₦airaland Forum

4 Play:
To Fabregas, Anderson is a terrorist.

Joke of the day. We can close this thread now. Sir, you rock.

frosbel:
Lol.

You are not serious. Lol.


Special forces are given a mandate at each and every mission. I am sure the one on the flotilla and is not a "Capture mission" but more like a "Capture, Search and Secure".

Anyone with military experience will tell you that those three will play fine with rules of engagement. I.e Shoot when you are fired upon [Self defence], Or shoot if necessary so as not to jeopardise the mission.

Romeo4real:
As well as this, another 48 people had gunshot wounds, and there are additional 6 people still missing.  Of all the people shot, 6 had gunshot wounds to the head and the other 3 to their chest and torso area.

Question is - If the IDF were acting in self defence as claimed, how do multiple gunshot wounds to the head and body align with "self defence" against opponents carry sticks, metal poles and knives? Why would a soldier need to shoot someone in the head 4 times, to stop him attaching with a knife?

Applying the rules of engagement in a non-conventional area will create several flawed outcomes.

The men on board the flotilla where ill-organised, and clearly from the video evidence we have seen, they appeared to be in chaos. When poorly armed men in a confined space takes on a military, the result will bear the hallmarks of multiple gun shots either to the torso or vitals. This is a CQC - Close quarters combat.

Shooting perceived enemies in the head, is almost a standard norm for Special forces around the world. The theory is that it is the safest [for the SF] and the quickest way to get rid of the threat.  If you are aware of the death of Charlse Demeneze who was killed in London by UK special forces, he was shot in the head nine times.

As someone who says they have a military background, I think you will find that the guns of these special forces are mostly semi-automatic or fully automatic - Especially in a CQC. Not condescending towards you here, but a gun set to Semi mode will fire short burst - Which can be set in 3s-2s or even 1s. Again, this kind of weapon and shot discharge will be in correlation with the entry points found on the dead bodies.

I have an armed forces background, and you are trained to shoot to the head or torso when you intend to kill.
The rules of engagement were clearly set to "shoot to kill" in the initial stages of the assault. More Israeli lies exposed.

I am baffling to see how your experience is exposing any lies to be honest.  

When you are under-attack and have wounded men being attended to, the first thing you do is create a perimeter. You can take out many threat as you want in the process etc, and in the chaos that happened on the flotilla, [bearing in mind it is confined space] there will be plenty of casualties.

redsun:
You are trying to explain what you don't understand and that can only make sense to the birds.

You mean "Tell it to the birds of the skies"? Yeah, that one is from James Hadley Chase's Crime thriller. Very original.

Very daft of you to keep saying "you don't understand blah blah blah" when your view point is forever challenged and ripped apart.

The fact that the overriding society that you unconsciously and subjectively believe in thinks that an action that impacts the same physical,emotional and traumatic effects on the victims and society at large can be termed differently based on the race,religion,intentions,creeds etc of the assumed of person or persons that carried out the action,does not make it right,get that straight into your head.

In Ethics and Law, Law is said to be perceived in some instances as not fair, but the law is still the law. While you may not agree with the stance of the society on certain issue, the view of the society remains unchanged.

For example I do not agree with paying taxes, but I am bound by the laws of the land to pay them. Get it?

You see using your logic,[b] by the laws and stance of the land in which this killings happened, it is not termed as a terrorist act. [/b]Merely, "a rampage" etc. I suppose you know better than the people of the UK right? Awesome.

Disagreeing with the stance, or looking for justification to back up your very weak points, are nothing but your problem. The society as it stand have the view that he is not a terrorist.  

The actions of the said man was not in anyway different from the actions of the mumbai terrorists massacre that took place not long ago in india,but in his own case,he was a one man squad terrorist with grudges against the society that meticulously kept those guns for so long waiting for the right time that he is had enough to take out the people that he hates and the unlucky passers by along with his sad self,same things proclaimed terrorist does

What a load of non-sense. Seriously, what a load of non-sense. He's a licensed gun user for over 5 years, are you trying to suggest he knew what he wanted to do all along?  Please let's not start making things up.

Again, I am forced to correct you here you see. Terrorism have a political ideology attached to it - like it was mentioned to you before - and it usually comes in this day and age with a form of religious notion of some kind.

Please go back and the read the original story of Derrick Bird killings, he had problems with his families - an ongoing family feud of jealousy and envy. To keep suggesting he is a terrorist, when the majority of the society and law of the land disagrees with you is just a joke on you. I think you may want to have the birds of the skies to agree with you on this one, because seriously, you appear to be alone here.

If i may ask you,what does your people call terror and terrorist in your language? I bet you won't know that and that explains why you are lost like so many africans who speaks in the languages they don't understand,it is meaningless hence the dormancy among africans because the languages they interact with and think they understand does not have any intuitive perceptions and views that drives a language,a typical case of gibbering.

Before we get all tribalistic - not sure if this is your goal - but allow me to stop you there and ask you this: What is  the connection between the price of tea in Bangladesh and Vocal slender playing in London tonight?   Please stick to the issue at hand. You know, the classification of Mr Derrick Bird's crime as to whether it is a Terrorist act or not.

Animals like dolphins are more evolved in everyday practical communications that average africans and that explains why they are able to navigate the massive oceans, keep their young and maintain communities for millions of years.Communication is way more than the word of mouth.

Yeah I agree a dolphin is probably smarter than you . WTF.

I am not even gonna bother with the above quote. It makes no sense and irrelevant to the debate at hand.  

^^

"Navigate to another thread in anger. . . . "


Or something along those lines.

joeycrack:
You could make an ideological case for both sides, I choose to look at the causalities and people affected.






As far as I'm concerned, both Hamas and Israel are war criminals that should be tried

Those are the two main points in my opinion.


In my experience, pointing fingers, taking sides etc yields nothing but endless bickering online. The same approach in real life have yielded little or no result over a century.

~Bluetooth:
I never knew lawlessness is so rampant in the so-developed countries like this.

You are one funny guy.

Lawlessness is when Deji of Akure beats the living day light out of his wife, and nothing happens to him.

Lawlessness is when one of your law makers is there sleeping with a minor, and he goes unpunished. Even more lawlessness is when he claims to be above the law of the country, and only guided by sharia.

Lawlessness is when known killers and corrupt officials are left unpunished, then allowed to run for a public office - IBB.

Lawlessness is when the police are overwhelmed by area boys from arresting a common criminal like Ibori.

Lawlessness is when.   .    .    .    .    .


I am sure you get the idea.

snowdrops:
The problem is El Razur. The guy has some form of paranoid personality disorder.

Thanks.

Beaf:
Shock horror! There were no dinghies doing crazy stunts, while gung ho terrorist commando's abseiled down from helicopters to shoot invade the Rachel Corrie today. No, the Israeli's are getting more civilised after the international outcry. The latest boarding was done with the least display of force (perhaps, it really was boy scouts), if things had been approached that way with the flotilla, there would be no needlessly spilt blood and no outcry.

Beaf, I beg you be reasonable guy. Try and see things from the perspective of others at times, it may help.

Sending commandos to do their job is not a crazy stunt am afraid. While it may appear dramatic to the untrained eye, the whole aim is "Fast response" approach. So abseiling from a Heli with ropes while holding Semi-automatics is nothing but a highly skilled act.

To hit the point on the head, there probably would have been no violence if, it wasn't offered in the first place. That is the point, I was getting across.

A show of force usually means there is a respect for each other in the aftermath. Just look at the recent skirmish between NK and SK.

The flotilla incident leaves little room for anything other than chaos. The number of "peaceful protesters" outnumbers that of the second ship.

A high number of poorly organised armed men, gives a predictable outcome of chaos. A chaos that was met with disproportionate force by IDF who boarded the ship. [Not denying that].

The disorganisation was seen in the video posted when the ship was boarded. Assuming they all have sat down like they did in the second ship, perhaps we won't be having all of these discussion? Just a thought.

redsun:
Of course they are terrorist bimbo,because they terrorize the people by their actions.Just because there are other oyinbo words for them does not mean they are not terrifying.What happens when a serial killer is on the loose?don't people feel terrified?same as when robbers are on rampage.

You guys don't have intuitive understanding of the words you use,that is why you find it difficult to see deeply,most of you are like tutored chimps,you can't see things differently unless as you are taught to see them.

You saying the same thing again, even though I tried to explain to you previously in simple terms:

Dude, again not really looking for a lengthy debate over simple matters.

Let me try and keep it simple. In this day and age, Terrorism is now redefined, or have a new meaning. There is nothing wrong with that. You know, just the same way words evolve over time. For example "Gay" used to be a word meaning "Happy" or "Care free". While, it still mean that, the mainstream application is now to describe a homosexual person.

You see, with the advent of using Religion as a tool for justification for killing people, especially, over the past 10 years or so, the word terrorism appears to have since taken a new definition. I really do not have to explain this, as I feel it is there for all to see.

It is just the same way where the killing of human being have various legal definition - Murder, Manslaughter, Death by Dangerous driving etc. While all of these are noting but fancy name for calling the death and killing of people. The court takes a look at the circumstances behind each death and deals with it according to the law.

My point is that, this dude carried out an act of terror, I am not so sure he is a terrorist in the grand scale of things. A killer? Yes. A deranged Killer? Yeah. But using the explanation I have given you above, I am not so sure I will call him a terrorist myself.

If he's done it calling the name of Jesus and Ogun in the process, and probably left a note behind citing religious reasons, then yes he will fit in with the definition of the new "Terrorist" and as such committed terrorism.

I mean Red sun, this is nothing really, but if you wanna make big fuss out of it. Please be my guest.

In addition to that, Armed robbers, Area boys, Omo onile etc using your logic should be labelled as terrorist, but guess what, the society do not, and the will and stance of the society carries more weight of reason, than yours am afraid.

This nah very simple matter. Choice of words, Definition of a word, the application of the word and in the context it is used as dictated by the society we are in.

This is probably one of the simplest debate I have engaged in on nairaland.

redsun:
They are armed robbers that terrorized people,same terrorism comes into play init?Terror is terror,which ever way you toy with it.FEAR.

Red sun, I get your point.

But to say he committed terrorism is far fetched in my opinon. Anyway, I hear you. No biggie.

Thanks BB. I have moved on.

Please accept my apology.

redsun:
I think it is you that should change your views,just because the conventional society and laws that are not infallible thinks or sees things in certain ways does not means they are right.

I was expecting you to answer my question. Can you do that please?

So I should change my view, simply because I do not agree with the society?

Hmm Okay, you are right. Only that while my views are changed, the fact of the matter remains. These folks in the example I gave are still seen as nothing but Armed robbers, and not the Terrorist, even though your logic will suggest they are Terrorist and the root cause of Terrorism.

Coming back to the debate at hand, Mr Derrick Bird -The killer - is not seen as a terrorist by the larger members of the society. A few people trying hard to be different like yourselves won't make any different at this time am afraid.

cold:
This argument can continue to swing back & forth with pro-Isrealis & the antagonists holding their grounds tenaciously. But truth be told it is apparent the Isrealis used disproportionate force against the activists.There must have been a better alternative.

You do not send boy scouts to search a ship you see, but I will await your alternative approach.

You do not provoke one of the best military forces in the world and not expect a backlash.

Yeah the force is disproportionate, but it may not have happened, if there wasn't any armed protest in the first place.

You see, when no violence means was offered today, there wasn't any violence given back either.

redsun:
We all live in the same world and until we begin to see injustices,plights,delusions as the same,race,colour,locations and causes notwithstanding,peace can never reign.

The same reason why far rights,skin head heads,neo nazis get away with murderous acts and hateful incitements because they are seen as mere racist not terrorists that they really are.

Very weird that you won't even see another man's view point, but yours.

Even more weird that you are appear to be giving a "I have a dream" type speech.

Redsun, can please drop these condescending approach? Play nice please.

I don't understand you, I have shown that I share you view, and that I have other views as well. Is that such a bad thing? 

Here let me give you another simple example.

People who are armed to the teeth and rob travellers of their belongings are what exactly? After all they strike fear into the lives of their victims and the society in general isn't?

Using your logic, there these people will be called Terrorist right? Well, you may be right, but the general society at large and the court of law see them as nothing but mere Armed robbers.

You may once again not agree with this, but these are the way things are dictated in the society.

Respect to Vocal Slender and those who helped him.

I had tickets for the show, but exam was in the way.

I am not finding it difficult to see anything. Jeez. I have shared your view point in my post. Remember I already said, "if we want to get technical, he committed an act of terrorism". And I asked you, if that was the angle you are coming in from.

Having said that, I have gone beyond that to present the other side that you are very unwilling to entertain or see. You see, I am not the one finding it difficult here.

You may not accept it, but the word Terrorism and Terrorist are used mostly and lately to describe barbaric acts that have religion ideology entwined into them.

You said it is politicised right? Well, perhaps if you acknowledge the fact that words meaning change over time, as it is dictated by the society, then you will see that there isn't no big deal like you are trying to make it.



Here is a news quote from BBC on the incident.

Police attempting to establish the motive behind Derrick Bird's shooting rampage have confirmed he was the subject of an ongoing tax inquiry.

The 52-year-old taxi driver shot 12 people dead in Cumbria before shooting himself on Wednesday.

Detectives said they were focusing on a number of key issues, including suggestions that he was involved in disputes with fellow drivers.

No suicide note or list of targets was found during a search of his home.

Bird's computer, mobile phones, and a large amount of paperwork have now been removed from the property in Rowrah.

A post-mortem examination will be carried out to establish whether he was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the shootings.

The senior investigating officer, Supt Iain Goulding, said: "Detectives are focusing on several key areas and are working to verify suggestions that Bird was involved in personal disputes with fellow taxi drivers, or others.

"We have also been reviewing his finances and investigating issues of taxation.

"We can confirm that Derrick Bird was subject to an ongoing investigation by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.

"While we continue to investigate these issues, we may never fully understand what could have driven Bird to commit such atrocities, as he is no longer here to answer our questions."

Read more
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10244223.stm


Before you make this into a Muslim theme thread, if you want, I can cite you instances where killings have been committed by Moslem and it was never called terrorism in the UK.

Horus:
An attack in international waters is illegal. Period. End of discussion. Instead of framing the issue as American and Israeli media outlets want you to see the issue, the more important aspect of the story is the violation of international law and The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by Israel.

Have a look at the original thread. I am sure this issue was raised. There are plenty reasons to suggest it is not illegal, and many to say it is. It all depends on what you want to believe.

redsun:
Since you said you understand enlish,u should know what terrorism mean.Terror is terror,that guy terrorized the people,killed so many and killed himself because he ready to die,just like the suicide bombers do.

Dude, again not really looking for a lengthy debate over simple matters.

Let me try and keep it simple.  In this day and age, Terrorism is now redefined, or have a new meaning. There is nothing wrong with that. You know, just the same way words evolve over time. For example "Gay" used to be a word meaning "Happy" or "Care free". While, it still mean that, the mainstream application is now to describe a homosexual person.

You see, with the advent of using Religion as a tool for justification for killing people, especially, over the past 10 years or so, the word terrorism appears to have since taken a new definition. I really do not have to explain this, as I feel it is there for all to see.

It is just the same way where the killing of human being have various legal definition - Murder, Manslaughter, Death by Dangerous driving etc. While all of these are noting but fancy name for calling the death and killing of people. The court takes a look at the circumstances behind each death and deals with it according to the law.

My point is that, this dude carried out an act of terror, I am not so sure he is a terrorist in the grand scale of things. A killer? Yes. A deranged Killer? Yeah. But using the explanation I have given you above, I am not so sure I will call him a terrorist myself.

If he's done it calling the name of Jesus and Ogun in the process, and probably left a note behind citing religious reasons, then yes he will fit in with the definition of the new "Terrorist" and as such committed terrorism.

I mean Red sun, this is nothing really, but if you wanna make big fuss out of it. Please be my guest.

One thing that strike me as odd here, and probably highlights the biases around here is that the story of the peaceful activist was believed from day one, even though there wasn't much video coming out then. But then the story of the IDF is dismissed, even though there are captured video evidence to the effect?

I mean, why will anyone say this IDF man is lying, but then believe stories from the "peaceful protesters" who claimed they never offered any resistance, but video evidence showed otherwise?

redsun:
@elrazur

Your type will be will be very quick to label an arab man that because of his disillusionment and tortured soul,according to you,picks up a gun and start shooting people at random a terrorist,just because u have been mentally conned like every other thing to believe that his act is terrorism while that of an english man or an american that did the same can be seen as stress.

Redsun, with all due respect, all I asked you to do was explain to me why you think the reported incident is terrorism? You have instead moved away from the original question and started with a quick generalisation.

Mentally conned?  In what way please, can you take time to explain to me as to how?

Terrorism is terrorism,any act that terrifies people and takes life for no cogent reason is terrorism,it doesn't matter whether it comes from an english person,american or a moslem.

Terrorism in this present day and age revolves around an abstract ideology like religion. But if you want to get technical, any form of act that strike fear into the minds of people etc can be called terrorism. I am not sure if that is the angle you are coming from?

You guys just speak this imperial language without making sense of it,that is why you are not going nowhere with it rationally and constructively,

Once again, you are generalising.  Is there a problem?   So I am guessing anyone who, god forbid, have a mind of their own and do not subscribe to your school of thought lacks rationale then?  Nice.


All I asked you was to explain something. Can you do that or not? 

Angiefan.

Please accept my apology.

Yet you keep responding?

Okay.

You really a losing it. I love it.



Once you make a decent post, I will respond. In the mean time, I am dying out laughing reading "About Afam Nnaji" on your website. You are one awesome dude. [Not really]

I have been caught long enough in a cycle of bickering with you, it is now time to rise above that. It is clear you are a juvenile, go on, have the last say and lets move on.

Lwkmd.

So you really have no shame and no integrity? if you have an ounce of those qualities, you would have dealt with the issues I raised in my previous post, instead of bickering again. Shame on you Afam Nnaji.

Nnaji Snr. will be disappointed with your display so far am afraid.

Read my post again, no one is asking you for a definition.

New bottle, same horrible-tasting wine. Same old regurgitated non-sense.

Simple question: What is this "lie" you speak of?

Surely, for every "lie" there is a "truth" or "fact"? Either post all of these or shut your trap?

Afam:
The funny thing here is that some ignorant christians like davidylan and co believe that what makes you a good christian is total and blind support for anything Israel does regardless of how bad or good. This is shameful to say the least.

The killing of any innocent person is wrong regardless of who is doing the killing.

You are one double standards muppet to be honest. Allow me to change a few words around in your own post and make it applicable to you.

Afam:
The funny thing here is that some ignorant minds like Afam and co believe that what makes you a good, honest and non hypocritical person is total and blind support for anything Palestine does regardless of how bad or good. This is shameful to say the least.

You see when your own post is rewritten, you are just as bad. Try thinking outside the box next time. Try thinking about your position before you point fingers at others.

The killing of any innocent person is wrong regardless of who is doing the killing.

Your really are full of it. Here is what your own "personal" website claims about you - See below.

About Afam "He hates double standards, hypocrisy and lies regardless of the reasons and will always stand by the truth on any issue regardless of the consequences."

Lwkmd.

Yet, when I mentioned that both sides are guilty, and have a hand in the problems going on, your response is that nope, it is only the Israelis. Clearly, all these things goes against your claim on your own site?

Gosh, speaking of honesty and integrity lwkmd. You have none. Period.

New bottle, same horrible-tasting wine. Same old regurgitated non-sense.

Simple question: What is this "lie" you speak of?

Surely, for every "lie" there is a "truth" or "fact"? Either post all of these or shut your trap?

Lwkmd.

OP, Good luck o.

Busy_body:
One don't owe a gun and its not ignorant, but "ignorance" - the noun form- that is a disease, and the use of basically as a qualifier in this context is correct because it simply means "most/mostly/almost"

Erm madam, you missed the point. Here is the original post:

Afam:
Seems the only thing you post these days are blame posts since basically everyone has learned to ignore your incoherent and ignorant posts.

Again, using "Basically" in this context is for making emphasis or highlighting a point. ["everyone has learned to .  .  .   .   .  "]

How is the usage of Basically in here becomes a qualifier for the word "Everyone"? 



From a dictionary on the word "Basically"

2 used when you are giving your opinion or stating what is important about a situation
Basically, there's not a lot we can do about it.
He basically just sits there and does nothing all day.
And that's it, basically.