Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm just wondering if yet another shorthand is what we need
If it's going to tie us up in a bunch of tiresome debates about what particular words mean, I'm happy to abandon it.
-
So Brickley, are you trying to make a narrow claim about whether NZ has a legal definition of "terrorism", or a broader one about whether "terrorism" is a useful word at all? I am frankly confused.
-
do we need the pejorative weight, or does it in fact shift the debate where we don't need it to go, in an area of politically polarised semantics
The pejorative weight may not be helpful.
But really, and this is a question for you and Brickley I guess, is there another convenient shorthand term I can use if I want to convey the notion that violence is intended to send a message, intimidate, or otherwise achieve a goal with a wider audience?
-
terrorism/terrorist is loaded
Yeah, it is. Loaded with extra pejorative weight. Isn't it nice to apply it to a deserving target?
-
Speaking as a cultured Wellingtonian Jew, I think you've hit some sort of offence jackpot, chaps.
-
So "terrorism" at least conceptually and positively, has no definition in New Zealand. Neither then, it seems, does "terrorist".
What is "terrorism"? What is a "terrorist"? I don't know. My first stab at it would be something with which the criminal law is incapable of dealing.
That's asinine. I have a collection of dictionaries that offer to provide a definition, located right here in this country. The absence of a legal definition is neither here nor there. Lots of words we sling about every day, from love to hate to bullshit, have no meaning in law, and yet we find them of use.
It seems to me that at the heart of the notion of terrorism is a deliberate campaign of violence intended to intimidate a group of people in order to achieve a political goal. We can argue around the margins (is it terror when it's state policy? how big does the target group have to be? if the violent ones observe some restraints does that count?) but the core of effecting change through fear of violence is undisputed, I would say.
If your point is that "terrorism" implies disapproval of the people employing the tactic, I agree, but in this case I find that makes the term more, not less apposite.
-
Grant: Randall Terry of Operation Rescue said that Tiller got what he deserved (that's how I read "reaped what he sowed") and then suggested going out for beer and hot wings. I'd call that both condoning murder and celebrating it. linky.
-
according to TV3 last night, Susan Boyle's loss in a reality TV show is worthy of greater prominence than an act of domestic terrorism in the US. WTF?
They didn't have any footage of the shooting. If they had, it would have led. It's all about the pictures.
On the upside, either way, apparently yet again nothing very interesting happened in New Zealand.
-
"fedora-topped business man"
Phoebe at Tumeke fails -- that dude's carrying a sax and is clearly on his way from a gig. The actual problem there is that any real musician would have their precious instrument in a case.
-
Has this been posted yet? I lost track.