Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:


So, people unable to socialize should be taken down ? I should be dead according to this criteria

Nah, antisocial is fine.

Stabbing people really does not fit in with the UC spirit of tolerance and diversity. Or something.

Yeah, and it spills blood everywhere, that's dirty.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Man stabs multiple people. Everyone spends time discussing word used to label him. #firstworldproblems

Lol, kind of like that. Then again nobody here can change what happened and having a good understanding never hurts.

I don't see it as terrorism, if more evidence comes out that he was affiliated with an organization (does not include being a wannabe) or committed the act for some politically motivated reason I will change my mind. As of what I know right now (which isn't much) this sounds like another case of the mentally ill that America is afraid to address.

Why would a "wanna be" affiliate with an organization not be counted as a terrorist? Surely if he wants to be part of said organization he wants to advance their agenda, and thus has political motivation.

Not saying that was the case here, but if he was inspired by them then it would indeed be terrorism(although frankly I think the political requirement for Terrorism is dumb, IMO any kind of premeditated mass attack meant to cause fear is terrorism)

 d-usa wrote:
I don't think Relapse is in the terrorist crowd with this one, he was just sharing why some people were thinking that way (aka: Muslim killing lots of guys kinda event).

You are correct, sir!

 Grey Templar wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Man stabs multiple people. Everyone spends time discussing word used to label him. #firstworldproblems

Lol, kind of like that. Then again nobody here can change what happened and having a good understanding never hurts.

I don't see it as terrorism, if more evidence comes out that he was affiliated with an organization (does not include being a wannabe) or committed the act for some politically motivated reason I will change my mind. As of what I know right now (which isn't much) this sounds like another case of the mentally ill that America is afraid to address.

Why would a "wanna be" affiliate with an organization not be counted as a terrorist? Surely if he wants to be part of said organization he wants to advance their agenda, and thus has political motivation.

Not saying that was the case here, but if he was inspired by them then it would indeed be terrorism(although frankly I think the political requirement for Terrorism is dumb, IMO any kind of premeditated mass attack meant to cause fear is terrorism)

Well, the dictionary definition of terrorism, and how it's used by lots of people (including journalists and politicians) is often different. You see that with a lot of terms, espcailly when it can be twisted for a political agenda.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Well, the dictionary definition of terrorism, and how it's used by lots of people (including journalists and politicians) is often different. You see that with a lot of terms, espcailly when it can be twisted for a political agenda.

The whole political angle is "supplementary" to the goals of instilling fear, in terms of the definition of "terrorism." I mean how can you KNOW for sure the motivations of an individual? Maybe the "seed" of this attack was planted years ago by a value system that justifies lashing out at those who wrong you? I have no idea.

The only difference between this and someone like James Holmes or Timothy McVeigh is the effectiveness of the planning. While Mr Mohammad was a fool and planned like an idiot, it is vastly important to note that his plan WAS logical (if flawed) and denoted premeditation on every level. Citing "I hate my fellow students and they kicked me out of a study group so I stabbed them" is terroristic enough of a motivation for me to slap a big ol' label on this one.

And I'll hang the same label on the next one too.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
Crazy ass terrorist stabs 4 people at UC Merced with a 10 inch knife, then gets shot dead by cops.

As a UC student I find this amusing/angering due to the idiotic on campus "Disarm UCPD" protest thing thats been going on lately. I wonder if the mouth breathers will have the temerity (not to mentional moral discontiunity) to protest over this scumbag getting the due & proper. I also think its ridiculous that the police are all "ITS NOT TERRORISM!" because if you decide to stab or shoot a bunch of students/faculty then you are by definition, engaging in terrorism.

Props to the construction worker that interrupted the stabbing.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/05/us/university-california-merced-stabbings/

You have it all mixed up.

I wonder if the mouth breathers

Huh. Mouth breathers? Explain yourself.

I also think its ridiculous that the police are all "ITS NOT TERRORISM!"

Just because someone is a Moslem doesn't mean they cant just go postal. Not everything is because jihad.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:
Man stabs multiple people. Everyone spends time discussing word used to label him. #firstworldproblems

The issue is whether a people group should be automatically labeled. Normally society agrees this is a bad thing.

Is Moslem and violent doesn't necessarily mean terrorist. This labels all Moslems and causes increased integration issues.

I think people are just saying Mass Murderer = Terrorist. Which I think is a totally fair definition. Honestly I didn't hear he was Muslim till yesterday.

Lets say we have a hypothetical serial mass murderer. He kills tons of people in his attacks, maybe he's a sniper or a bomber. He is doing this for no reason other than that he is just angry and raging at the world. I think he's still a terrorist even if he has no real political goal other than some twisted sense of personal revenge, or even if he's just a psychopath who just wants to kill for the sake of killing.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think people are just saying Mass Murderer = Terrorist. Which I think is a totally fair definition. Honestly I didn't hear he was Muslim till yesterday.

Lets say we have a hypothetical serial mass murderer. He kills tons of people in his attacks, maybe he's a sniper or a bomber. He is doing this for no reason other than that he is just angry and raging at the world. I think he's still a terrorist even if he has no real political goal other than some twisted sense of personal revenge, or even if he's just a psychopath who just wants to kill for the sake of killing.

Yep, and that's how most people use it. It's one of those things that people use incorrectly, but because everybody does, nobody notices.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
Crazy ass terrorist stabs 4 people at UC Merced with a 10 inch knife, then gets shot dead by cops.

As a UC student I find this amusing/angering due to the idiotic on campus "Disarm UCPD" protest thing thats been going on lately. I wonder if the mouth breathers will have the temerity (not to mentional moral discontiunity) to protest over this scumbag getting the due & proper. I also think its ridiculous that the police are all "ITS NOT TERRORISM!" because if you decide to stab or shoot a bunch of students/faculty then you are by definition, engaging in terrorism.

Props to the construction worker that interrupted the stabbing.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/05/us/university-california-merced-stabbings/

You have it all mixed up.

I wonder if the mouth breathers

Huh. Mouth breathers? Explain yourself.

I also think its ridiculous that the police are all "ITS NOT TERRORISM!"

Just because someone is a Moslem doesn't mean they cant just go postal. Not everything is because jihad.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:
Man stabs multiple people. Everyone spends time discussing word used to label him. #firstworldproblems

The issue is whether a people group should be automatically labeled. Normally society agrees this is a bad thing.

Is Moslem and violent doesn't necessarily mean terrorist. This labels all Moslems and causes increased integration issues.

What in the hell does his religion have to do with it? Nobody else brought that up.

I'm curious as to why you'd even go there.

If a person picks up a knife, takes it to school, and then starts stabbing students/teachers then YES they are a terrorist. Yes they deserve to be shot dead in their tracks, and yes as a student in said school system I am DAMN glad the guy was killed. I don't care if he's a muslim (wtf is a "moslem" anyway?", a christian, a zoastrian, jew, aethist, or anything else. I care about what he DID.

Why do we even bother with the word "terrorist" if it's indistinguishable from "murderer"?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Why do we even bother with the word "terrorist" if it's indistinguishable from "murderer"?

Please explain how school attacks are NOT terrorism. Then we can address your question.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Why do we even bother with the word "terrorist" if it's indistinguishable from "murderer"?

Please explain how school attacks are NOT terrorism. Then we can address your question.

I did, you promptly ignored my post.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I also think its ridiculous that the police are all "ITS NOT TERRORISM!" because if you decide to stab or shoot a bunch of students/faculty then you are by definition, engaging in terrorism.

Merriam Webster wrote:noun ter·ror·ism \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm\

: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal

Considering nothing at this point is pointing towards this as a politically motivated attack, calling it "terrorism" only works if you're completely ignoring everything the word means.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
Please explain how school attacks are NOT terrorism. Then we can address your question.

Because it's just a murder which happened to occur at a school. It's not some kind of grand statement against the system or an attempt to accomplish a political goal, it's just a guy who was angry about an argument. It's like saying it's terrorism if a teacher shoots their boss because they get fired.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
Please explain how school attacks are NOT terrorism. Then we can address your question.

Because it's just a murder which happened to occur at a school. It's not some kind of grand statement against the system or an attempt to accomplish a political goal, it's just a guy who was angry about an argument. It's like saying it's terrorism if a teacher shoots their boss because they get fired.

The guy had a 2 page written manifesto. Manifesto = value based rationalization, including condemnation of that which oppresses. I guess we're not going there though, yah?

Here's a hypothetical.

Given an identical scenario with the added detail that he'd been yelling "down with the system", would it count as terrorism in your mind? What if he were yelling "In the name of Christ I cleanse you!" What if he were yelling "Death to America!" Etc etc. Identical behavior though. Would it be terrorism then?


For me the defining point of "terrorism" is not the political inclination of the attacker, but the manner in which they plan out and enact their violence. Do they purposefully plan things in a logical manner? Do they intentionally choose civilian targets who are going about their daily routines? Do they plan an escalation of force in order to cause more extensive harm (IE stealing a cop's gun to shoot more people)? This dude did all that. Good thing he was a total moron, otherwise he might have actually killed people.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
The guy had a 2 page written manifesto. Manifesto = value based rationalization,

What did the manifesto actually say? Because if all it is a letter talking about how butt-blasted he was that he was kicked out of his study-group, that still isn't a specific railing against the system or perceived source of oppression, yet the media would likely label it as "a manifesto" anyway because the media knows how buzzwords affect ratings.

"Guy gets angry at peers, stabs a bunch of them" is an intrinsically less interesting narrative to the public then "muslim commits terrorist attack on UC".

During he past few weeks Peter has managed to out-frazzle Frazzled, out-nationalized Iron_Captain, and out-glad-he's-deaded Grey Templar. He's starting troll threads, he's wishing cancer in world leaders, he's making up his own definitions of most things, and he still hasn't told anybody if his friend's uncle's sister's roommate's mother survived her brush with Ebola.

It's quite impressive really, but meanwhile we end up with another thread where we explain the same thing over and over again while he ignores the explanation, and that's just gonna get exhausting day after day.

 d-usa wrote:
During he past few weeks Peter has managed to out-frazzle Frazzled, out-nationalized Iron_Captain, and out-glad-he's-deaded Grey Templar. He's starting troll threads, he's wishing cancer in world leaders, he's making up his own definitions of most things, and he still hasn't told anybody if his friend's uncle's sister's roommate's mother survived her brush with Ebola.

It's quite impressive really, but meanwhile we end up with another thread where we explain the same thing over and over again while he ignores the explanation, and that's just gonna get exhausting day after day.

Welcome to discussing with leftists. Works for both sides. We also got our local extreme leftists.

It's leftist behavior to wish cancer on Justin Trudeaue, a far-left politician, because said leftist politician doesn't want to use military force on ISIS?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
During he past few weeks Peter has managed to out-frazzle Frazzled, out-nationalized Iron_Captain, and out-glad-he's-deaded Grey Templar. He's starting troll threads, he's wishing cancer in world leaders, he's making up his own definitions of most things, and he still hasn't told anybody if his friend's uncle's sister's roommate's mother survived her brush with Ebola.

It's quite impressive really, but meanwhile we end up with another thread where we explain the same thing over and over again while he ignores the explanation, and that's just gonna get exhausting day after day.

Welcome to discussing with leftists.

A CHALLENGER APPEARS!!!!

Can we just get a lock on this and be done with it? It's clear nobody is on topic.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
During he past few weeks Peter has managed to out-frazzle Frazzled, out-nationalized Iron_Captain, and out-glad-he's-deaded Grey Templar. He's starting troll threads, he's wishing cancer in world leaders, he's making up his own definitions of most things, and he still hasn't told anybody if his friend's uncle's sister's roommate's mother survived her brush with Ebola.

It's quite impressive really, but meanwhile we end up with another thread where we explain the same thing over and over again while he ignores the explanation, and that's just gonna get exhausting day after day.

Welcome to discussing with leftists. Works for both sides. We also got our local extreme leftists.

Ah, he's leftist ? Doesn't look like one.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's leftist behavior to wish cancer on Justin Trudeaue, a far-left politician, because said leftist politician doesn't want to use military force on ISIS?

Trudeaue is a sexist, so that's that. Why was the thread about him locked again?

Since there are crimes defined as terrorist, there have to be legal definitions of terrorism.

If I don't respond to your post, I've probably got you blocked for being insufferable.

And while yes, I troll on occasion (who doesn't), if you think I'm not 100% serious about the stuff in this thread then you are quite wrong. This is something that happened less than 200 miles from where I go to school, on a campus in the same university system. I view it as entirely possible that the same kind of thing could occur at my school.

Oh, and no I am not a "leftist"....though if you put me in a "conservative" area I'd likely be "liberal" by comparison. On a hyper-leftist campus like the one where I go to school I fall somewhere in the middle, leaning a bit "right." Context is funny like that.

Not saying that you're leftist. Just saying that some people who complain about your posts usually praise posts exactly like yours coming from the far left camp on the forums.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Not saying that you're leftist. Just saying that some people who complain about your posts usually praise posts exactly like yours coming from the far left camp on the forums.

I'm flattered you noticed, booski.

I like to use leftist argumentative tactics in order to underline the hypocrisy of their stances.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Not saying that you're leftist. Just saying that some people who complain about your posts usually praise posts exactly like yours coming from the far left camp on the forums.

I'm flattered you noticed, booski.

I like to use leftist argumentative tactics in order to underline the hypocrisy of their stances.

That's not an admission of having an intentionally disruptive posting style, is it?

 Alpharius wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Not saying that you're leftist. Just saying that some people who complain about your posts usually praise posts exactly like yours coming from the far left camp on the forums.

I'm flattered you noticed, booski.

I like to use leftist argumentative tactics in order to underline the hypocrisy of their stances.

That's not an admission of having an intentionally disruptive posting style, is it?

Only on the very limited occasions that moderators notice and lock a thread (that I start). Happens maybe once every 6 months and its usually exceedingly obvious.

I don't try to disrupt or derail other people's posts, if that is what you are asking.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Not saying that you're leftist. Just saying that some people who complain about your posts usually praise posts exactly like yours coming from the far left camp on the forums.

I'm flattered you noticed, booski.

I like to use leftist argumentative tactics in order to underline the hypocrisy of their stances.

So, could you point out a thread where 'leftists' on this forum have wished death upon someone for not wanting to launch military action on ISIS?

What about a 'leftist' using a right wing equivalent of 'Just another obstructionist Bolshevik'?

Or the 'leftist' equivalent of advocating that cops summarily execute captured prisoners that are no longer a threat?

Maybe someone that does the equivalent of referring to people as 'comrade' whenever they see Iron_Captain post in a thread?

This isn't terrorism. This is mass murder. Terrorism can be mass murder and mass murder can be terrorism, but mass murder is not insta-terrorism, nor is terrorism insta-mass-murder (confusing as it may seem to some amongst us). Premeditation does not equal terrorism, either; otherwise practically every mass murder ever committed would be an act of terrorism. A kid who has his life falling into shambles and is bullied daily by half his school and finally snaps, grabs his daddy's hunting rifle and starts blowing people away with an escape vehicle out back and a few hundred bucks for a road trip into Mexico, is he a terrorist? No. He's killing to kill, the fact that he is causing terror doesn't factor into his psychotic little brain; only the sensation of murder and punishing the people who make his life hell. When the US nuked Japan, that was terrorism; they acted to terrify the foe into submission. When the Viet Cong hung villagers to scare their foes into submission, that was terrorism. Terrorism has a purpose: sowing fear in order to achieve an objective (usually cowing the foe into submission). Simple mass murder does not equate to terrorism.