Explosion at the Boston Marathon.

L.Y.S. said:
The question is not one of supporting the person's actions, but rather, their fundamental rights as a persons. Of all the BS rhetoric commonly thrown on this forum, you're telling me that defending HUMAN rights is supporting terrorism? Why don't we just dissolve due process, and the right to a fair and speedy trial while we're at it. I'm sure that'll help justice move along swimmingly in this country. :)
Click to expand...

Which of his rights have been violated, exactly?
 
Alt+F4 said:
You are correct. The same thing happened in 2007 when Steve Fossett's plane disappeared. Not only was crowd sourcing useless, it actually hindered the search because every amateur sleuth who thought they saw the plane took time away from legitimate leads.
Click to expand...

Oh! This sounds really familiar! Let me focus...

I see some names. Two names. One starts with S. The other one starts with J.

Let me focus harder ...

Sil... Silver? No! Sylvia!.. and J... Jo... Join? No, hold on ... John. John E something...? John Eddy.

No that's not right. ... John Edwardian.

Something like that.


Amirite?
 
The_Fire said:
No. Just no.

People purposefully targeting civilians for maximum shockeffect = Terrorists.
People trying to avoid killing civilians while fighting for freedom/basic human rights = Freedom fighters.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly with this. The expression "One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter" is glib and ignorant bollocks.

Baader Meinhof, Al Qaeda, IRA, Black September:
Killing civilians and non-involved people indiscriminately, targeting anyone to make their point.... Terrorists

French Maquis, Yugoslav Partisans, Greek and Cretan Andartes:
Targeted enemy installations, vehicles and soldiers only. Went to great lengths where possible to avoid killing civilians and enemy non-combatants.... Freedom fighters
 
L.Y.S. said:
Supporting human rights is terrorist sympathy? :confused:
Click to expand...

I have no idea how you relate this^ to what I posted.

Is it supporting human rights to demand the release of a terrorist? Ahem, an alleged terrorist?

Release him? What, now? Give him bail perhaps? I'm very confused as to what's being represented here.
 
smartcooky said:
I agree wholeheartedly with this. The expression "One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter" is glib and ignorant bollocks.

Baader Meinhof, Al Qaeda, IRA, Black September:Killing civilians and non-involved people indiscriminately, targeting anyone to make their point.... Terrorists

French Maquis, Yugoslav Partisans, Greek and Cretan Andartes:
Targeted enemy installations, vehicles and soldiers only. Went to great lengths where possible to avoid killing civilians and enemy non-combatants.... Freedom fighters
Click to expand...


Thanks for the definitions. Putting the ....:eye-poppi

So, going with your "logic", no-one considers the hilited to be "freedom fighters" ?

The written definition and the applied definition is a matter of on which side of the fence you exist. Ignorant bollocks, indeed.
 
The_Fire said:
No. Just no.

People purposefully targeting civilians for maximum shockeffect = Terrorists.
People trying to avoid killing civilians while fighting for freedom/basic human rights = Freedom fighters.
Click to expand...


No. Nice horse.

Freedom fighters, can, do, and have used terrorism. Definition of freedom fighter only depends on your ideology. "IRA are terrorists" to all but the people who support them. To those people they are freedom fighters. This is what the phrase (One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter) refers too.

But you already knew that.
 
I redact my previous statements out of lack of understanding of what two other posters meant. Perhaps I misinterpreted their statements in the thread.
 
Shiner said:
I have no idea how you relate this^ to what I posted.

Is it supporting human rights to demand the release of a terrorist? Ahem, an alleged terrorist?

Release him? What, now? Give him bail perhaps? I'm very confused as to what's being represented here.
Click to expand...

Apparently, chuck his critical condition right out of the hospital onto the street so as not to violate his rights, since he has no discernable health insurance. Thats the American way. Can't pay? Die.

ETA: Still waiting to hear which exact human right of this guy has been violated.
 
Last edited:
abaddon said:
ETA: Still waiting to hear which exact human right of this guy has been violated.
Click to expand...

Did I not just redact my previous statement out of lack of understanding and common ground? I dropped the issue, it was a fruitless debate.
 
Shiner said:
No. Nice horse.

Freedom fighters, can, do, and have used terrorism. Definition of freedom fighter only depends on your ideology. "IRA are terrorists" to all but the people who support them. To those people they are freedom fighters. This is what the phrase (One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter) refers too.

But you already knew that.
Click to expand...


People who call themselves "Freedom Fighters" who indiscriminately target civilians are terrorists, whether or not their supporters believe they are freedom fighters. End of!
 
zeggman said:
I still wonder why they shot the M.I.T. guard (a simple terrorist act?) and why they stole a car when they already had a car ("It's only a matter of time before they're looking for our car"?), but when two guys can't figure out that one of them can buy snacks while the other stays with the hostage ("You always buy Cheetos. I hate Cheetos"?) they seem more and more like whatever the terrorist version of Keystone Kops would be.
Click to expand...
They panicked? Or maybe the MIT guard found out their identities?

We still don't have a clue as to what their motives were, so it's all speculation.
 
Shiner said:
I get the feeling you disagree. The tag #FreeJahar is terrorist sympathy itself.

Using it to hilite a message of support for a terrorist is ........? Please fill in the blanks.
Click to expand...
We don't even know whether these guys were terrorists. So at this point it's just two sociopaths deciding to kill people for no apparent reason. Which makes supporting them even worse. But there's always people who'll cheer on random death and destruction.
 
smartcooky said:
People who call themselves "Freedom Fighters" who indiscriminately target civilians are terrorists, whether or not their supporters believe they are freedom fighters. End of!
Click to expand...


The fact that you felt you needed to post this, after quoting what you did, tells me that it is indeed the "End of!". Like I said, nice horse.
 
Peephole said:
We don't even know whether these guys were terrorists. So at this point it's just two sociopaths deciding to kill people for no apparent reason. Which makes supporting them even worse. But there's always people who'll cheer on random death and destruction.
Click to expand...


My point was the wording of the tag. "FreeJahar". He's under arrest. Pending whatever the U.S justice system has in store for him. Calls to "free him" are more out of line than any speculation on his guilt. I feel quite comfortable labeling him "terrorist". I doubt that any other conclusion will be reached.

Cue clever quips about MDC and so on.
 
zeggman said:
There are crazy people out there who could be stalking you. There are crazy people out there who could be stalking me. Allowing such a remote possibility to inspire fear which prevents us from leaving the house is idiotic.
Click to expand...

The chances of some crazy person stalking this kid is greatly magnified by the fact that his face was plastered worldwide, don't you think?

I've asked before, but haven't seen an answer: is the other "bag man" so fearful that he is housebound? If not, why not?
Click to expand...

There have been no interviews with him, so there is no way to know.

Well,there's no way for ME to know. But since you yourself have clearly been in their shoes, I'll defer to your "expertise".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom