Do you believe in terrorism?


Normally open July 4th only---the one day a year when partisan politics, religion, etc. are acceptable topics on this Board (within reason). The forum is now closed.

Is an act which meets your definition of terrorism ever morally justifiable?

Poll ended at Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:21 am

Yes
2
14%
No
12
86%
 
Total votes : 14

Postby Pego » Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:29 pm

SQUACKEE wrote:
bad hammy wrote:
Pego wrote:Even the Inquisition learned that torture produces false confessions and false information. You inflict something very painful, especially repeatedly, they'll say anything you want to hear.

Exactly . . .


You dont waterboard to get a confession, that would be stoopid. You waterboard to get real information that can be checked out. Which, if you believe some reports, is exactly what happened, or it didnt happen and its all a lie. I dont know what to believe so i have to believe what makes the most sense to me. It doesnt make sense that the people who have been trained to do this sort of work have no idea what they are doin.


According to the CIA operatives, whose statements I saw, they got all (or vast majority) of the necessary information by "routine interrogation".
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re:

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:19 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
Marlow wrote:It's a matter of a little thing called the law. Just because a government commits atrocities doesn't mean we all should. Now . . . if a government continues to show malice towards its constituency, we have the right to overthrow it.

how can you overthrow a government peacefully when you don't even have the right to vote? Wasn't it JFK who said that "those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable?"

I'm still waiting for an answer Mr. Anchors Away. By the way, was George Washington morally justified when he took up arms against his government?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Re:

Postby Daisy » Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:25 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:By the way, was George Washington morally justified when he took up arms against his government?

He was a traitor, then a hero and finally a president. Presumably this is not an uncommon sequence of events. And the winners always write the history books. Just ask lonewolf.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Re:

Postby Marlow » Sat Jul 03, 2010 5:50 am

Daisy wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:By the way, was George Washington morally justified when he took up arms against his government?

He was a traitor, then a hero and finally a president. Presumably this is not an uncommon sequence of events. And the winners always write the history books. Just ask lonewolf.

The founding fathers were motivated by money, not morals. Washington and Jefferson were against slavery, but could not afford to run their estates without it. Jefferson considered his male slaves 'men', yet wrote 'all men are created equal' without batting an eye.

Interesting quote I ran across: "What did antebellum slaves think of the 4th of July?"
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Re:

Postby jazzcyclist » Sat Jul 03, 2010 7:45 am

Marlow wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:By the way, was George Washington morally justified when he took up arms against his government?

The founding fathers were motivated by money, not morals. Washington and Jefferson were against slavery, but could not afford to run their estates without it. Jefferson considered his male slaves 'men', yet wrote 'all men are created equal' without batting an eye.

I'll take that as a "no". Now what's your answer to my other question: How can you overthrow a government peacefully when you don't even have the right to vote?

Marlow wrote:Interesting quote I ran across: "What did antebellum slaves think of the 4th of July?"

Have you ever read Frederick Douglass' 1852 Fourth of July speech? Here's an excerpt:
What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sound of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants brass fronted impudence; your shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanks-givings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy -- a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jul 04, 2010 7:15 am

Here's a good article on how the word terrorism has become meaningless in the American lexicon.
There's a great paradox in the American political landscape: the word that is used most frequently to justify everything from invasions and bombings to torture, indefinite detention, and the sprawling Surveillance State -- Terrorism -- is also the most ill-defined and manipulated word. It has no fixed meaning, and thus applies to virtually anything the user wishes to demonize, while excluding the user's own behavior and other acts one seeks to justify. All of this would be an interesting though largely academic, semantic matter if not for the central political significance with which this term is vested: both formally (in our law) and informally (in our political debates and rhetoric). . . .

The reason no clear definition of Terrorism is ever settled upon is because it's virtually impossible to embrace a definition without either (a) excluding behavior one wishes to demonize and thus include and/or (b) including behavior (including one's own and those of one's friends) which one desperately wants to exclude.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... /terrorism
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:09 pm

Here's one final question in the twilight hours of Free Speech Weekend 2011. Do you consider Nat Turner to be a terrorist?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby Daisy » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:21 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:Here's one final question in the twilight hours of Free Speech Weekend 2011. Do you consider Nat Turner to be a terrorist?

At the time, yes. Was Gerry Adams a terrorist?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:03 pm

Daisy wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:Here's one final question in the twilight hours of Free Speech Weekend 2011. Do you consider Nat Turner to be a terrorist?

At the time, yes. Was Gerry Adams a terrorist?

Absolutely! But both Turner and Adams were justified in their actions IMO. Here's the thing. If a nation, a sub-national group or a lone individual have a legitimate grievance for which non-violent tactics have proven ineffectual, and they do not possess war-making capability, the only option left to them is terrorism. Don't ever overestimate the power of nonviolent protest. If Ghandi had faced Hitler, he would have been just another dead Indian.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby BillVol » Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:09 pm

Ask Nelson Mandela if he believes in terrorism.
BillVol
 
Posts: 3759
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Chattanooga

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:21 pm

BillVol wrote:Ask Nelson Mandela if he believes in terrorism.

He certainly didn't spend 27 years in prison for sitting in at lunch counters. As a matter of fact, when the finally caught him, he was plotting to blow up a passeneger train.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby Marlow » Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:27 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
There's a great paradox in the American political landscape: the word that is used most frequently to justify everything from invasions and bombings to torture, indefinite detention, and the sprawling Surveillance State -- Terrorism -- is also the most ill-defined and manipulated word. It has no fixed meaning, and thus applies to virtually anything the user wishes to demonize, while excluding the user's own behavior and other acts one seeks to justify. All of this would be an interesting though largely academic, semantic matter if not for the central political significance with which this term is vested: both formally (in our law) and informally (in our political debates and rhetoric). . . .

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said in this thread a very short while ago.

And once a word has lost its way, it ceases to serve ANY function in debate - rendering this entire thread . . . moot*. :roll:

* second denotation = of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Jul 03, 2013 8:35 pm

So 12 people answered "no" to the question in my original post. Out of curiosity, I would appreciate it if the no's stated their definitions of terrorism in concise and unambiguous language. Pego kinda sorta gave a definition but it has some wiggle room in it. Here's my definition so you get an idea of what I'm looking for:

    Terrorism - violence against innocent civilians for the purpose of intimidating, coercing or breaking the will of a government; or for the purpose of disrupting or influencing a democratic process in order to promote or oppose a political agenda.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby CookyMonzta » Wed Jul 03, 2013 8:50 pm

I gather the definition (the first part of it, especially) also applies to rogue states as well. The current regime in Syria uses the same tactics in order to break the will of the people. That is just one, among many examples you can find from 1933 onward.
CookyMonzta
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby Pego » Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:32 am

jazzcyclist wrote:So 12 people answered "no" to the question in my original post. Out of curiosity, I would appreciate it if the no's stated their definitions of terrorism in concise and unambiguous language. Pego kinda sorta gave a definition but it has some wiggle room in it. Here's my definition so you get an idea of what I'm looking for:

    Terrorism - violence against innocent civilians for the purpose of intimidating, coercing or breaking the will of a government; or for the purpose of disrupting or influencing a democratic process in order to promote or oppose a political agenda.


This is too narrow. For example, the white supremacist asshole that shot up the Sikh temple in Milwaukee just because he hated people wearing turbans was a terrorist in my book.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Do you believe in terrorism?

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Jul 04, 2013 6:34 am

Pego wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:So 12 people answered "no" to the question in my original post. Out of curiosity, I would appreciate it if the no's stated their definitions of terrorism in concise and unambiguous language. Pego kinda sorta gave a definition but it has some wiggle room in it. Here's my definition so you get an idea of what I'm looking for:

    Terrorism - violence against innocent civilians for the purpose of intimidating, coercing or breaking the will of a government; or for the purpose of disrupting or influencing a democratic process in order to promote or oppose a political agenda.


This is too narrow. For example, the white supremacist asshole that shot up the Sikh temple in Milwaukee just because he hated people wearing turbans was a terrorist in my book.

He's a terrorist in my book too, similar to the KKK, a group that also carried out racial, ethnic and religious motivated murders. The fact that he may have been ignorant about the religious affiliation of Sikhs is besides the point. The main point is that, like the KKK, he was opposed to racial, ethnic and religious tolerance in our society. That falls under the category of "promote or oppose a political agenda". Keep in mind that not only do hate groups hate minorities, they also hate the laws that protect them. Also, didn't that attack happen as a reaction to another terrorist attack that had recently taken place?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests