Nairobi terrorist attack

[Mr Pee]

You're not even trying to make it look as though your lips aren't moving, are you?

Not for the first time, I haven't the foggiest what you are implying by that.

[MrGongGong]

Not for the first time, I haven't the foggiest what you are implying by that.

could someone send this to mrPee for me
I think it might help him

http://www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise

[french frank]

Yes, I take the simplistic view that it is wrong for a bunch of murderers to walk into a crowded shopping centre and start spraying bullets around, whatever twisted logic you choose to use to excuse it.

I doubt if you would find anyone who is excusing it, as an act - merely attempting to account for it.

[MrGongGong]

I doubt if you would find anyone who is excusing it, as an act - merely attempting to account for it.

Exactly
Why do so many people seem unable to see that ?
I haven't encountered anyone who would excuse it

[Beef Oven!]

Exactly
Why do so many people seem unable to see that ?
I haven't encountered anyone who would excuse it

You are appealing to some relative or contextual aspect of this monstrous act by placing it on a moral axis with some other issue that you have a grievance about.

Mr Pee has quite rightly focused on the absoluteness of it. Your failure to grasp that by appealing to some spurious notion of 'accounting for it', is the source of the dissonance.

[MrGongGong]

You are appealing to some relative or contextual aspect of this monstrous act by placing it on a moral axis with some other issue that you have a grievance about.

Mr Pee has quite rightly focused on the absoluteness of it. Your failure to grasp that by appealing to some spurious notion of 'accounting for it', is the source of the dissonance.

I think you misunderstand .......

MrPee fails completely to see connections between things
and (rather stupidly IMV) seems to assume that those who do are trying to excuse what are "monstrous acts"
trying to understand WHY things happen isn't the same as approval

[ahinton]

You are appealing to some relative or contextual aspect of this monstrous act by placing it on a moral axis with some other issue that you have a grievance about.

Mr Pee has quite rightly focused on the absoluteness of it. Your failure to grasp that by appealing to some spurious notion of 'accounting for it', is the source of the dissonance.

It is a source of considerable amazement to me that a few (mercifully very few) people seem unable - or do I mean unwilling - to accept that, whilst everyone else here regards the incident concerned as a monstrous act for which there can be no credible excuse, they also see it as vital to try to account for its occurrence; does it not seem sensible and constructive to try to develop an understanding the background to this and what led to it, just as one would expect to try to do in the case of any other instance of mass murder that is not necessarily of obvious political or religious motivation?

Where is the logic or usefulness in condemning those who commend the understanding of such acts on the grounds that to do this is analogous to condoning their commission?

That "Mr Pee has quite rightly focused on the absoluteness of it" does not and indeed must not mean that the rest of us, along with him, should use that as an excuse not to account for how it happened.

Is it really not possible for some people to grasp, for example, that those who have lost family members / loved ones in this atrocity must wonder why and how on earth such a thing could have happened? - or is that not supposed to matter?

[scottycelt]

It is a source of considearble amazement to me that a few (mercifully very few) people seem unable - or do I mean unwilling - to accept that, whilst everyone else here regards the incident concerned as a monstrous act for which there can be no credible excuse, they also see it as vital to try to account for its occurrence; does it not seem sensible and constructive to try to develop an understanding the background to this and what led to it, just as one would expect to try to do in the case of any other instance of mass murder that is not necessarily of obvious political or religious motivation?

Where is the logic or usefulness in condemning those who commend the understanding of such acts on the grounds that to do this is analogous to condoning their commission?

That "Mr Pee has quite rightly focused on the absoluteness of it" does not and indeed must not mean that the rest of us, along with him, should use that as an excuse not to account for how it happened.

Is it really not possible for some people to grasp, for example, that those who have lost family members / loved ones in this atrocity must wonder why and how on earth such a thing could have happened? - or is that not supposed to matter?

On the contrary it's the 'mercifully very few' who appear to have grasped the issue here and it's the "others" who might need some assistance in the matter.

If we all agree that there can be 'no excuse' for 'a monstrous act' then logically it follows than any offered "reason" for committing that act is irrelevant. Thankfully, I suspect that more than 'mercifully very few' of us can grasp that if a group of killers is willing to deliberately slaughter wholly innocent men, women, children, toddlers and babies for one 'reason' they are not likely to be too squeamish about doing the same for any other.

Some keep searching for 'reasons' when the only one is already there staring them in the face.

It's a horrible, destructive human failing called Evil. Of course if we don't even believe Evil exists then we'll continue to desperately and unsuccessfully flail around looking for 'reasons' to explain wholly unreasonable and quite dreadful crimes.

[MrGongGong]

On the contrary it's the 'mercifully very few' who appear to have grasped the issue here and it's the "others" who might need some assistance in the matter.

If we all agree that there can be 'no excuse' for 'a monstrous act' then logically it follows than any offered "reason" for committing that act is irrelevant. Thankfully, I suspect that more than 'mercifully very few' of us can grasp that if a group of killers is willing to deliberately slaughter wholly innocent men, women, children, toddlers and babies for one 'reason' they are not likely to be too squeamish about doing the same for any other.

Some keep searching for 'reasons' when the only one is already there staring them in the face.

It's a horrible, destructive human failing called Evil. Of course if we don't even believe Evil exists then we'll continue to desperately and unsuccessfully flail around looking for 'reasons' to explain wholly unreasonable and quite dreadful crimes.

Well that helps doesn't it ? .............. NOT

Your "logic" is somewhat flawed methinks

You'll be blaming the snake next !!

All you have done is given a name to something and made the rather daft assumption that the act of doing that explains what it is and how is came about.

[teamsaint]

If its just "Evil", why aren't these acts carried out by entirely unpredictable people, groups, races,"religious" groups or whatever?

Hands up who thinks that the autocratic/theocratic regimes of the middle east (as one example) are unconnected to this supposedly random evil?

[Beef Oven!]

It is a source of considerable amazement to me that a few (mercifully very few) people seem unable - or do I mean unwilling - to accept that, whilst everyone else here regards the incident concerned as a monstrous act for which there can be no credible excuse, they also see it as vital to try to account for its occurrence; does it not seem sensible and constructive to try to develop an understanding the background to this and what led to it, just as one would expect to try to do in the case of any other instance of mass murder that is not necessarily of obvious political or religious motivation?

Where is the logic or usefulness in condemning those who commend the understanding of such acts on the grounds that to do this is analogous to condoning their commission?

That "Mr Pee has quite rightly focused on the absoluteness of it" does not and indeed must not mean that the rest of us, along with him, should use that as an excuse not to account for how it happened.

Is it really not possible for some people to grasp, for example, that those who have lost family members / loved ones in this atrocity must wonder why and how on earth such a thing could have happened? - or is that not supposed to matter?

You have totally missed the point. Quit banging-on a can about 'excusing'. Re-read my post #50 and wrap your noodles around it - If you can't, let it be!

[MrGongGong]

You have totally missed the point. Quit banging-on a can about 'excusing'. Re-read my post #50 and wrap your noodles around it - If you can't, let it be!

So if it's a question of "absoluteness" then you (and i'm not a philosopher !) are suggesting that it's possibly an event with NO context, no precedent and no comparison? If you are , then it's a rather dodgy way to go IMV

[amateur51]

Not for the first time, I haven't the foggiest what you are implying by that.

You're ventriloquising, putting things into my mouth that ain't there, not for the first time.

[amateur51]

On the contrary it's the 'mercifully very few' who appear to have grasped the issue here and it's the "others" who might need some assistance in the matter.

If we all agree that there can be 'no excuse' for 'a monstrous act' then logically it follows than any offered "reason" for committing that act is irrelevant. Thankfully, I suspect that more than 'mercifully very few' of us can grasp that if a group of killers is willing to deliberately slaughter wholly innocent men, women, children, toddlers and babies for one 'reason' they are not likely to be too squeamish about doing the same for any other.

Some keep searching for 'reasons' when the only one is already there staring them in the face.

It's a horrible, destructive human failing called Evil. Of course if we don't even believe Evil exists then we'll continue to desperately and unsuccessfully flail around looking for 'reasons' to explain wholly unreasonable and quite dreadful crimes.

But there are 'reasons', scotty and they are not 'excuses'.

The complexity of this notion, not that it is elaborate, seems sufficient to confuse you.

Take a leap of faith (:winkeye:) and start off from the premise that we all are repelled by what happened in Nairobi and proceed from there.

[ahinton]

You have totally missed the point.

I have done nothing of the kind.

Quit banging-on a can about 'excusing'.

The reference to "excusing" arose with Mr Pee and was referred to subsequently by FF; I did not raise that subject myself.

Re-read my post #50 and wrap your noodles around it - If you can't, let it be!

That I had already done so is evident from my having quoted part of it. I do not see what noodles have to do with the price of milk, let alone the subject under discussion.

The "point" (since it seems to be you rather than I who has "missed" it) is that, whilst we are all agreed that the event concerned was a grave atrocity for which there is and can be no excuse whatsoever, that fact alone does not and indeed cannot of itself help anyone, least of all those injured and/or bereaved as a direct consequence of it, to come to terms with the whys and wherefores of its occurrence or to understand them in order to try to minimise the risk that such a thing will happen again.

Of course there can never be a guarantee that such preventative action can work effectively, but it certainly won't at all if no effort is made towards that end.

The other part of that point is that this atrocity is hardly comparable in background to those committed by Breivik or by the mass murderers that have on occasion wreaked havoc in US, not least because the latter examples were all committed by lone individuals and in all but Breivik's case the perpetrators are dead so cannot commit further atrocities, whereas no one has even been apprehended for having committed this one; it must therefore be considered and understood at the outset as differing from all of those.