Privacy and the State

[Richard Barrett]

Terrorism is a global problem

No s**t, Sherlock. But we were talking about state surveillance in the West, why it's being carried out, whether its stated aims to combat terrorism are credible and, if not, how terrorism is to be combated. Each case of course needs to be loked at on its own merits, and there was one particular case we were discussing, is that not so?

As for democratically-elected governments versus self-appointed individuals: the spreading of death and mayhem feels the same to those on the receiving end no matter where it's coming from. I imagine that the survivors, if any, of a family wiped out by a drone attack in Pakistan are not going to say "it's a fair cop, they were democratically elected."

[MrGongGong]

I imagine that the survivors, if any, of a family wiped out by a drone attack in Pakistan are not going to say "it's a fair cop, they were democratically elected."

I'd bet a certain cyclist would say that this is a "small price to pay" :-(

[MrGongGong]

I imagine that the survivors, if any, of a family wiped out by a drone attack in Pakistan are not going to say "it's a fair cop, they were democratically elected."

I'd bet a certain cyclist would say that this is a "small price to pay" :-(

[An_Inspector_Calls]

But if you take the recent Nairobi attack, it was their government (Kenya) interfering in the affairs of Somalia that was presumed to be the reason for the attack. And the attack was on Kenya.

Are you saying that the Somalian terrorists were the aggrieved party?

[MrGongGong]

I have no idea why this appeared 3 times ?

[scottycelt]

But if you take the recent Nairobi attack, it was their government (Kenya) interfering in the affairs of Somalia that was presumed to be the reason for the attack. And the attack was on Kenya.

More accurately the attack was launched deliberately on anyone of any nationality, men, women and babies who happened to be in a shopping-centre in Nairobi, and whom the murderers knew had absolutely nothing to do with their internal conflict.

Whatever the presumption of 'the reason', that was the savage, inhuman reality. How can any person who claims to be civilised even hope to begin to 'understand' that?

[scottycelt]

I have overtly chided no one here, as I'm sure you know if truth were told; if indeed I have chided anyone by implication, it is quite clearly those who continue to take no notice of the kind of things that Richard Barrett and others write on these issues.

I know, you keep saying that over and over again ...

Some of us do take notice of what all members say, not just the illustrious Mr Barrett. That's what a forum is for, I'd have thought.

It's just that some of us don't agree with Mr Barrett (and others). I know it may be hard for you to come to terms with such a shocking and appalling revelation but you really must try and get over the hurt you so obviously feel on Mr Barrett's behalf, ahinton!

[french frank]

More accurately the attack was launched deliberately on anyone of any nationality, men, women and babies who happened to be in a shopping-centre in Nairobi, and whom the murderers knew had absolutely nothing to do with their internal conflict.

Whatever the presumption of 'the reason', that was the savage, inhuman reality. How can any person who claims to be civilised even hope to begin to 'understand' that?

The proposition is that however 'random' the effects of terrorist acts, that doesn't mean that groups of savage, inhuman people get together and say: "Which part of the globe shall we bomb next in our savage, inhuman way? Shall we stick a pin in a map and bomb wherever the pin lands?"

[scottycelt]

The proposition is that however 'random' the effects of terrorist acts, that doesn't mean that groups of savage, inhuman people get together and say: "Which part of the globe shall we bomb next in our savage, inhuman way? Shall we stick a pin in a map and bomb wherever the pin lands?"

I would certainly agree that even savages probably don't stick pins in maps. I'm sure they might pick what they consider to be the 'softest' targets.

I disagree with the rest of your comment. As terrorist atrocities by the main terror groups have been spread out over the world I'd have thought that was an essential part of the maximum fear that they wish to instill ... in other words, no one anywhere is safe even those who are so desperate to 'understand'.

[french frank]

I think you're ignoring the obvious question. Why do they come into existence?

[scottycelt]

I think you're ignoring the obvious question. Why do they come into existence?

Well, we can all blame somebody else for our actions.

It easily could be argued that it was the Allies humiliating the Germans after WWI who were initially responsible for the rise of Hitler, the Holocaust etc.

Previous faults and shortcomings of some are not a 'reason' for barbarism in others. The barbarism is a conscious choice of those who practise it and no one else or thing is responsible for that choice. We all have free will.

I think you may be ignoring that.

[Anna]

I think you're ignoring the obvious question. Why do they come into existence?

Because they are not the sharpest knives in the box.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

I think you're ignoring the obvious question. Why do they come into existence?

Moving on from 'we're depraved because we're deprived' I suppose.

Hug a terrorist.

[french frank]

Moving on from 'we're depraved because we're deprived' I suppose.

Hug a terrorist.

There's no pressure on anyone to post a reply if they have nothing to say.

[french frank]

Well, we can all blame somebody else for our actions.

I merely posed a question. You presuppose the answer.

Previous faults and shortcomings of some are not a 'reason' for barbarism in others.

Oh, but it may be a reason. That is not the same as an excuse, or justification.