Agnostic.com

6 1

Can a one off act be called terrorism?

Imho in order to terrorise a population there needs repetition so anxiety is caused.

powder 8 Aug 5
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

When my brother-in-law farts, it is an act of terrorism, so yes, in answer to your question.

As George Carlin once said, "It is not the smell, it is the burning of my eyes!".

0

Under no definition have I ever heard that terrorism HAS to be repetitious. Besides these mass killings are becoming repetitious. Just not coordinated, more radicalized lonewolf. A slightly different trend that we are used to seeing. Terrorism none the less.

@powder

I understand your argument. Just don't agree. We've had 250 uncoordinated mass shootings with many of them underlain by a similar ideology. That to me is a movement and a trend linked by commonality of purpose and ideology.

An Iraqi or Syrian bomber, which are separated by similar sects but different group affiliations, and are not much different than the El Paso shooter. He has similarity to other shooters of other white nationalists ideology. Just because it's our country doesn't mean Americans can't be terrorists. We are not that special, nor innocent.

@powder

Perhaps, but the El Paso shooter was linked into a website that is kind of an underground website that encourages one another act on ideology. He also referenced the New Zealand manifesto. It's a lose knit group on the media that sow their hatred and goad each other on. It is an ideology that is shared, that makes their acts, acts of terrorism.

@powder

Not sure why calling these white supremacist terrorists is difficult to accept. In the 1960's the Weatherman Underground were called terrorist. In the late 60' the SLA (Siambanese Liberation Army) of patty Hearst fame were called terrorists. The Bader Meinhoff of Germany were called terrosists. The Red Army were called terrorists.

Granted each were more cohesive as an identifiable group, but they were organized around a fringe ideology. White supremicists, just like European Islamic lone wolves, all act upon a common ideology just like our white supremacists. And the Islamic lone wolves are called terrorists.

@powder Works for me.

1

250 some mass shootings this year pretty much fits the definition of repetition.

Their central affiliation is right wing extremism. It's not a series of accidents, it's a product of a culture of fear where they lash out to try and instill thier fear into others.

So yeah, it's terrorism. Aren't we supposed to be fighting a war against it, BTW ?

1of5 Level 8 Aug 5, 2019

@powder well thats just dumb.

So lemme guess, they aren't brown skinned or darker so they can't be terrorists. That the actual root of your question?

Also, this: [thebulwark.com]

H/T chalupacabre

@powder racist nationalists using terrorism. How is mass murder not terrorism? I can't wait to hear this one.

1

Fits the definition of

2

Terrorism is deliberately targeting civilians for political purposes, the El Paso shooter's manifesto makes it a slam dunk that this was an act of terrorism.

There's really no such thing as a terrorist, it's a propaganda label used to demonize people who you want to dehumanize and whose cause you want to de-legitimize. So it doesn't really matter, the act is terrorism, good enough for me.

0

I think the quantity is immaterial...the anxiety produced is the criterion. The uncertainty and apprehension of where and when an attack may happen, especially when a known network has signalled that it intends to kill certain groups of people. The fact that this network is not an organised terrorist cell or group, but just individuals who act on their own after espousing an ideology proliferated on the Internet, makes it all the more frightening, because we never know where or when someone will decide to act.

@powder
I think the US over reacted to the 9/11 attacks, but I don’t see how “thoughts and prayers” is an over reaction to years of random violence.

@Haemish1 Thoughts and prayers is not a response it’s a non response.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:384469
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.