that way.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,950
    Nigeria suicide attack: Triple blasts kill at least 30 in Borno.



    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    any act that results in the intended victim feeling terrorised is by definition a terrorist act. for example, invading a home, dragging out an occupant knowing full well their neighbours will be sleeping fitfully, waiting for their own home to be invaded, is by definition terrorism.   
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,950
    edited August 2019
    any act that results in the intended victim feeling terrorised is by definition a terrorist act. for example, invading a home, dragging out an occupant knowing full well their neighbours will be sleeping fitfully, waiting for their own home to be invaded, is by definition terrorism.   
    That simply isn't the definition of terrorism. Not in the dictionary, not in law, nowhere. Sorry, I guess maybe it would feel good to just make up meanings for everything any way we see fit as individuals and declare it the definition, but it doesn't work that way, thank goodness.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mcgruff10mcgruff10 Posts: 28,495
    PJ_Soul said:
    any act that results in the intended victim feeling terrorised is by definition a terrorist act. for example, invading a home, dragging out an occupant knowing full well their neighbours will be sleeping fitfully, waiting for their own home to be invaded, is by definition terrorism.   
    That simply isn't the definition of terrorism. Not in the dictionary, not in law, nowhere. Sorry, I guess maybe it would feel good to just make up meanings for everything any way we see fit as individuals and declare it the definition, but it doesn't work that way, thank goodness.
    How did I miss that?!? That definition is ridiculous!!!!
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
Sign In or Register to comment.