SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the we-have-NJ-jokes-but-maybe-not-the-right-time dept.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/19/us/new-york-explosion-investigation/
The intense investigation into the weekend bomb blasts in New York and New Jersey is leading authorities to signs of a possible terror cell in those two states, law enforcement officials told CNN Monday. The ongoing investigation, which includes two bombs in New York City and devices in two cities in New Jersey, has given authorities leads on specific people who are urgently being sought.
Also on Monday morning, a federal law enforcement official said BBs and ball bearings were among the pieces of metal that appeared to be packed into both pressure cooker bombs in New York. One of those devices exploded on 23rd Street, but the fact that it was partly under a metal trash container may have diminished the force of the blast.
The latest developments came just hours after a backpack containing multiple bombs was found Sunday night near an Elizabeth, New Jersey, train station, according to the FBI and the city's mayor. [...] The [New York City] blast occurred on the same day an explosion went off near a Marine Corps charity run in New Jersey and a man stabbed nine people at a Minnesota mall. Authorities are investigating all three incidents as possible terror acts.
Update: NYT: Police Hunt for Ahmad Khan Rahami in Connection With Manhattan Bombing
Update 2: The suspect has been captured alive, despite getting into a shootout with police.
[Ed's Note: Whereas in some parts of the world, BB is an abbreviation for ball bearing, in the US in particular it refers simply to a round pellet fired from a compressed air weapon.]
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Monday September 19 2016, @04:11PM
How about we change "terrorism" for "criminal damage" or some other more descriptive word that is less emotive.
Just because someone declares a "mission" for their illegal, and psychopathic actions, doesn't mean it is so.
Probably the only true "terrorism" of the last 100 years has been things like dropping bombs on cities, y'know, like in wars.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday September 19 2016, @05:10PM
Were New York, Minnesota Attacks Open-Source Jihad? [nbcnews.com]
Call it what it is: Open Source Jihad!
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 19 2016, @06:08PM
There are imams as well as political figures calling on "good Muslims" everywhere to strike in the name of Allah.
And, like morons, we try hard to dismiss each and every attack, saying it's unrelated to "the war on terra". Workplace violence, road rage, domestic violence spilled into the street, we'll make any excuse that might help us avoid calling Muslims "extreme".
This particular dirt bag didn't target some individuals who interfered in his business. He targeted random people instead. That's how they do things in Islam.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday September 19 2016, @07:21PM
What drives a lone wolf to terrorism while millions of good Muslims go to Starbucks or sit on the couch watching Netflix?
Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez [wikipedia.org]: Strict parents who divorced, drug and alcohol abuse, thousands of dollars in debt and planning to file for bankruptcy, depression/bipolar disorder
Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik [wikipedia.org]: Mostly Islam in both cases, but Rizwan Farook was abused as a child
Omar Mateen [wikipedia.org]: Failure to work in law enforcement, failed marriage, possible mental illness, habitual steroid use, social awkwardness (which creates killers of all stripes), and possible internal conflict about his sexual orientation (you could just blame Islam for that one)
If you look at all of these kinds of amateur attacks, you'll find a lot of the same bad circumstances drive these people to kill. Pure ideology usually isn't enough. Even if it was, that ideology is not reaching a billion Muslims.
And you can find pastors calling for genocide against gays and Muslims - so what? Christians still have to choose to act on it.
That's how they do things in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut too.
Is the existence of Israel and its occupied territories the business of Muslims? Can we exonerate them if they attack Israel and ignore the U.S. completely? If a Muslim has family or friends killed by a U.S. drone, do they have cause to retaliate against the U.S.?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 19 2016, @08:05PM
And you can find pastors calling for genocide against gays and Muslims
[citation needed]
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday September 19 2016, @08:25PM
http://www.rawstory.com/2014/09/tn-pastor-vows-not-to-repent-for-homophobia-god-says-gays-must-be-put-to-death/ [rawstory.com]
http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/christian_pastor_says_gays_worthy_of_death_at_conference_with_3_gop_presidential_candidates [thenewcivilrightsmovement.com]
http://addictinginfo.org/2016/06/12/christian-pastor-calls-orlando-massacre-good-news-because-50-fggots-died-video/ [addictinginfo.org]
http://defendchristians.org/commentary/im-islamaphobic-are-you/ [defendchristians.org] (written by Gary Cass, a former pastor)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/18/guess-why-this-christian-terrorist-plot-against-muslims-isn-t-getting-any-press.html [thedailybeast.com]
terror bonus [wikipedia.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday September 19 2016, @07:49PM
Because the language is descriptive, that is why we should keep using it. Because using the correct term is a first step in understanding, and understanding is required to formulate an effective set of counter measures. The counter measures against crime are utterly ineffective against terrorism, and the countermeasures for terrorism are not going to prevent acts of war.
Terrorism is the word for an attack against the civilian population of a Nation State which practices popular elections, intended to influence, through terror, the policy of that Nation. Note that random attacks on civilians rarely occur in absolute rule forms of government, since terrorizing the populace isn't likely to influence policy. Instead you see attacks on the machinery of the State.
Terrorism usually has a Nation State sponsor, often with plausible deniability. This is why after the fall of the Soviet Empire the tactic is now almost exclusively an Islamic thing. The House of Islam is at war with the House of War but lacks the military ability to engage in traditional warfare.
Bombing cities is not 'terrorism, that is called an Act of War, part of a conflict between Nation States intended to force one to submit to the demands of the other by either destroying the ability to make war or just costing it more than submitting. It is, intrinsically, neither good or evil, it is the goal sought by the war that must be judged.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @07:58PM
> a Nation State which practices popular elections
lol you are so amerio-centric
The charge of "terrorism" is used by ALL governments, regardless of their source of legitimacy.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday September 19 2016, @08:21PM
Citation needed.
Seriously. Show me a terrorist organization attacking an absolute dictator or monarch. For propaganda reasons they will sometimes use the word 'terrorism' against a group attacking a military target in such a country, but that is merely propaganda. You won't find examples because it would be dumb to do so. The people in such countries can't influence State policy so attempts to panic them to influence that policy wouldn't work. I suppose a group could attempt to so destabilize a dictator that a revolution would occur, but history provides no examples.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @09:24PM
Is this one [cnn.com] good enough for ya? Or were you under the mistaken impression that KSA is a representative democracy?
Nope, that one wasn't a military target. There are many things you could call their prophet's final resting place but "military target" is not one of them.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday September 19 2016, @10:08PM
The basis of Saudi authority is their custodianship of the Holy places of Islam. They might not be military targets but they certainly qualify as symbols of State power. Think of it more like an attack on the Statue of Liberty or Eiffel Tower... or the WTC for a brutally relevant example that straddles the categories of target. The attackers dispute that authority and attack to undermine Saudi regime credibility, not to terrify the worshipers into political action. Riddle me this, under what possible conditions would the opinion of ordinary Saudi citizens matter? Would randomly attacking them bring those conditions about?
The correct word for your example would probably be guerrilla warfare.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @10:40PM
Oh please, you are just trying to no true scottsman your way out.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday September 19 2016, @11:20PM
Not at all. I asserted that the definition of 'terrorism' required two elements. You cite an example that possibly meets one. Terrorism requires the target be a civilian target AND that the motive is to bring about political change by terrifying said population. These attacks on the Holy Sites of Islam in Saudi Arabia certainly don't meet the second requirement and I would argue don't even meet the first. That is part of the complaint, the fact the Saudi government is using the Holiest places in Islam as instruments of secular power.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @03:33AM
OK, sunshine! Put that goalpost right back where you found it. You have to play the ball where it lies!
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Monday September 19 2016, @08:37PM
yeah but my point is calling letting of anything less than a 3000lb bomb that brings down a buidling, is simply just criminal. Stupid criminal. Deluded criminal. Evil criminal even.
And when you get to killing >100 people, that's sociopathic/psychopathic and we should treat them as dangerous mentally ill criminals.
That would keep all the "faith based attacks" in their place - mentally ill criminal actions - locked up with loads of meds and no parole.
I would save "terrorism" for state-level attacks, like 9/11 which the mentally ill jackasses that got support from SA (now we have documents and the legal right to sue apparently?), so that qualifies.
Some idiot sets fire to a gas tank, or takes a machine gun to a school, many scales of mental illness and criminal liability - but not terrorism no matter what fairies they say told them to do it.
The point is, if we deny the oxygen of publicity to these wannabes then the news gets a bit more rational - these deluded groups know that western media loves the drama - we literally have an attention deficit media that doesn't see the harm it's doing while not actually informing the public.
A bit of a rant, but this chump deserves nothing but the bottom tier jump suit. /rant
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday September 20 2016, @12:20AM
Bombing cities is not 'terrorism, that is called an Act of War,
And all is fair, in love and war? Oh, you hopeless romantic, jmorris. But wait, could "jmorris" be the account name for Rudy Guilliani?
And actually, bombing cities is terrorism, is not act of war, it is a war crime. Only being an American could make anyone say different. Oh, dear, "noun, verb, 9/11!" On little attack, minimal casualties, and Americans kill over a million? Have you heard of the bombing of Dresden, Tokyo? The nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Yes, American war crimes. And now we know why Americans have let the terrorists win, why they have done everything the terrorists wanted, pulled troops out of Saudi Arabia, exited the EU, aided and abetted discrimination against all Muslims, let jmorris on SoylentNews and Trump on any news at all. Cowards.