43 replies to this topic

[Yasnov]

_{tell me nightingale , who were those shooters trying to coerce ? who were they attempting to instill fear in? What reign of terror did they seek to establish ?}

Aligarr, why not ask those questions to the surviving witnesses, the wounded or the families of the victims?

Yasnov

[Aligarr]

What for ? It wouldn't change the definition of the shooter , of course they must have been "terrorized " , but by a madman without a cause , a deranged psychotic with no ideology or goal .Angry at the world for his own failures , just as the Virginia Tech and Columbine shooters .

Edited by Aligarr, 30 July 2012 - 01:52 PM.

[Yasnov]

What for ? It wouldn't change the definition of the shooter , of course they must have been "terrorized "

Please show some sympathy to the victims, Aligarr. Stop ridiculing and making fun of them with your cynical quote and unquote. When those people in the theater were terrorized they were terrorized, your silly quote and unqoute would not change that fact.

but by a madman without a cause , a deranged psychotic

He planned it for months. And you are a psychiatrist? And he is your patient?

with no ideology or goal .Angry at the world for his own failures , just as the Virginia Tech and Columbine shooters .

Says who? Send him to me and most likely I will be able to tell you of his goals.

Yasnov

[Nightingale]

As I said Aligarr, one of my friends was amongst the killed at Virginia Tech. I know his family quite well and you don't think they were terrorized and experienced the same pain people who suffer from terrorism do?

What about the Norwegian shooter? He's the same thing as the Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora shooters. They are all terrorists. By the definition.

[abdullahfath]

<sub>tell me nightingale , who were those shooters trying to coerce ? who were they attempting to instill fear in? What reign of terror did they seek to establish ? .

They sought to kill as many people as they could ,before being killed themselves or committing suicide at the conclusion of their act .</sub>

Isn't James Holmes currently on trial and thus not killed?

the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

source: http://www.merriam-w...onary/terrorist

Ter´ror`ist n. 1. One who governs by terrorism or intimidation; specifically, an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France. 2. One who commits terrorism{2}.

source: http://www.webster-d...ition/terrorist

Ter´ror`ism n. 1. The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; a mode of government by terror or intimidation. 2. The practise of coercing governments to accede to political demands by committing violence on civilian targets; any similar use of violence to achieve goals.

source: http://www.webster-d...ition/Terrorism

Webster is the most acceptable source for definitions in English first of all. Secondly, by using this the idea that Columbine was a "terrorist" act is mistaken as is Virginia Tech regardless of whether media used it to refer to it as well. However, Oklahoma City was a terrorist act.

Timothy James McVeigh (April 23, 1968 – June 11, 2001) was a United States Army veteran and security guard who detonated a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Commonly referred to as the Oklahoma City Bombing, the attack killed 168 people and injured over 800 people,^[3] and was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.^[3]
McVeigh, a militia movement sympathizer, sought revenge against the federal government for its handling of the Waco Siege, which had ended in the deaths of 76 people exactly two years prior to the bombing, as well as for the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992. McVeigh hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government. He was convicted of 11 federal offenses and sentenced to death. His execution took place on June 11, 2001 at the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana. Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier were also convicted as conspirators in the plot.

source: http://en.wikipedia....Timothy_McVeigh

Personally, though, I believe that he was not a sympathizer and was in fact a member of a particular organization that decided to disavow him because he got caught. Although, I cannot particularly remember the name of the organization at present.

[Aligarr]

Abdullahfath -
That's right McVeigh was a terrorist . I agree . I also have previously stated that Columbine ,Virginia Tech and Aurora shooters were not terrorists , so we agree there too .

[Aligarr]

Yasnov , he was under a psychiatrist's care at the school he was attending . I doubt you could have gained any information of his goals , his own psychiatrist could not , so no , I would not send him to you . He was not a terrorist , but a psychotic as would anyone behaved as he did .

[Aligarr]

Nightingale I would agree that the Nowegian Shooter was both , a terrorist with an ideology against muslims , he therefore attacked the political party he thought responsible for what he percieved as a nationalistic threat or problem .
And yes , there is no doubt the victims at Virginia Tech were terrorized , not by a terrorist ,but by a psychotic killer without an ideology , but a desire to kill as many people as he could and then end his own life .


But you still haven't answered my question - Do you consider the Bus Bombing in Bulgaria to be a terrorist act , commited by a terrorist ?

Edited by Aligarr, 30 July 2012 - 06:49 PM.

[AHMAD_73]

i don't aim to attack you, while i like to discuss the issue from a fair acadimic view

That was a war

i, just, like to apply any deffenetion in acadimic mannar to that kind of war, without predecting the results in advance. do the deffention you accept specify the scale of the terror action or exclude the government's terrorism or wars?? specially since Al-qadaa calls its attacks as war as well.

the US didn't held the war to free the Iraqi people, but to destruct the alleged faked chimical weapon program!!!!! is it ok to chang the goals during the war...something like..i'm killing you because you wear a hat.....but i never had a hat.....that's exactly what i'm killing you for, hehehe

don't you believe that war contained some sorts of small scale terrorist actions like the Hadeetha incedent, when 4-5 marine fighters terrified the family of the 14 years old girl, Abeer, raped here repeatadily, and finally killed here along with all of her familly, and then set fire to the house.....ETC

Was Saddam practicing terrorism against the Shia in the South and the Kurds in the North

that is not right, the most agrissive action by Sadam was in the mid of the 80s against the kurdish village "halabgah" where about 200 been killed. at the time and after it, the Terrorist Sadam was recieving the maximum aid and specially the military aid from the west!!!! your country and global media didn't mention any thing about that tell the 2000!!!! you don't care about the Kurdish, you care about Israel....

The reasons for that war were political . The politics of the Bush Administration .And I'm in agreement with you regarding Blackwater , they WERE the responsibility of the occupying forces

that's great then the privite pre-paid killer folks are terrorists, what about the governments that contracted them!!!! i can see them are terrorists as well

However in the past 2 weeks over 400 have been killed in Iraq and 1500 wounded , not by the hand of the US or any foreign entity .
Who is doing that ? Blowing up people waiting in line for paychecks , blowing people up in Masjids while at prayer , blowing up people at funerals or pilgrims going to Holy Places .....what would you call that ? Is that "war " or "terrorism " ?

i can see that as the calculated consequances of the US war, .....

[Aligarr]

I see we agree on several issues , Blackwater was for all practical purpose and definitions , abunch of terrorists on the leash of occupying forces , and since I stated that the Invasion of Iraq was wrong from it's start , yes I would concede it to be a form of terrorism on a State Scale .

However I would diagree on the US being the blame for the sectarian violence and terrorism taking place in Iraq . And I would also disagree with your satement that Saddam did not inflict terrorism on the Shia in the south , he even went so far as to drain the swamplands where many thousands live and have lived for centuries . not to mention slaughtering 300,000 of them over the course of his rule .As for the Kurds , they've always been persecuted not only by Saddam but by Turkey , Iran and Syria .....terrorism has been used against them .

[Aligarr]

BTW Yasnov , I wasn;t making fun of the victims nor ridiculing them , I simply answered in the same tone you asked . Your question was silly . Yes anyone would expext the people were terrorized , you are confusing words now .
To be terrorized , could be brought about by anything , a fire , an earthquake , the fact that they are terrorized is a description of an emotional state , it doesnt make the shooter " a terrorist " no more than a vicious barking dog terrorizes a child ....does that make the dog a terrorist ? Holmes was a homicidal psychotic not a terrorist .

[Yasnov]

BTW Yasnov , I wasn;t making fun of the victims nor ridiculing them

Then why the need to use quote and unquote in terrorist?

To be terrorized , could be brought about by anything , a fire , an earthquake , the fact that they are terrorized is a description of an emotional state , it doesnt make the shooter " a terrorist " no more than a vicious barking dog terrorizes a child ....does that make the dog a terrorist ?

Sure, if the dog bought thousands of rounds of ammunition and, calmly purchased a ticket and returned to its car to prepare himself before reentering the theater to disorient and then shoot at the large crowd. Yes, If the dog rigged his apartment with jars of liquids, explosives and chemicals so that any person who entered his residence after the attack would be killed or maimed. Yes.

Holmes was a homicidal psychotic not a terrorist .

What incidence of mental illness he had prior to the terrorist act?

Yasnov

[Aligarr]

Yasnov quote does not denote ridicule . As far as his mental illness , only his doctor knows , the fact he was under care of a psychiatrist indicates , he had psychological issues , and subsequent actions on his part kind of confirms it .

Again you are confusing the NOUN "terrorist " with the ADVERBS "terrorized " and "terrorizing " .
Holmes ' only purpose was to kill and maim . No social , ideological , political or religious agendas .

Edited by Aligarr, 31 July 2012 - 10:50 AM.

[Aligarr]

Nightingale , you are strangely silent regarding the question I asked of you . Do you consider the Bus Bombing in Bulgaria a terrorist act , and the one who did it a terrorist ?

[Yasnov]

Yasnov quote does not denote ridicule .

Let me give you an example:

Americans are smart
Americans are "smart"

As far as his mental illness , only his doctor knows

Right, not only his doctor, but also yourself. Look at your posts how you know for sure that he suffered this and that. So, I can say, you are a "smart" man.

Yasnov

[Nightingale]

Yes the Bulgarian bombing was terrorism, even with the doubts of who actually committed it. There's a lot of talk it was Iran and Hezbollah, but there hasn't been any proof shown that it was them, but yes it was terrorism. I denounce all terrorism (whether small or large-scale, shootings or bombings).

[Aligarr]

I'm in agreement with you there , so inturn although it is suspected that Iran is behind it , since Hezbollah is their proxy , those who committed that act are terrorists .
I too am against any terrorist act whether it be by the hand of US occupyig forces in Iraq , or Iran's State sponsored terrorism .
Do you see a difference in motive between that and the Aurora shooter ? Even with a given , that the victims of both were in fact terrorized ?

[Aligarr]

Well Yasnov , logical deduction is not a rarity amongst anyone who has had an education , or even those who haven't .A man who walks into a McDonalds and opens fire on who ever happens to be in that restuarant, with the intention of killing as many people as possible - it is not unreasonable to conclude the man is psychotic .

As for my use of quotation marks ? There can be a number of uses. They are used to denote a previous use - as was the case in which I used it , and yes they can be used to negatively or positively denote anothers previous use ,as in this type of written discussion .Or they simply can be used to emphasize the word in question ,in this case the use of the word or it's meaning .

You have assumed a negativity , when none was indicated .That would be considered presumptious on your part ,you presumed there was ridicule , since there was no indication of ridicule or sarcasnm indicated in the context in which I used the quotation marks .

Edited by Aligarr, 31 July 2012 - 02:15 PM.

[Yasnov]

Well Yasnov , logical deduction is not a rarity amongst anyone who has had an education , or even those who haven't .A man who walks into a McDonalds and opens fire on who ever happens to be in that restuarant, with the intention of killing as many people as possible - it is not unreasonable to conclude the man is psychoti.

Except that you don't mention the extensive planning involved in James Holmes. All the calculation and deliberation. You seem to talk about spur of the moment thing in your McDonald case.

As for my use of quotation marks ? There can be a number of uses. They are used to denote a previous use - as was the case in which I used it

quote...unquote

informal

Definition

said to show that you are repeating someone else's words, especially if you do not agree with them
She says they're, quote 'just good friends' unquote.
http://dictionary.ca...h/quote-unquote

Yasnov

[Aligarr]

No Yasnov , a person who walks into a McDonalds and shoots everyone does indeed plan , he must attain the weapon , or if he already has it , he must load it , conceal it to a degree which would allow entry un-noticed . The only difference is the degree of planning involved .Both are psychotic.

As for the quotation marks You are wrong , OR you did not refer to the gollossary in the back of the dictionary - Section under"Punctuation,Mechanics and Manuscript Form " page 1682-subsection under- Quotation marks -there are examples 1 thru 7-a,b,and c. of different uses / Websters-New World Dictionary of the American Languqage /Second College Edition . Did you read them all , or simply choose the one that best suites your argument ?

Are you splitting hairs Yasnov , since from the beginning of this sub-discussion , I informed you of my intent ,when you questioned it, and from the beginning you chose a negative connotation despite the fact that there was nothing in the context in which I used the marks, that would indicate negativity [or ridicule ] . Perhaps you are reading more into it than is actually there .

Edited by Aligarr, 31 July 2012 - 04:49 PM.