Earlier quoted context omitted.
Argument from emotion.
Yes. Because we are humans, not Vulcans. Someone saying: "Don't hit me, please" is also an argument from emotion.
That's not an argument, it's a request.
FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
111–120 of 152 posts
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
If no actual preparations were made to execute the plan, it would be clear violation of the 1st amendment. What is the case of being locked up for fantasizing?
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/video-gamer-arrested-...
Not even close to being the same thing.
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah, probably not. Who cares about the shooting of some homeless and some damn hippies, right? Edit: Folks, the country I grew up in and my ancestors fought for knew of a potential assassination attempt on innocent civilians, and apparently didn't care enough to warn the cops standing watch. Forgive me a little fucking gallows humor.
Who cares about shooting some homeless and some damn hippies? Definitely not the US government which is literally worse than Nazi Germany. Sheeple need to wake up. Also lol: Engineer, coder, and all around cheerful human being.
Sorry for the all-caps:
STOP USING THE WORD "SHEEPLE"!
It makes you look like the most mediocre revolutionary that has ever walked the earth.
There are MUCH better terms (no, i'm not going to give them to you, you need to do some research) for the people you have issues with, and your interests would be better served in engaging them in debate rather than quoting XKCD (http://xkcd.com/1013/).
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
One does not preclude the other. People who planned to shoot Occupy leaders might be terrorists - or not, depending on what they wanted to achieve by this shooting - terrorism is a tactic, relying on fear and intimidation for a political goal, so depending on if they wanted to intimidate Occupy protestors for a political goal or not they may or may not be terrorists. Some Occupy people could be potential terrorists t…
I see two potential explanations for why they didn't intervene: 1. The FBI does not see public assassination of Occupy participants itself as terrorism 2. The FBI does not see public assassination of Occupy participants by whoever was planning it as terrorism
I propose a third: they didn't see threats of public assassination of Occupy participants as credible. Considering the assassinations didn't happen it wouldn't be the worst course of action.
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Governments can lie. But terrorist is not an arbitrary term to stifle dissent - it is a specific and identifiable tactic used to achieve certain goals. If somebody says black is white, it doesn't mean black and white are arbitrary labels that can be applied to anything. That's the false dichotomy that is offered to us.
Terrorist is an arbitrary term used to stifle dissent and demonide an opposition. One could use the term "freedom fighter" in it place and suddenly it has a whole new moral meaning. We Brits know this well, as we referred to the IRA terrorists, while many Americans and Irish called them freedom fighters, while funding them. Perhaps consider this when Nelson Mandela dies. A man who for years was considered a terrorist…
Terrorism implies the use of terror, -choosing targets and tactics not to inflict the biggest/smallest damage but to scare.
Typically this results in attacks on civilians instead of attacking enemy soldiers (who have been trained to handle fear). Other typical traits: using weapons that creates visible damage, injures etc
The sets of freedom fighters and terrorists might intercept but neither is a subset of the other.
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry, but no. There's no equivalence in spirit between a crying mother deciding that it's in the best interests of her family to terminate a pregnancy and a bunch of scary-eyed fanatics trying to make humanity "better". I'm assuming you've never known anyone go through that. It's a personal tragedy, not an intellectual issue.
Argument from emotion.
Swooping down to declare a fallacy then immediately swishing your cape and dashing away is highly unlikely to gain much social traction or admiration.
Also, when arguing if something is in a particular spirit, it's appropriate to discuss emotions and principles.
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's entirely possible that someon in the FBI wrote a report describing the Occupy folks as potential terrorists - I can easily believe that occurred. That's not the same as the entire organization or even its leadership holding that position. I agree that this is not something to be outraged about, but it is something to be watchful of and to be called out - government agencies should not refer to peaceful or even v…
> government agencies should not refer to peaceful or even violent protesters as terrorists You mean "potential terrorists." And, I for one am fine with people in government speculating and planning. There is a vast difference in research and study, speculation and planning. After all, all it would take is a few OWS people to go blow up a bank or something to escalate the entire matter. Sure, it's just a few members,…
Wait what? Hope that the government has plans to invade Canada? Maybe you meant defend from Canada, Prevent war with Canada, nullify Canada Army. But invade? I sure hope they don't have plans for that.
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Abortion of a foetus with an identifiable disability is considered acceptable today by many people, which is similar in spirit if not in practice to eugenics.
I'm sorry, but no. There's no equivalence in spirit between a crying mother deciding that it's in the best interests of her family to terminate a pregnancy and a bunch of scary-eyed fanatics trying to make humanity "better". I'm assuming you've never known anyone go through that. It's a personal tragedy, not an intellectual issue.
"terminate a pregnancy"? Is there a name for the practice of using more convoluted words so as no to make people focus on the real meaning of the sentence?
You could have used "terminate the carrying developing offspring within the body, by terminating said offspring's capacity for metabolism, growth or reaction to stimuli".
OTOH, you mention "a crying mother", which IMHO should be compared to the other tragedy: "an innocent baby being torn apart, aspirated, poisoned or killed in some other way"
And there goes my karma down in 3,2,1,...
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry, but no. There's no equivalence in spirit between a crying mother deciding that it's in the best interests of her family to terminate a pregnancy and a bunch of scary-eyed fanatics trying to make humanity "better". I'm assuming you've never known anyone go through that. It's a personal tragedy, not an intellectual issue.
Argument from emotion.
I claim that any argument about "in spirit" is necessarily about emotion. The original statement struck me as veering pretty close to Godwin's law.
Re: FBI Document: [DELETED] had "plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire"
#120Warning: this comment gets very silly, because I think the story here is actually a very silly one, and can only be understood with a sense of humor. Yes, I'm gonna go against my hippie liberal leanings and say this story is probably mostly harmless. I believe that the plan to "engage in sniper attacks against protestors (sic) in Houston, Texas if deemed necessary" was formulated for the contingency when Occupy threatened to undermine government authority altogether, plunging the United States into anarchy. Because we know what happens next: a coup, followed by fragmentation into various regional governments, which in turn become subsumed in a race war as patriot groups and groups of parasitic degenerates battle to define the foundations on which civilization is rebuilt.
This is not an uncommon fantasy. Most people who are into guns are content to enjoy them for sport, as objects, and for limited self-defense scenarios, but a few like to have one or more elaborate fantasies for every exotic gun they own in which that gun becomes eminently practical. So some guy works for a police department that has some suppressed sniper rifles (thanks, War on Terror!) and naturally gets to thinking about the heroic ways he could use them to save the world by averting a horrible catastrophe. He knows it's all bullshit, but it's still a potent fantasy enabler.
It's no different from when you think about your hot sister-in-law, and you're thinking, "Oooh, yeah, she's so goddamned hot, I would just... wait, I would never do that to my brother. Well, supposing my brother died in a car accident. I would totally bend... wait, that would destroy my marriage. Okay, so my wife and my brother are in a car together on one of those dangerous mountain roads in South America, and it goes careening off a cliff... no, a bus containing everyone in my family except my sister-in-law goes careening off a cliff on the way to Lake Titicaca, and then we would console each other, and then, ooooh, yeah, so hot."
Except instead of a bus accident, you have Occupy undermining government authority, and instead of your hot sister in law, you have hot, hot, sexy firearms. Boom-chicka wow. I mean, it's never going to happen, but let's face it, you're only ever going to get the old familiar, and you get that, what, once a year? If all the stars align correctly, that is. And at your age, it takes a little more than the old familiar to get you remotely excited anyway. Your fantasies are all you have left. Put one such dreamer in a police department, and I'm sure some weird contingency plans get drawn up.