tweakabelle -> RE: What makes a terrorist? (6/14/2017 8:49:46 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote:
I am a little sad at the direction the thread has taken so far. I would have thought that any claim that terrorist acts/acts of mass violence were "predictable and preventable" might merit some examination of that claim. I bet you are. I saw this thread earlier; had to go away; came back and saw the number of replies and thought, 'Lordy, Tweak must be pleased! Indeedies! Your guess was spot on! One thing - should be obvious, but it somehow slips out of the mind - so many of these attacks (the last three in the UK, for instance) involved attackers who were very, very keen to be *known* as the attackers. In the last one on Westminster Bridge, for instance, they could have killed some people by just hitting them in their van. Few shouts of 'Allah Akhbar' through the windows; drive on at full speed ... and, conceivably, get away. Or at least have a chance of getting away. But they didn't do that: they got out and started slashing and stabbing. There wasn't any deliberate attempt to connect themselves with ISIS, even. They were concerned only for it to be known that they were Islamists - and for their individual names to become famous (or infamous). That's all. As we know here from the IRA attacks - it's easy to kill people (while making it clear why they've been killed) but never be caught. Biddulph's premise chimes for me. There's so much about these killings that seems to me to be about ego - about massive desire for recognition. If true, it seems vital to me to work out where that comes from and learn how to deal with it. Yes. It is interesting to ponder that desire for recognition that is so powerful that it somehow overcomes the desire to live. And egos so desperate for some form of affirmation that they end up perverted into powerful urges to kill indiscriminately. Biddulph alludes to a certain type of masculinity that prefers death to dishonour. And terms like honour, humiliation, and revenge crop up frequently in offenders' statements - it's almost like a contemporary version of 'honour killings' in the minds of some offenders. We are talking about grievances (real or imagined it doesn't really matter, what is going on in the head of the offender is what is important here) that have festered in their heads for heaven knows how long without any attempt to address them. Is it unmanly to acknowledge and deal with issues like this? If it is, then surely it's time that this antiquated notion of masculinity was challenged and discarded. What on earth is the point of earning renown and recognition through butchery - all that person is ever going to be recognised and remembered for is the carnage they wrought as they went out - not in the blaze of glory they might imagine but leaving behind a litter of corpses.
|
|
|
|