Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lady Katherine Devonshire
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
68
|
Posted - 2012.11.04 05:09:00 -
[61] - Quote
Gussarde en Welle wrote:I wonder what the statistics are on the labeling of Caldari/Amarr criminals as "terrorists" vs. "criminals." Are they labeled as terrorists for acts that Federation members are guilty of, or do they really commit acts worthy of "terrorist" far more often. The recent mass murder-suicide by Boma Araiken suggests that perhaps the facts really bear out this bias?
A criminal is one who tries to breaks a society's rules. A terrorist is one who tries to break a society. EvE Forum Bingo |
Amaki Mai
Meiyi Family Holdings
68
|
Posted - 2012.11.04 05:47:00 -
[62] - Quote
Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:Gussarde en Welle wrote:I wonder what the statistics are on the labeling of Caldari/Amarr criminals as "terrorists" vs. "criminals." Are they labeled as terrorists for acts that Federation members are guilty of, or do they really commit acts worthy of "terrorist" far more often. The recent mass murder-suicide by Boma Araiken suggests that perhaps the facts really bear out this bias? A criminal is one who tries to breaks a society's rules. A terrorist is one who tries to break a society.
Agreed, what's the point of speculation? Both terms have very clear definitions unless you count their use in Tabloid journalism or the cheapest type of pandering propaganda.
A Criminal is one who deliberately and with malice aforethought breaks the laws of their society.
A Terrorist is one who attempts to achieve any sort of goal (Political, Economic, Military) through the specific targeting of non-combatants so as to create motivation by Terror. Usually said motivation attacks the belief of the body politic that their government is still able to enforce the laws by which said body politic has consented to be governed, threatening a collapse of civic order which threatens the stablility of the government, causing them to accept terms. |
Gussarde en Welle
Fruidian Logic The Volition Cult
47
|
Posted - 2012.11.04 06:32:00 -
[63] - Quote
Amaki Mai wrote:Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:Gussarde en Welle wrote:I wonder what the statistics are on the labeling of Caldari/Amarr criminals as "terrorists" vs. "criminals." Are they labeled as terrorists for acts that Federation members are guilty of, or do they really commit acts worthy of "terrorist" far more often. The recent mass murder-suicide by Boma Araiken suggests that perhaps the facts really bear out this bias? A criminal is one who tries to breaks a society's rules. A terrorist is one who tries to break a society. Agreed, what's the point of speculation? Both terms have very clear definitions unless you count their use in Tabloid journalism or the cheapest type of pandering propaganda. A Criminal is one who deliberately and with malice aforethought breaks the laws of their society. A Terrorist is one who attempts to achieve any sort of goal (Political, Economic, Military) through the specific targeting of non-combatants so as to create motivation by Terror. Usually said motivation attacks the belief of the body politic that their government is still able to enforce the laws by which said body politic has consented to be governed, threatening a collapse of civic order which threatens the stablility of the government, causing them to accept terms.
I believe the discussion at hand was with respect to societal labeling and subsequent choice of criminal laws as applied to punishment. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
550
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 00:36:00 -
[64] - Quote
That's the legitimate definition of terrorist, yes.
However that's not how it's always used. |
Amaki Mai
Meiyi Family Holdings
68
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 00:14:00 -
[65] - Quote
Gussarde en Welle wrote:Amaki Mai wrote:Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:Gussarde en Welle wrote:I wonder what the statistics are on the labeling of Caldari/Amarr criminals as "terrorists" vs. "criminals." Are they labeled as terrorists for acts that Federation members are guilty of, or do they really commit acts worthy of "terrorist" far more often. The recent mass murder-suicide by Boma Araiken suggests that perhaps the facts really bear out this bias? A criminal is one who tries to breaks a society's rules. A terrorist is one who tries to break a society. Agreed, what's the point of speculation? Both terms have very clear definitions unless you count their use in Tabloid journalism or the cheapest type of pandering propaganda. A Criminal is one who deliberately and with malice aforethought breaks the laws of their society. A Terrorist is one who attempts to achieve any sort of goal (Political, Economic, Military) through the specific targeting of non-combatants so as to create motivation by Terror. Usually said motivation attacks the belief of the body politic that their government is still able to enforce the laws by which said body politic has consented to be governed, threatening a collapse of civic order which threatens the stablility of the government, causing them to accept terms. I believe the discussion at hand was with respect to societal labeling and subsequent choice of criminal laws as applied to punishment.
I thought it might be useful to have proper definitions of the words that are so often abused and bandied about for political gain as part of that discussion.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |