Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 13, 2011 11:46:19 GMT -5
I was struck by the grace shown by the First Lady all night, particularly with the Congresswoman's husband and the student who sat between the President and former Justice O'Connor. The moment when it was announced that the Congresswoman opened her eyes was moving and genuine more than anything said or done during the day. Even better that people were there to witness the miracle, and I believe that the timing and who was in the room was no coincidence. What a remarkable story when, I think, most people thought she would die - I am still stunned by this. If there's a moment that will be replayed again and again, it will be the eyes opening moment. If eyes can be opened for the need to change tone and reflect, great, but that in many ways is a tougher problem than that facing the Congresswoman right now, and the path to change tone is much longer, and actual, sincere reflection will be required. Isn't it great that Chris Matthews is a Hoyatalk member? How's that thrill up your leg? |
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Jan 13, 2011 11:59:16 GMT -5
I was struck by the grace shown by the First Lady all night, particularly with the Congresswoman's husband and the student who sat between the President and former Justice O'Connor. The moment when it was announced that the Congresswoman opened her eyes was moving and genuine more than anything said or done during the day. Even better that people were there to witness the miracle, and I believe that the timing and who was in the room was no coincidence. What a remarkable story when, I think, most people thought she would die - I am still stunned by this. If there's a moment that will be replayed again and again, it will be the eyes opening moment. If eyes can be opened for the need to change tone and reflect, great, but that in many ways is a tougher problem than that facing the Congresswoman right now, and the path to change tone is much longer, and actual, sincere reflection will be required. Isn't it great that Chris Matthews is a Hoyatalk member? How's that thrill up your leg? Well-played Elvado. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2011 13:21:28 GMT -5
Six dead, a dozen injured, and a thread full of snark and insults.
Stay classy, Hoyatalk.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jan 13, 2011 14:55:29 GMT -5
Six dead, a dozen injured, and a thread full of snark and insults. Stay classy, Hoyatalk. If refraining from posting would bring those six back from the dead, I'd do it. However, Obama appears to be the only one with such powers. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Jan 13, 2011 15:02:15 GMT -5
Ever stop to think that I may have been referring to God? If you may ask, my only point was that miracles do not happen in the presence of the devil. Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, and all deserve civil and honest dialogue, and the question is who will answer the call.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 13, 2011 15:07:59 GMT -5
Ever stop to think that I may have been referring to God? If you may ask, my only point was that miracles do not happen in the presence of the devil. Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, and all deserve civil and honest dialogue, and the question is who will answer the call. With your usual supplication to Barry O, it was an easy and honest mistake. That said, the Bible is full of examples of miracles happening in the presence of the Devil. |
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,398 
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Jan 14, 2011 10:28:37 GMT -5
The Tuscon shooter’s worldview was shaped by the popular conspiracy theory documentary Zeitgeist, friends say. From The Daily Beast. Quote:We now know a little bit more about the matrix of ideas that helped inspire Jared Loughner’s murderous rampage on Saturday. According to a friend of his interviewed on Good Morning America on Wednesday, the conspiracy documentary Zeitgeist “poured gasoline on his fire” and had “a profound impact on Jared Loughner's mindset and how he views the world that he lives in.” He was also, according to his friend’s father, influenced by the documentary Loose Change, a classic of the 9/11 Truth movement. This does not mean that either of these movies is responsible for making Loughner do what he did, but it does show how his madness was shaped by a broader climate of paranoia, and offers a clue as to why he targeted Gabrielle Giffords.
According to his friend, Zach Osler, Loughner “didn't listen to political radio, he didn't take sides, he wasn't on the left, he wasn't on the right.” Naturally, conservatives have seized upon this to exonerate themselves of charges of incitement. But it’s not that simple. It’s hard to place Zeitgeist and Loose Change on the conventional partisan spectrum—both come from a shadowy conspiracy-mad subculture where the far right and the far left meet. Yet it’s the contemporary right, the right of Glenn Beck and the Tea Party, that has mainstreamed ideas from this demimonde in an unprecedented way...
The point, again, is not that Alex Jones, Zeitgeist or The Tea Party are responsible for Loughner’s crimes. The point is that he targeted Giffords for a reason, one rooted in his unhinged interpretation of recognizable conspiracy theories. Right-wing activists and politicians have traded on such theories, giving them far more mainstream exposure and credibility than they ever had before. Experts on political violence have been arguing for months that this is extremely dangerous. People like Loughner are the reason why.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 14, 2011 10:34:52 GMT -5
Maybe he was just a whack job. Took one Psych course at GU, you know.
Remember the President said it's not time to point fingers.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,398
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Jan 14, 2011 10:45:33 GMT -5
Maybe he was just a whack job. Took one Psych course at GU, you know. Remember the President said it's not time to point fingers. I am certain that the fact that he is whack job is beyond dispute. That guy is totally crazy. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,458
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 14, 2011 14:43:55 GMT -5
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 14, 2011 14:48:59 GMT -5
A very interesting take. My biggest question is why the rush to label it at all? A clearly disturbed young man committed unspeakable mayhem against innocents. Labeling him a terrorist within the first 72 hours of the act does nothing to combat future attacks or comfort the grieving. Likewise discounting the terror angle serves no immediate salutary purpose.
Thus, I am left to conclude that those who wish to label this crime one way or the other do so for their own political needs/agendas.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,458
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 14, 2011 15:24:03 GMT -5
The rush to judgment always occurs when the political hacks left and right, politicians or pundits, seek to capitalize. Bynum is not a political hack. Neither is Bruce Hoffman nor Brian Jenkins mentioned in the article. Hoffman and Jenkins (both originally at RAND) are considered pioneers in the field of terrorism studies and have brought a degree of rigorous analysis to the field.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jan 14, 2011 15:40:45 GMT -5
I too find it difficult to ascribe rationale to this killer. Unless you meant, "rational" discourse, in which case I, as a duly designated representative of the government grammar/spelling police, must issue you a citation.  But, for for purely academic argument, let's take a look: - Terrorism seeks a political objective. Loughner really had no political objective except destruction. Complaints, grievances? Yes. Objectives? I don't think so. It's a fine line, I know, but Loughner's lack of coherence really makes it impossible to ascribe that to him. - Terrorists, for the most part, are not mentally impaired. Yes, their actions seem crazy to most western eyes, but that is not the same thing. Terrorists can usually provide a very rational explanation for what they do. We may abhor that explanation, but it doesn't make it insane. I don't think Loughner is even capable of rationality. - Modern terrorism is also usually very organized and methodical. It is not generally characterized by spur of the moment operatives going off half cocked (if you will pardon the expression). And we've all seen this week how irresponsible attempts to ascribe any organizational influence to Loughner's actions failed, and failed spectacularly (for the very sane reason that there was no evidence of such). I agree with the writer that terrorism can have somewhat of a pornography definition. But there are also some very real criteria that we generally apply to terrorist actions. Loughner, IMO, does not fit any of them. Just some thoughts. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,458
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 14, 2011 15:51:57 GMT -5
Plead guilty -- I meant rational. It's been a long day in the desert. I also agree that this guy is simply a whack job. I would agree with everything you states except I would disagree somewhat with your statement theat modern terrorism is usually very organized and methodical. There has been an increase in the "lone wolf" terrorist such as the Richard Reids, Abdulmultallubs, et al. who do derive their inspiration from terrorists like Al Awlaki.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,458
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 15, 2011 0:39:08 GMT -5
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,909
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jan 15, 2011 10:46:07 GMT -5
Plead guilty -- I meant rational. It's been a long day in the desert. I also agree that this guy is simply a whack job. I would agree with everything you states except I would disagree somewhat with your statement theat modern terrorism is usually very organized and methodical. There has been an increase in the "lone wolf" terrorist such as the Richard Reids, Abdulmultallubs, et al. who do derive their inspiration from terrorists like Al Awlaki. Reid had attended terrorist training camps in Pakistan and got his Exploding Shoes(tm) there. An identical explosive was given to one Saajid Muhammad Badat, who was supposed to undertake the same sort of attack (the two of them, iirc, traveled to Pakistan together for this purpose). Badat got cold feet - pun absolutely intended - and didn't go through with it. Abdulmutallab attended an AQAP training camp and got the explosives for his underwear bomb there as well. So, while the the "well-organized and methodical" part definitely varies, the 'true' lone wolves are guys like Nidal Hasan, Naveed Afzal Haq, or Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar. It's not a coincidence, of course, that all of these guys appear to have had mental illness issues of varying degrees. The broader question of "why the rush to label at all" has the obvious answer that 'terrorist' has become such a catchall and pejorative - like 'communist' in the 50s - that its application is often done with political motives in mind. The whole "palling around with terrorists" thing is a perfect example, but there are plenty of others. From a legal point of view, terrorism also brings in additional jurisdictions, additional charges and legal tactics, and a whole host of other things tied into GWOT, at home and abroad. For someone studying terrorism, that can all be very maddening. As it is, any paper you write has to painstakingly explain what you mean by terrorism and how you've selected your universe of cases. Does an attack on a police station count? Does it matter if the police station is in Chechnya or in Dagestan? Etc. ad nauseum. And then your methodology will surely be attacked by someone who wants to include other groups or incidents. What's worse, even you aren't entirely happy with your definition. For instance, Dan includes "Was it carried out by a non-state actor - that is, a person or persons outside the government?" in his list of criteria for terrorism. But Dan has written a book and numerous articles on state sponsors of terrorism, as well as Hezbollah, which was an official part of the Lebanese government until a few days ago. I do hope that one of the outcomes from this incident and the "let's tone down our rhetoric" push is that public figures especially will be more precise in their use of language. Loughner shows us that you can be a Very Bad Man and not fit into the terrorism box that we keep trying to shoehorn every bad guy into. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jan 15, 2011 10:58:18 GMT -5
There was a time when the word terrorist wasn't pejorative?
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,909
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jan 15, 2011 11:07:15 GMT -5
There was a time when the word terrorist wasn't pejorative? There was a time when it was a more technical term, like irregular combatant, and less of a catchall label that you apply to anyone you don't like. It's kind of like the difference between "paranoid schizophrenic" and "madman" or "Antisocial Personality Disorder" and "psychopath." The former are diagnoses, the latter have become labels that are at this point more frequently applied to those who are not mentally ill than those who are. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jan 15, 2011 14:47:23 GMT -5
So you believe Bill Ayers wasn't a terrorist? Of course he was, by any definition.
I'm really not following here.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,458
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 15, 2011 23:38:46 GMT -5
Russky can speak for himself but I think he's distinguishing between whack jobs like the Son of Sam, who some called a "terrorist" and those who use violence against civlian targets (i.e., non-govt, non-combatants) to advance ideological or political objectives.
Menachem Begin -- terrorist or freedom fighter?
|
|
