______________________________________
A friend from Russia made this comment:
It wasn’t a terakt*… it was only a crime. It was an enormity… it was massive… but it was a crime, not a terakt. The latter requires a political motivation lacking in this case. It was a crime based in hate, yes… however, it wasn’t a terakt with political or social ramifications. That’s how it looks like from here…
- Terakt: Russian acronym for “terrorist action”
I agree with this assessment. The shooter was a criminal, not a terrorist. He killed out of hatred, not out of political conviction. The fact that he was Muslim, therefore, shouldn’t even enter anyone’s assessment of the action. He was a criminal, full stop, and his religious affiliation doesn’t matter one little bit, for it wasn’t a real motivation of the mass murder (let’s call it what it was). The guy had repressed homosexual urges. Such denial always leads to disaster. That is, whether we like it or not, the reason behind this murder wasn’t large… it was just a guy with “upstairs issues” “acting out”. I’m not minimising this… not at all. However, let’s keep it focused. The motivation behind this wasn’t hate of homosexuals or hate of the West… it was a nutter who had access to guns and ammo. It speaks loudly of the Second Amendment fanatics, doesn’t it? That’s a discussion that no one’s having, for fear of the Gun Lobby and the gun nutters.
On the other hand, when a rightwing activist killed a Labour Party MP in the UK, the media brushed him off as a “lone-wolf with mental problems”. One wonders… if the killer is a “Westerner”, they’re unrepresentative nutters. If the killer has any sort of “foreign” connections, they’re terrorists. This isn’t right… it doesn’t only misrepresent the killers… it dishonours the dead. You see, some are using the dead of Orlando to further their political aims and ambitions… misplaying it as a terakt. You see, if it’s only a crime, one can’t mine it for political gain. The victims are just as dead… the relatives and friends still grieve… the action remains reprehensible. However, no matter which way you spin it, it’s a crime, not terrorism. Sadly, there’s no larger meaning in it… save to remind us that we’ve been led astray long enough by the gun nutters and their deformation of the US Constitution… now, that’s something that we CAN change… but shall we?
Shall we act or shall we just follow the ethically dead?
BMD
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Voices from Russia 
19 June 2016. A Foreign Response to Orlando
Tags: Crime, Crime and Justice, Mass murder, murder, political commentary, politics, terror, terrorism, terrorist, terrorists, True Crime, United States, USA
______________________________________
A friend from Russia made this comment:
I agree with this assessment. The shooter was a criminal, not a terrorist. He killed out of hatred, not out of political conviction. The fact that he was Muslim, therefore, shouldn’t even enter anyone’s assessment of the action. He was a criminal, full stop, and his religious affiliation doesn’t matter one little bit, for it wasn’t a real motivation of the mass murder (let’s call it what it was). The guy had repressed homosexual urges. Such denial always leads to disaster. That is, whether we like it or not, the reason behind this murder wasn’t large… it was just a guy with “upstairs issues” “acting out”. I’m not minimising this… not at all. However, let’s keep it focused. The motivation behind this wasn’t hate of homosexuals or hate of the West… it was a nutter who had access to guns and ammo. It speaks loudly of the Second Amendment fanatics, doesn’t it? That’s a discussion that no one’s having, for fear of the Gun Lobby and the gun nutters.
On the other hand, when a rightwing activist killed a Labour Party MP in the UK, the media brushed him off as a “lone-wolf with mental problems”. One wonders… if the killer is a “Westerner”, they’re unrepresentative nutters. If the killer has any sort of “foreign” connections, they’re terrorists. This isn’t right… it doesn’t only misrepresent the killers… it dishonours the dead. You see, some are using the dead of Orlando to further their political aims and ambitions… misplaying it as a terakt. You see, if it’s only a crime, one can’t mine it for political gain. The victims are just as dead… the relatives and friends still grieve… the action remains reprehensible. However, no matter which way you spin it, it’s a crime, not terrorism. Sadly, there’s no larger meaning in it… save to remind us that we’ve been led astray long enough by the gun nutters and their deformation of the US Constitution… now, that’s something that we CAN change… but shall we?
Shall we act or shall we just follow the ethically dead?
BMD
Share this:
Like this:
Related