More attacks

Got anything else on your mind that isn't about the Warriors? If you do, this is the place to post.
User avatar
Josie's friend
Posts: 523
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 4:54 am

Re: More attacks

Post by Josie's friend »

Wigan_forever19​85​ wrote:What defines a terriost attack though? is it simply the colour of your skin or your "apparent" religion?.

Im not trying to be facetious its a genuine question and please understand im not trying to offend anyone here or belittle the events of the past few months.

To my knowledge and please correct me, none of the last 3 "terror" attacks had a perpetrator whom defined their cause before acting out, so what im looking for here is shouting a particular cause or association, or leaving a letter or more damming a video confession.

ISIS claim responsibility for nearly all of these attacks, but again how much faith can you have in this, is it not sort of like someone doing something at work and you just claiming credit because that person isn't around anymore. Wouldnt they always claim credit even if they have zero input into the situation?

I know police tell us after that the attackers are "known" to them but again this seems fuzzy to me, it seems like they are saying yeah they were radical but not quite enough for us to put close tabs on

If you look at the two london incidents the amount of people killed was relatively small in terms of comparing it against other things, for example seven people killed could easily be replicated or increased in a motorway incident involving a drunk driver for example.

What im trying to get at is when does a murder (which is the crime) become terrorist?, if a white man walked into a pub and shot 10 people i cant see it being referred to as a terrorist attack, ISIS probably wouldn't claim responsibility but the core happening is the same someone doing something unbelievably cruel and hideous. Now say the person was known to police had a history of violence.

Is the only thing defining this from terrorism the religious connotations?
You are not trying to get at anything, you are just talking shit
DaveO
Posts: 15880
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: More attacks

Post by DaveO »

Josie's friend wrote:
Wigan_forever19​85​ wrote:What defines a terriost attack though? is it simply the colour of your skin or your "apparent" religion?.

Im not trying to be facetious its a genuine question and please understand im not trying to offend anyone here or belittle the events of the past few months.

To my knowledge and please correct me, none of the last 3 "terror" attacks had a perpetrator whom defined their cause before acting out, so what im looking for here is shouting a particular cause or association, or leaving a letter or more damming a video confession.

ISIS claim responsibility for nearly all of these attacks, but again how much faith can you have in this, is it not sort of like someone doing something at work and you just claiming credit because that person isn't around anymore. Wouldnt they always claim credit even if they have zero input into the situation?

I know police tell us after that the attackers are "known" to them but again this seems fuzzy to me, it seems like they are saying yeah they were radical but not quite enough for us to put close tabs on

If you look at the two london incidents the amount of people killed was relatively small in terms of comparing it against other things, for example seven people killed could easily be replicated or increased in a motorway incident involving a drunk driver for example.

What im trying to get at is when does a murder (which is the crime) become terrorist?, if a white man walked into a pub and shot 10 people i cant see it being referred to as a terrorist attack, ISIS probably wouldn't claim responsibility but the core happening is the same someone doing something unbelievably cruel and hideous. Now say the person was known to police had a history of violence.

Is the only thing defining this from terrorism the religious connotations?
You are not trying to get at anything, you are just talking shit
Tell him why then. Otherwise you have no point. I am not saying I agree with him by the way.
cow yeds
Posts: 1149
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:42 am

Re: More attacks

Post by cow yeds »

Wigan_forever19​85​ wrote:What defines a terriost attack though? is it simply the colour of your skin or your "apparent" religion?.

Im not trying to be facetious its a genuine question and please understand im not trying to offend anyone here or belittle the events of the past few months.

To my knowledge and please correct me, none of the last 3 "terror" attacks had a perpetrator whom defined their cause before acting out, so what im looking for here is shouting a particular cause or association, or leaving a letter or more damming a video confession.

ISIS claim responsibility for nearly all of these attacks, but again how much faith can you have in this, is it not sort of like someone doing something at work and you just claiming credit because that person isn't around anymore. Wouldnt they always claim credit even if they have zero input into the situation?

I know police tell us after that the attackers are "known" to them but again this seems fuzzy to me, it seems like they are saying yeah they were radical but not quite enough for us to put close tabs on

If you look at the two london incidents the amount of people killed was relatively small in terms of comparing it against other things, for example seven people killed could easily be replicated or increased in a motorway incident involving a drunk driver for example.

What im trying to get at is when does a murder (which is the crime) become terrorist?, if a white man walked into a pub and shot 10 people i cant see it being referred to as a terrorist attack, ISIS probably wouldn't claim responsibility but the core happening is the same someone doing something unbelievably cruel and hideous. Now say the person was known to police had a history of violence.

Is the only thing defining this from terrorism the religious connotations?
There have been terrorist attacks in this country by white skinned people or have you conveniently forgot?
Frany1
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:11 pm

Re: More attacks

Post by Frany1 »

DaveO wrote:A bit of light, but salutary, relief

Tory MP James Conwyn on Twitter:
#VoteConservative if you want strong and stable leadershit
:D :lol1:
False news - James Conwyn MP is a spoof account, which has since been taken off Twitter.
User avatar
Wormburner
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: More attacks

Post by Wormburner »

Frany1 wrote:
DaveO wrote:A bit of light, but salutary, relief

Tory MP James Conwyn on Twitter:
#VoteConservative if you want strong and stable leadershit
:D :lol1:
False news - James Conwyn MP is a spoof account, which has since been taken off Twitter.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Let's is a contraction of “let us.” You use it to make suggestions about what you and someone else should do. Let's is NOT a promise
Wandering Warrior
Posts: 3108
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:09 pm

Re: More attacks

Post by Wandering Warrior »

He was right though!
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
When John Byrom plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints - Jimmy Armfield
Locked