Civil Rights

[Cam42]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 24 2005, 12:27 PM']terrorism, in common usage, is a term referring to the murder or mass murder of civilians intended to drive fear into a people.  by having a "war on terror" we mean to say we are at war with the people who intend to murder our civilians.
[right][snapback]656860[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

That is your opinion......However, by definition, terrorism is to terrorize....not to kill. If the terrorists on 9/11 were out to commit Mass murder, why only kill 5000 people in a city of millions? Wouldn't it be more murderous to destroy something larger, such as a stadium full of people or some such thing?

They wanted not necessarily to kill people, but rather to destroy a symbol of capitalism....they thought by doing this they would instill fear in the country of the United States. Do you honestly think that they were expecting a retaliation on the scale in which they are getting it now?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 11:49 AM']That is your opinion......However, by definition, terrorism is to terrorize....not to kill.  If the terrorists on 9/11 were out to commit Mass murder, why only kill 5000 people in a city of millions?  Wouldn't it be more murderous to destroy something larger, such as a stadium full of people or some such thing?

They wanted not necessarily to kill people, but rather to destroy a symbol of capitalism....they thought by doing this they would instill fear in the country of the United States.  Do you honestly think that they were expecting a retaliation on the scale in which they are getting it now?
[right][snapback]656879[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Okay as you know I agree that the goal of the 9/11 attackers was to destroy the symbols of Capitalism and our country, I am after all the person who put that Idea forward, but I think the argument here is being missed the definition of terrorist is not in dispute by Apotheoun but weather or not these men are terrorist at all. I think in a sense you are both right and are both wrong. First I don't think fear was their primary goal( for reasons I have already stated), nor was it to simply kill ( for other reasons I have already stated), their goal was to strike at us hard just like a military would to destroy the symbols of our society and to do any administrative damage that they could. Killing a large number of people was just gravy. It was also to display power and proficentcy. It was a show of strength, a declaration that the Moslem could hit us hard even with out the technology we have, even with our military might. I think the leadership of Al Quaida expects this kind of retaliation sure, ( the Talaban probably not) they are now at war, everyone recognizes that Osama has been able to launch a war agianst us and survive, and still strike at us--- this is year 4 so far I'd say he is doing pretty well.

Edited July 24, 2005 by Don John of Austria

[Aloysius]

yeah I'm confused as to what the argument over the definition was too though, so I really don't disagree with any of the above.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 07:40 AM']And I believe that we are to follow the example of Christ and if need be have the snot beat out of us, just like He did at the hands of the Romans and Jews.  And I believe the Church began as a small group numbering about 120 hiding in a room, did it not?

[url="http://drbo.org/book/51.htm"]The Acts of the Apostles[/url] is a fantastic book....perhaps your analogy is a synopsis of the book?

I am not concerned about the end result and I will not be terrorized.  I think that if we all take this position, then we effectively disarm the terrorists and then the fighting will end, sooner rather than later.

My Catholic faith tells me that I have nothing to fear, so I am not afraid.
[right][snapback]656645[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Yes that is where the Church began but since I do not believe there is salvation out side of it I find it quite upsetting that most of the people in the world on the last day might very well o to Hell. Further the Church might be crushed and as the Bride of my Lord that to is quite upsetting, when they come to Crucify our priest on the Church doors ( that is historicly a very common thing) and melting down the sacred vessals I am happy that you will not be upset seeing that you know that in the End Christ will win, however, I believe it is our duty to protect Mother Church and will be sending as many of those guys to hell as possible when that day comes. Certianly with an attitude of " it doesn't really matter, because in the end Christ wins" from so many Catholics we can expect that day to come sooner rather than later.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 24 2005, 03:12 PM']yeah I'm confused as to what the argument over the definition was too though, so I really don't disagree with any of the above.
[right][snapback]657130[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I don't really understand either, except to say that Carrie was not wrong in her assertion about what happened. I simply threw out the definitions as a support for her position.

She was not wrong in her understanding of terrorism. Even though Appy disagrees.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 02:29 PM']I don't really understand either, except to say that Carrie was not wrong in her assertion about what happened.  I simply threw out the definitions as a support for her position.

She was not wrong in her understanding of terrorism.  Even though Appy disagrees.
[right][snapback]657153[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
No Appy is saying that these are not Terrorist at all. That these men are fundementally differant than say the Basque of northern Spain. I think he is fundementaly correct there even if he is incorrect about thier goals.

[Jaime]

Appy I don't know why you are being so stubborn on this issue. You've had articles cited and even the dictionary definitions given to you. Yet you are obstinately holding that you know the truth about the nature of terrorism.

All you have offered is the diary of a terrorist. Which while helpful is not definitive. While one terrorist's intent is murder only, that does not reflect what his superiors are thinking.

Couple of examples.. A demolitions expert in the army may be only focused on demolitions . The generals are more concerned about the broader picture and his role in that. Is the ultimate goal for the demolitions soldier the same as the generals? No

Here's another. Since you've provided quotes from a terrorists diary.

[quote]"lt's nice to know you can be a cause of your life as well as an effect," convert John Travolta, 23, says of his Scientology training. "lt's a logical and very sane way of living. I don't get upset as easily as I used to. I don't think I could have handled my success as well without it.[/quote]

The true nature of Scientology is far different than what the "unofficial spokesperson" of scientology has to say about it.

[Carrie]

[quote]Perhaps that is because you buy into the same politically correct ideology that she does.[/quote]

Firstly, I haven't bought into any politically correct ideology.

[quote]I doubt many people on this forum have studied Islamic theology, but to understand the conflict our nation (and the entire West) has entered into, they better acquaint themselves with it quickly. [/quote]

The diary of a terrorist doesn't prove your point. It's completely subjective.

[quote]Nowhere have I indicated that the 9-11 mass murders were all that bright about every issue, but if you really think that they tried to kill as few people as possible, that's fine.[/quote]

I never once stated that they tried to kill as [b]few[/b] people as possible. I simply stated that the number of dead was not their first priority.

[quote]Again, as I have said already, this is a war;[/quote]

No one has denied that this is a war. Yet that does not change what terrorism means.

[quote]Also it may have come down to simple flight schedules.[/quote]

As hot stuff pointed out, there were approximately nine flights leaving the Newark and Boston airports per hour. The argument about convenient flight schedules just does not stand.

[quote]Don John is right, they wanted to destroy the symbols of our culture. [/quote]

I also agree.

[quote]You know as well I do that giving a dictionary definition is not an argument.[/quote]

You choose to ignore the dictionary definition (btw, Thank you Cam!). But how about the literature written by [b]experts[/b] in this field? These certainly support the argument Cam, hot stuff, DJ, and I support.

Have you looked into any of that? Or do you choose to continue arguing without actually looking at documentation provided to you?

[quote]By the way, the use of the words "terrorist" and "terrorism" is a part of the problem, because Jamie and Carrie actually think that that these men are "terrorists" and that all they really only want to do is to instill fear in innocent people; but in reality these men are jihadists[/quote]

Hate to break it to you, but not all terrorists are jihadists. I'm not specifically speaking of jihadists, but of terrorists.

We have had domestic terrorists. For example Timothy McVeigh, who was angry over the Waco fiasco. His goal was not purely to kill. Because of his anger over Waco, he was hoping to start a revolution against the American government.

[quote]That is your opinion......However, by definition, terrorism is to terrorize....not to kill. They wanted not necessarily to kill people, but rather to destroy a symbol of capitalism....they thought by doing this they would instill fear in the country of the United States. [/quote]

DIng! That is correct!

Apotheoun, I've provided you with expert literature backing up my position. If I'm to take you seriously, I'd like to see some literature backing up your position.

If you don't have any, I'll simply leave this as a matter of your opinion and certainly not your expertise.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Jul 24 2005, 09:11 PM']Hate to break it to you, but not all terrorists are jihadists.  I'm not specifically speaking of jihadists, but of terrorists.
[right][snapback]657554[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Get out!!!! You are? I would have never guessed that.....oh wait, maybe I did......



Thanks for the clarification of your position Carrie.....I thought I had read your post correctly.

[quote name='Carrie' date='Jul 24 2005, 09:11 PM']You choose to ignore the dictionary definition (btw, Thank you Cam!).[/quote]

You are welcome.....

[Carrie]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 10:19 PM']Get out!!!!  You are?  I would have never guessed that.....oh wait, maybe I did......



Thanks for the clarification of your position Carrie.....I thought I had read your post correctly.
You are welcome.....
[right][snapback]657565[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Jaime]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Jul 24 2005, 08:36 PM']
[right][snapback]657586[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


pssst sometimes Cam likes to be called "punkin"

[Carrie]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jul 24 2005, 10:46 PM']pssst sometimes Cam likes to be called "punkin"
[right][snapback]657606[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Thanks for the tip!

[quote]Get out!!!!  You are?  I would have never guessed that.....oh wait, maybe I did......



Thanks for the clarification of your position Carrie.....I thought I had read your post correctly.
You are welcome.....[/quote]

Thank you punkin!

[Cam42]

You are welcome.

You are the first girl to call me punkin since 1992.

[Carrie]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 10:54 PM']You are welcome.

You are the first girl to call me punkin since 1992.


[right][snapback]657613[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

1992? Wow, since it's been awhile, I'll go one step better.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Jul 24 2005, 10:01 PM']1992?  Wow, since it's been awhile, I'll go one step better.


[right][snapback]657624[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

And now you are the first Democrat to ever throw me kiss.....most usually do one of two things....

1. Throw rotten tomatoes at me.
2. Puke on my shoes.

[Cam42]

[quote]If you don't have any, I'll simply leave this as a matter of your opinion and certainly not your expertise.[/quote]

Isn't that an ironic statement, based upon recent history???????

[Carrie]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 11:15 PM']And now you are the first Democrat to ever throw me kiss.....most usually do one of two things....

1.  Throw rotten tomatoes at me.
2.  Puke on my shoes. 
[right][snapback]657654[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


(pppssttt...I'm actually a registered Republican. I'm thinking of switching to Democrat after seeing hot stuff's link).

[Cam42]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Jul 24 2005, 10:22 PM'](pppssttt...I'm actually a registered Republican.  I'm thinking of switching to Democrat after seeing hot stuff's link).
[right][snapback]657669[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

OHHHHHHH well.......then

[Carrie]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 24 2005, 11:25 PM']OHHHHHHH  well.......then

           
[right][snapback]657674[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Don John of Austria]

Alright guys first remember that ya'll and I agree so I am not agrueing agianst you position, but I still think ya'll are missing the position Appy has he is contending that these guys are not Terrorist that there Jihad seperates them from a traditional Terrorist. And was that a Diary? I thought it was more like a guide given by a superior to the soldier.