Non-IT News Thread
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@NattNatt said in Non-IT News Thread:
Another terrorist attack in London overnight, seems to be a "retaliation attack" - but targeting peaceful Muslims that have never done anything wrong...
Was that confirmed? Assuming you're talking about the vehicle that ran over some people? The last report I read said that they didn't know if it was just an accident or intentional?
Yeah, the latest was that when the guy was arrested, he was shouting "Death to Muslims, I've done my part" while being taken away - sounds pretty intentional to me sadly.
-
@NattNatt said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@NattNatt said in Non-IT News Thread:
Another terrorist attack in London overnight, seems to be a "retaliation attack" - but targeting peaceful Muslims that have never done anything wrong...
Was that confirmed? Assuming you're talking about the vehicle that ran over some people? The last report I read said that they didn't know if it was just an accident or intentional?
Yeah, the latest was that when the guy was arrested, he was shouting "Death to Muslims, I've done my part" while being taken away - sounds pretty intentional to me sadly.
While it's true (and completely wrong) that we call a single person acting out a terror attack these days - I personally don't consider this a terrorist attack unless it was sponsored by one of the terrorist orgs.
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@NattNatt said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@NattNatt said in Non-IT News Thread:
Another terrorist attack in London overnight, seems to be a "retaliation attack" - but targeting peaceful Muslims that have never done anything wrong...
Was that confirmed? Assuming you're talking about the vehicle that ran over some people? The last report I read said that they didn't know if it was just an accident or intentional?
Yeah, the latest was that when the guy was arrested, he was shouting "Death to Muslims, I've done my part" while being taken away - sounds pretty intentional to me sadly.
While it's true (and completely wrong) that we call a single person acting out a terror attack these days - I personally don't consider this a terrorist attack unless it was sponsored by one of the terrorist orgs.
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
By definition a "terror attack" is just an attack that is designed//executed to cause terror, can be a crazy-guy targeting a specific group or an organised group out to cause as much destruction as possible.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
While it's true (and completely wrong) that we call a single person acting out a terror attack these days - I personally don't consider this a terrorist attack unless it was sponsored by one of the terrorist orgs.
grind it.You redefining what it means doesn't make it so, though. Your definition doesn't match up with what the term means.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
Why would that make it better?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
While it's true (and completely wrong) that we call a single person acting out a terror attack these days - I personally don't consider this a terrorist attack unless it was sponsored by one of the terrorist orgs.
grind it.You redefining what it means doesn't make it so, though. Your definition doesn't match up with what the term means.
You're both right - but at the same time, we didn't call these types of attacks terror attacks 20+ years ago, they were hate crimes, etc.
Now we call everything a terror attack - just fueling the governments machine to take away more of our freedoms.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
Why would that make it better?
It's better because it's less likely that another attack will be forth coming, at least from the same person.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
While it's true (and completely wrong) that we call a single person acting out a terror attack these days - I personally don't consider this a terrorist attack unless it was sponsored by one of the terrorist orgs.
grind it.You redefining what it means doesn't make it so, though. Your definition doesn't match up with what the term means.
You're both right - but at the same time, we didn't call these types of attacks terror attacks 20+ years ago, they were hate crimes, etc.
Now we call everything a terror attack - just fueling the governments machine to take away more of our freedoms.
That's people fueling that. If people didn't assume that terror attack meant something that it doesn't, the government would have no fuel.
A terror attack has always been an attack meant to cause terror. And remember, all military action is a terror action to someone.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
Why would that make it better?
It's better because it's less likely that another attack will be forth coming, at least from the same person.
You can say the same thing about any terrorist group. I don't see any differentiation.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
Why would that make it better?
It's better because it's less likely that another attack will be forth coming, at least from the same person.
You can say the same thing about any terrorist group. I don't see any differentiation.
I'm not surprised. You also never hear the wrong words in a song either though - like so many of the rest of us
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
With any luck, this is just one pissed of person with an ax to grind, and sadly this is how they decided to grind it.
Why would that make it better?
It's better because it's less likely that another attack will be forth coming, at least from the same person.
You can say the same thing about any terrorist group. I don't see any differentiation.
I'm not surprised. You also never hear the wrong words in a song either though - like so many of the rest of us
Hearing the wrong words is very different from making up personal meanings to defined words.
-
And bottom line, if you are going to make up your own meanings, the government has been empowered to do whatever they want. That's the empowerment.
-
You've got a Smoky the Bear problem here. Only YOU can prevent forest fires. The only person with the power to change this situation are the people who choose to misuse the words. When you misuse words, you make the government able to mislead you without lying. But the government can't make this happen, only the people choosing to play semantic games can do so. Stop those games, and the government, as well as marketers, become weak. Both prey on people wanting words to mean what they want, rather than what they do.
-
The thing is that there are three major possibilities in the driving into a crowd case...
- Drunk, asleep, dead, dementia or other "accidental" killing. This happens.
- Hate or focused crime where someone is trying to hurt the people in question.
- Terrorism where the goal isn't to hurt the people involved but to scare those that were not involved.
-
Example.....
Blowing up Westboro Baptist Church would likely be a normal crime, not terrorism, because chances are someone was trying to kill the people there NOT to scare other people.
Blowing up a random church is likely an act of terrorism hoping to scare churchgoers in general.
-
The train station in Brussels that we used in 2012 was just bombed. No details yet. Evacuation underway.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
The train station in Brussels that we used in 2012 was just bombed. No details yet. Evacuation underway.
-
This is well worth watching...
-
@dafyre said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
The train station in Brussels that we used in 2012 was just bombed. No details yet. Evacuation underway.
From the reports so far, sounds like the only dead person is the bomber. They evacuated before it went off.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@dafyre said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
The train station in Brussels that we used in 2012 was just bombed. No details yet. Evacuation underway.
From the reports so far, sounds like the only dead person is the bomber. They evacuated before it went off.
That's good news at least, except for the damage to the train station.
