Quik Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 An act intended to harm people and/or property in the furtherance of a cause i think covers it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share Posted December 21, 2015 All fair points . My point is we could all google words and cherry pick links until we found a definition to suit our own viewpoints . Mafya's post# 95 on his Why isn't this classed as a terrorist attack? thread adds more value to a discussion than RootsFluster did my simply googling a word when he was bankrupt of common sense . All that thread provides from yourself and Mafya is a circle-jerk back-slapping party between the two of you, agreeing on the same opinion without putting forward any actual explanation for your assertions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 All that thread provides from yourself and Mafya is a circle-jerk back-slapping party between the two of you, agreeing on the same opinion without putting forward any actual explanation for your assertions. You miss out the point that they never back anything up, they never explain they understand what the current definition of terrorism is and they fail to explain what the dividing line is between one act which is terrorism and another which is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 You miss out the point that they never back anything up, they never explain they understand what the current definition of terrorism is and they fail to explain what the dividing line is between one act which is terrorism and another which is not. By backing up , you mean googling definitions and amateur legal analysis with rose tinted spetacles in the absence of cognizance . You continue to miss the point of Mafya's thread which was more about public perception in the current climate than terrorism it self . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 By backing up , you mean googling definitions and amateur legal analysis with rose tinted spetacles in the absence of cognizance . You continue to miss the point of Mafya's thread which was more about public perception in the current climate than terrorism it self . Mafya asked a question which was why was it not classed as a terror attack. Your starting point is what is actually recognised as a terror attack and then its a case of applying the facts to the definition. This was explained to both of you, but neither of you were able to back up your claims or could be bothered to answer points that were raised over obvious weaknesses in your definitions. You seem to have a problem with people identifying the correct information by doing a bit of research. You seem to want to say its all common sense in Gamston World, except you make little sense and you never back anything up. As for amateur legal analysis, if its so poor, then you should have no problem pointing out the weaknesses and responding with valid relevant points of your own. You never do that though. Your standard answers are, you cant google its just common sense or thats apples and pears argument. Why not persuade through reason and intelligence rather than just keep on going its common sense, but never bother to explain or engage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Mafya asked a question which was why was it not classed as a terror attack. Your starting point is what is actually recognised as a terror attack and then its a case of applying the facts to the definition. This was explained to both of you, but neither of you were able to back up your claims or could be bothered to answer points that were raised over obvious weaknesses in your definitions. You seem to have a problem with people identifying the correct information by doing a bit of research. You seem to want to say its all common sense in Gamston World, except you make little sense and you never back anything up. As for amateur legal analysis, if its so poor, then you should have no problem pointing out the weaknesses and responding with valid relevant points of your own. You never do that though. Your standard answers are, you cant google its just common sense or thats apples and pears argument. Why not persuade through reason and intelligence rather than just keep on going its common sense, but never bother to explain or engage? All you have done again is use a lot of words without addressing the real issue . One more time in bold this time .............. You continue to miss the point of Mafya's thread which was more about public perception in the current climate than terrorism it self . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Does Mafya have a keyword email alerter set up for this forum? The only time he seems to post is to go on the defensive to play the persecution card. The IRA weren't Muslims but their attacks were most definitely terrorism and reported as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lottiecass Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 [/s] All you have done again is use a lot of words without addressing the real issue . One more time in bold this time .............. You continue to miss the point of Mafya's thread which was more about public perception in the current climate than terrorism it self . Yes but public perception does not make the law any different,it was arson,not an act of terrorism.So you are just as wrong regardless of how many posts you put up,all you are doing is showing ignorance/arrogance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) [/s] All you have done again is use a lot of words without addressing the real issue . One more time in bold this time .............. You continue to miss the point of Mafya's thread which was more about public perception in the current climate than terrorism it self . I'm pretty sure it was about the police and media's perception... A man plants a bomb in a Preston shopping centre and the police and media don't class it as a terrorist attack yet if the device had gone off it would have caused terror/injury= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6777976.html If this had been a Muslm looking suspect the media would have been screaming " Muslim terrorist attack ". The police say the wanted man wanted to cause serious injury.... Meanwhile the vilification of Muslims carrys on= http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/vi...-34298716.html Please be careful while out Christmas shopping, it's not only the Muslim looking people you need to be wary of it........ ...but let's not let that get in the way of your misdirection, eh? Edited December 21, 2015 by RootsBooster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Yes but public perception does not make the law any different,it was arson,not an act of terrorism.So you are just as wrong regardless of how many posts you put up,all you are doing is showing ignorance/arrogance. With respect , you are another poster who is missing the point . The main issue is about the appearance of the suspect more than the correct or incorrect definition of the word terrorism . Mafya and I believe if the suspect seen on CCTV was of Muslim appearance, then the media would have reported it rightly or wrongly as a potential terrorist act shortly after the incident occurred before the facts were established . It is others who are ignorant/arrogant by being obsessed about the definition of the word terrorism . I don't have any issues or problems that the suspect has not been charged with a terrorist offence even though in the current climate there are fair arguments he should have been charged with a terrorist act . Edited December 21, 2015 by Gamston typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now