Stu Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 A glimpse at the tactics of our enemy. Cowards they are all. Note also the heroism of the Iraqi citizen killed to prevent further death. ______________________________________ Disabled child in suicide attack http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/16278831 31 January 2005 Terrorists used a disabled child as a suicide bomber on election day, Iraqi interior minister Falah al-Naqib said today. In all, 44 people were killed in a total of 38 bomb attacks on polling stations. Police at the scene of one the Baghdad blasts said the bomber appeared to have Down's syndrome. Mr Al-Naqib praised an Iraqi citizen who was killed while preventing one suicide bomber from reaching a crowd of people outside a polling station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 disgusting, I hope that the arab street see's this the same way as I. These "Freedom Fighters" are really upstanding arent they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 It's a religion of peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 It's a religion of peace. It's a "region" of peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by codeorama It's a "region" of peace. why can't people just call them homicide bombers? That's what they're doing. Even the mentally retarded child with a bomb strapped on him is still going to be a murderer in the end, if it goes off. Its a Region of Peace.....with a Religion of Peace that's been hijacked a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford why can't people just call them homicide bombers? That's what they're doing. Even the mentally retarded child with a bomb strapped on him is still going to be a murderer in the end, if it goes off. Its a Region of Peace.....with a Religion of Peace that's been hijacked a long time ago. My only point is that the area is a problem, not the religion, where are all the american muslim suicide bombers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 great point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Wow, how do even "THEY" justify this one.. You got the one guy that is against them now because he was tricked into blowing up his own people when he just wanted to blow up americans and now this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford why can't people just call them homicide bombers? That's what they're doing. homocide is just plain murder and that's not what is going on here. These people aren't your run of the mill murderers using bombs. They intend to die making their goals and counter measures required to stop them very different. They really should have a name of their own to more accurately describe them. I'd say MS bomber but I don't want to demonize Microsoft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 well, they aren't going to blow themselves up in a field. They want to take people with him. Killing them. A suicide shooter sounds like he/she only killed themselves. Why should bomber be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 As much as I hate to say it this almost needs to happen. Freedom is not the result of a vote provided you by a foriegn power, but instead a mindset of a nation. This fight between terrorist and Iraqi's is finally drawing a line in the sand between average citizen and killer in a area of the world that for too long has been a giant grey area. Hopefully more Iraqi's will recognize the evil of terrorism and stand up for themselves and their people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford well, they aren't going to blow themselves up in a field. They want to take people with him. Killing them. A suicide shooter sounds like he/she only killed themselves. Why should bomber be any different? That's the "MS" thing. Murder Suicide is an accurate description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Having a child do it that's possibly mentally ill? That's all time low. How can you even put a spin on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 I am glad people can think of new ways to disgrace themselves. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford why can't people just call them homicide bombers? That's what they're doing. Even the mentally retarded child with a bomb strapped on him is still going to be a murderer in the end, if it goes off. Its a Region of Peace.....with a Religion of Peace that's been hijacked a long time ago. Two things on this post. 1. I'm confused about the outrage of many over the term "suicide bomber", as if it is some sort of benign, bleeding heart term. It simply describes a certain type of attacker, one who intends to kill people with a bomb while taking their own life as well. It is a straightforward way to distinguish from other bombers who do not take their own lives in the process. The homicidal intent is implicit by the term "bomber". So let's stop trying to make "homicide bomber" happen. 2. Calling a child with Down's Syndrome a murderer is a huge stretch. Murder implies intent. Are you suggesting that this child had willful intent to commit this crime? The people who strapped the bomb on this victim are murderers. This child is in all likelihood a victim, not a murderer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Edit. Double post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeaconBlue Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Dan, firstly I believe that is a matter of perception. I think that the label "suicide bomber" for most people seems to place most of the focus in the self sacrfice of the bombers life rather than his intent to kill and maim with the detonation of his device.Many feel that the bombers intent to kill and maim as many innocent( and sometimes it would appear the more innocent the better) bystanders as physically possible should be more tangible in whatever these people wind up being call. I think (myself included) feel that the way that language is used can offer theses individuals and there compatriots more empathy than they are due. Which ,by the way, to me is absolutely nil. Secondly, I do believe that the child with Downs Syndrome was at least aware that his intent was to kill. Downs is a form of birth defect that among other things does result in mental disabilities. I does not however mean that he could not deferientiate right from wrong. Now I do have more compassion for him than I do for his non disabled compatriots because the reasoning behind what he was being asked to do probably wasn't as clear to him as it may be to someone without mental deficit. As to his handlers who chose someone with deminished capacities ,HELL YES , that is a new low. It shows that they are to cowardly to do their own dirty work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by DeaconBlue Dan, firstly I believe that is a matter of perception. I think that the label "suicide bomber" for most people seems to place most of the focus in the self sacrfice of the bombers life rather than his intent to kill and maim with the detonation of his device. Many feel that the bombers intent to kill and maim as many innocent( and sometimes it would appear the more innocent the better) bystanders as physically possible should be more tangible in whatever these people wind up being call. I think (myself included) feel that the way that language is used can offer theses individuals and there compatriots more empathy than they are due. Which ,by the way, to me is absolutely nil. Secondly, I do believe that the child with Downs Syndrome was at least aware that his intent was to kill. Downs is a form of birth defect that among other things does result in mental disabilities. I does not however mean that he could not deferientiate right from wrong. Now I do have more compassion for him than I do for his non disabled compatriots because the reasoning behind what he was being asked to do probably wasn't as clear to him as it may be to someone without mental deficit. As to his handlers who chose someone with deminished capacities ,HELL YES , that is a new low. It shows that they are to cowardly to do their own dirty work. I don't see "suicide bomber" as an empathetic label, but instead a precise use of language. It describes a specific type of attack in two words without ambiguity. To me the language is neutral. Whether one attaches empathy to the bomber because they kill themselves is a function of the reader, not the term itself. The problem I have with "homicide bomber" is that it is redundant and less descriptive. As to the use of the child with Down's Syndrome to deliver a bomb, I don't know enough about the case to know whether the child was even aware of what he or she was doing. Their diminished mental capacity would make them a candidate to be duped into carrying out something they didn't even fully understand. Whether this is the case or not, I don't think we know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Dan T, I agree pretty much with everything you say. I loathe the term "homicide bomber" - it's just silly and completely undescriptive. Almost any bomber is a homicide bomber. To me, "suicide bomber" not only is accurate, but also conveys the chilling horror of the crime: it's a person so fanatically connected with a cause that he will destroy even himself to achieve his horrible ends. It conveys a sense of death and desperation, not empathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeaconBlue Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Thats pretty much why I said it was a matter of perception. The simple fact is that the very same words have divergent meanings(connotations) to different people. Thats all. I dunno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Alchemist Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Originally posted by Dan T. 2. Calling a child with Down's Syndrome a murderer is a huge stretch. Murder implies intent. Are you suggesting that this child had willful intent to commit this crime? The people who strapped the bomb on this victim are murderers. This child is in all likelihood a victim, not a murderer. I agree. It seems like self preservation. Just send innocent people to kill others on their behalf. Their cause is useless if they are all dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSCNZ20 Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 It's a religion of peace. are you always this ignorant? nothing in the religion says to kill, not in any religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.