An act of terrorism commited by an American: Alabama shooting spree kills 10

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Fateh,

Glad we agree. You can do a google search on US/CIA interventions in Latin America to read about their activities there. I came across it in my Latin American History class in Uni.

On Baluchistan, we have Indian analysts essentially confirming Musharraf's views. Therefore I believe that like Pakistan's support for the Kashmiri movement, there is really no more doubt over this. The only better evidence would be to have PM MMS admit it, and that isn't going to happen.

But anyway, that's besides the point - the issue is that whether in India or abroad, the US and Indian actions are not referred to as 'terrorism', which they should be if we are to be consistent in how we apply the definition, and that is because of the biases that have crept in which tend to apply the term largely to Islam related activities or Muslim nations.

It could also merely be a manifestation of geo-politics. The Western Press is the most widely read globally, and carries the most credibility, so when they jump on the bandwagon of their respective governments to promote their governments foreign policy objectives (the US media in the run up to Iraq for example, and their bias against Pakistan in support of India) they tend to ignore the ills of those aligned with their governments foreign policy and focus on those that are not.

This isn't necessarily malicious on the part of the press - in the US at least, when it comes to foreign policy and 'national security' the Govt. exercises tremendous control over the coverage. All these reporters attached to the Defence and State Department who quote 'Intelligence or US administration sources' would likely lose their access to these people if they did not clear their stories with the admin. on foreign policy and NS issues.

At the same time, through these 'sources' they also become susceptible to whatever propaganda the US administration wants to put out. If your 'High level Intelligence source' tells you the administration found evidence of 'Iraqi WMD's' and its Ok to publish that, you go ahead and do so mostly on good faith.

As a reporter, who else are you going to validate 'secret intelligence information' from?

Just some thoughts.

 

[notsuperstitious]

AM said-

Glad we agree. You can do a google search on US/CIA interventions in Latin America to read about their activities there. I came across it in my Latin American History class in Uni.

As i said, i've only replied abt india as i don't really have enough knwoledge, tho i'll try to read up when i get time.

On Baluchistan, we have Indian analysts essentially confirming Musharraf's views. Therefore I believe that like Pakistan's support for the Kashmiri movement, there is really no more doubt over this. The only better evidence would be to have PM MMS admit it, and that isn't going to happen.

don't agree, had written a long reply, but no point. don't think a private citizen's thoughts count as evidence.

But anyway, that's besides the point - the issue is that whether in India or abroad, the US and Indian actions are not referred to as 'terrorism', which they should be if we are to be consistent in how we apply the definition, and that is because of the biases that have crept in which tend to apply the term largely to Islam related activities or Muslim nations.

It could also merely be a manifestation of geo-politics. The Western Press is the most widely read globally, and carries the most credibility, so when they jump on the bandwagon of their respective governments to promote their governments foreign policy objectives (the US media in the run up to Iraq for example, and their bias against Pakistan in support of India) they tend to ignore the ills of those aligned with their governments foreign policy and focus on those that are not.

This isn't necessarily malicious on the part of the press - in the US at least, when it comes to foreign policy and 'national security' the Govt. exercises tremendous control over the coverage. All these reporters attached to the Defence and State Department who quote 'Intelligence or US administration sources' would likely lose their access to these people if they did not clear their stories with the admin. on foreign policy and NS issues.

At the same time, through these 'sources' they also become susceptible to whatever propaganda the US administration wants to put out. If your 'High level Intelligence source' tells you the administration found evidence of 'Iraqi WMD's' and its Ok to publish that, you go ahead and do so mostly on good faith.

As a reporter, who else are you going to validate 'secret intelligence information' from?

Just some thoughts.

I agree, india was at the receiving end of this during the cold war and still is when it comes to tensions between christian evangelists and their hindu brothers. however just the same way as i can not reject ur claim just because thats what a senior home ministry officer (related thru my wife) has told me, similarly u can not be 100% sure what the analyst said is true.

But i'd say this, quite categorically i would not support my govt to support violence against civilians, not in my name.

btw this post was abt calling any crime 'terrorism', and i stick to what i said abt it. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

[notsuperstitious]

There is a stark difference between a robbery and cool blooded murder. Comparing both is like comparing apples to oranges. Learn to differentiate between both.

Your denial that this heinous murder of innocent people isn't terror is a reminder that you're willing to apply double standards when it suits you. I've already pointed out that the problem is related to gun culture. Read the my first post in this thread before making assumptions or accusations. Well, it certainly does portray how quick some Indians are to make an exception and downgrade this or other alike incidents as a crime. Of course, the Western press will never term this as terrorism. They too have reserved those terms specifically for Islam, Muslims and everything else related to it. Now tell me whose the genius?

There's a super stark difference between cold blooded murder in the name of an ideology and a mentally disturbed man killing his family and then shooting everyone in sight before shooting himself in the head.

 

[jeypore]

This is not Terrorism. Simply this a person that went crazy because he was fired from his job, and killed 9 of his family members and comminted suicide at the door steps of were he worked.

 

[notsuperstitious]

terrorism is use of violence againt unarmed civilians to achieve a political objective.QUOTE]


Where did you get that definition from?

Terrorism is the act of terrorising. Murder, rape, robbery all terrorises people so its all an act of terrorism with murder and rape being worse acts of terrorism than robbery.

Tell me what does terror mean?

Can't belive i'm actually replying to this.

terrorism - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
terror - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

 

[Stumper]

Nevertheless, this incident can and in fact should be classified as terrorism. Terrorism can be defined as the indiscriminate and senseless murder of innocent people. Most Indians have the tendency and are obsessed with equating terrorism with Pakistan, Muslims and Islam in general. Your denial doesn't surprise me. Your reluctance to classify this incident as terrorism has to do with your unconscious bias. You have reserved and attached terrorism with Islam, Pakistan etc. Any sane being would without any hesitance condemn this insane act of terrorism.

The best things guys like you can resort to, is to bring in religion. And if that is not enough, bring national sentiments in for good measure. As if that augments your assertion. I dont need to explain to you what i feel about terrorism cause you will invariably paint it in color of religion.

If you care to read, i meant "It depends on what YOUR definition of terrorism is..since no standard definition exist". I believed this to be more of a mass killing spree.

 

[Omar1984]

Can't belive i'm actually replying to this.

terrorism - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
terror - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Thank you. According to the defination provided from your source, Michael McLendon committed an act of terrorism.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Thank you. According to the defination provided from your source, Michael McLendon committed an act of terrorism.

OH GOD ALMIGHTY, GIVE ME STRENGTH.

Here's the definition of terrorism i gave

"terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"

You would've anyways reached the conclusion u reached if this was the definition i'd given

"terrorism - is the build-up of a waxy deposit on the inside of blood vessels"

 

[metalfalcon]

Someone just Goes NUTS in USA and Starts Killing Innocent School or University Students for no reason or Someone Kills his own Family, this shows how Lethal a Depressed person can turn out to be.

It is very bad news for humanity.

 

[Omar1984]

OH GOD ALMIGHTY, GIVE ME STRENGTH.

Here's the definition of terrorism i gave

"terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"

Didn't this killer use terror to kill more than one person? I'm sure the people who had the gun pointed at them were terrified.

 

[Stumper]

Can't belive i'm actually replying to this.

terrorism - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
terror - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Fateh : No universally accepted definition of word "Terrorism" exist. The reason i go on harping about this is ... in absence of a globally accepted definition, even a homicide can be clubbed as terrorist act. To each his own.

 

[RajsParadise]

With a way bit of idea here is the history and definition of the word "Terrorism" as per International Court of Justice (No Prejudice included),

Violence aimed at inspiring fear and intimidating populations is not a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, references to ‘terrorism’ in law and politics can only be found in more recent times. The word ‘terror’ was first used to describe the Jacobin ‘Reign of Terror’ that followed the French Revolution in 1789. The first legal responses to terrorism and attempts to define the word can be traced to the 20th century. One commentator dates ‘the first organized international legal attempt to grapple with the problem of defining terrorism’ to the International Conferences for the Unification of Penal Law, a series of events convened in various European capitals throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Since then lawyers,academics, national legislatures, regional organisations and international bodies,such as the United Nations, have produced a bewildering array of definitions. One 1988 study identified a total of 109 different definitions, and the number would be far higher today. Despite decades of effort, with even greater focus after September 11, attempts to develop a generally accepted legal definition of terrorism have failed.

In adopting the specific approach, international law has adapted itself to the
‘predominant form of terrorist action at any given time’, and has attempted to side step the political sensitivity of the broader definitional question. As a consequence, there are some 12 international conventions, such as the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages,and the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings,directed to commonly-acknowledged terrorist modus operandi.

The Definition and further Revision of the same:
"Any other act intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to a civilian, or to any other person not taking an active part in hostilities in a situation of armed conflict, when the purpose of such an act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a Government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act."

Now the Revision:

More recently, as part of its response to the events of 11 September 2001, the Sixth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly attempted to formulate a comprehensive general definition of terrorism.30 Article 2(1) of the Draft Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism provides:
(1) Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person, by any means, unlawfully and intentionally, causes:
(a) Death or serious bodily injury to any person; or (While interpretation of this clause those citizens or non state actors whose actions come under sedition has to be inferred).
(b) Serious damage to public or private property, including a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system, an infrastructure facility or the environment; or
(c) Damage to property, places, facilities, or systems referred to in paragraph 1(b) of this article, resulting or likely to result in major economic loss, when the purpose of the conduct, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a Government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing an act.

 

[Captain03]

i heard about that
that's pretty sad
tauba tauba

 

[Bane Blade]

It was a tragic nonetheless a bit like the commiting of suicide of a Indian army officers wife or a Mujahideen being taught misconceptions on a peacefull religion one must understand that this is an incedent that should show to Pakistanis and Indians what guns can cause to even those nations that claim to be a super power. Hence please fellow members stop the bickering over definitions and understand that this man did cause as much damage as a terrorist, scared the lives out of people and took some as well and work in your neighbourhood for your country to get rid of guns.

 

[Luftwaffe]

The guy has links with Alqaeda US should attack ...............? so stupid its sad that it happened but its normal in the States Americans call it shootout and gives it so many names but they never use the term terrorism..whatever happened US failed to stop local terrorism and calls for cleaning terrorists around the world they should look into their own **** before looking outside.