Octopus Overlords

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:20 pm Just some bombs in the mail.

You may not be actively supporting my position (or perhaps you are) but I thank you for writing anyway.

And as a reminder, there is plenty of room for this to turn out to be an act of terrorism by everyone's definition here on the board, including mine. My position is not that this *isn't* terrorism.

Oh, wait. Look out, Cocheese, Dobbs is on the case:


https://mobile.twitter.com/LouDobbs/sta ... 4827776001

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:23 pm Oh, wait. Look out, Cocheese, Dobbs is on the case:


https://mobile.twitter.com/LouDobbs/sta ... 4827776001

Is... someone going to tell him we already have pictures of the bombs? I would, but I don't speak racist codger.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:20 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:15 pm
I hate the idea of any of these things happening. The fact that you and I don't really fear getting one of these bombs in our mailboxes doesn't mean the terror isn't ours. We might be terrified of the breakdown of traditional politics that will occur if extreme groups resort to more violence.

So the slippery slope to actual terrorism is terrorism? There are several "ifs" there. It's not an illogical progression, certainly, but right now there isn't evidence of extreme groups resorting to more violence. Just some bombs in the mail.

Well, my whole thing in this discussion has been that it depends on motive.

If the bomber thinks his victims are lizard people here to steal the Coke recipe: not terrorism.
If the bomber was trying to set off the Great MAGA Patriot Uprising by decapitating the Left: yes, terrorism.

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:34 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:20 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:15 pm
I hate the idea of any of these things happening. The fact that you and I don't really fear getting one of these bombs in our mailboxes doesn't mean the terror isn't ours. We might be terrified of the breakdown of traditional politics that will occur if extreme groups resort to more violence.

So the slippery slope to actual terrorism is terrorism? There are several "ifs" there. It's not an illogical progression, certainly, but right now there isn't evidence of extreme groups resorting to more violence. Just some bombs in the mail.

Well, my whole thing in this discussion has been that it depends on motive.

If the bomber thinks his victims are lizard people here to steal the Coke recipe: not terrorism.
If the bomber was trying to set off the Great MAGA Patriot Uprising by decapitating the Left: yes, terrorism.

Not to take this even farther into pedantism, but the second scenario is not terrorism. Inspiring a revolution is inspiring a revolution. Terrorism is generally coercing a government to change behavior, or to coerce or intimidate a population, through violent acts. If he's inspiring MAGA people everywhere to rise up, he's not doing so through fear / intimidation / coercion.

Now, if his goal is to scare democrats away from opposing Trump, for fear that they may be subject to further violence - now that's what I call terrorism.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:37 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:34 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:20 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:15 pm
I hate the idea of any of these things happening. The fact that you and I don't really fear getting one of these bombs in our mailboxes doesn't mean the terror isn't ours. We might be terrified of the breakdown of traditional politics that will occur if extreme groups resort to more violence.

So the slippery slope to actual terrorism is terrorism? There are several "ifs" there. It's not an illogical progression, certainly, but right now there isn't evidence of extreme groups resorting to more violence. Just some bombs in the mail.

Well, my whole thing in this discussion has been that it depends on motive.

If the bomber thinks his victims are lizard people here to steal the Coke recipe: not terrorism.
If the bomber was trying to set off the Great MAGA Patriot Uprising by decapitating the Left: yes, terrorism.

Not to take this even farther into pedantism, but the second scenario is not terrorism. Inspiring a revolution is inspiring a revolution. Terrorism is generally coercing a government to change behavior, or to coerce or intimidate a population, through violent acts. If he's inspiring MAGA people everywhere to rise up, he's not doing so through fear / intimidation / coercion.

Now, if his goal is to scare democrats away from opposing Trump, for fear that they may be subject to further violence - now that's what I call terrorism.

Oh, we've been well into pedantry all day with this topic!

But, again, the lines aren't clear. Actions shade over into intentions. I'd say that inspiring the MAGA upraising also and necessarily has the effect of putting Lefty Globalist Elite Welfare Cucks on terror notice that their end has come.

The KKK lynching blacks is terrorism. When they murder the white political opponent of their favored candidate for mayor, is it no longer terrorism?

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:48 pm

El Guapo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:37 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:34 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:20 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:15 pm
I hate the idea of any of these things happening. The fact that you and I don't really fear getting one of these bombs in our mailboxes doesn't mean the terror isn't ours. We might be terrified of the breakdown of traditional politics that will occur if extreme groups resort to more violence.

So the slippery slope to actual terrorism is terrorism? There are several "ifs" there. It's not an illogical progression, certainly, but right now there isn't evidence of extreme groups resorting to more violence. Just some bombs in the mail.

Well, my whole thing in this discussion has been that it depends on motive.

If the bomber thinks his victims are lizard people here to steal the Coke recipe: not terrorism.
If the bomber was trying to set off the Great MAGA Patriot Uprising by decapitating the Left: yes, terrorism.

Not to take this even farther into pedantism, but the second scenario is not terrorism. Inspiring a revolution is inspiring a revolution. Terrorism is generally coercing a government to change behavior, or to coerce or intimidate a population, through violent acts. If he's inspiring MAGA people everywhere to rise up, he's not doing so through fear / intimidation / coercion.

Now, if his goal is to scare democrats away from opposing Trump, for fear that they may be subject to further violence - now that's what I call terrorism.

Oh, we've been well into pedantry all day with this topic!

But, again, the lines aren't clear. Actions shade over into intentions. I'd say that inspiring the MAGA upraising also and necessarily has the effect of putting Lefty Globalist Elite Welfare Cucks on terror notice that their end has come.

The KKK lynching blacks is terrorism. When they murder the white political opponent of their favored candidate for mayor, is it no longer terrorism?

Isn't pedantism its own form of terrorism?

Anyhow, the murder in your case could be terrorism if it was intended to scare that candidate's supporters into not opposing their guy, or to intimidate specific populations / minority groups inclined to support the assassinated person.

Let's not forget the real victim of this terrorism/not terrorism.

A day after several leading Democrats were found to have been targeted by package bombs, Republicans have identified one of their own as a victim: President Donald Trump.

...

“Look, it’s the media’s doing what the media does, which is any narrative that they can twist against Trump, they will do so,” Sen Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt.

In an interview with POLITICO, former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who traveled Wednesday with Vice President Mike Pence on Air Force Two, said past incidents in which Republican politicians were threatened drew far less coverage than this week’s attempted bombings, which have dominated news coverage for two days running.

“I don’t think the same level of media scrutiny was received as we are seeing today,” Lewandowski said, citing incidents in which letters with white powder (later found to be harmless) were sent to the president’s sons, as well as threats against Sen. Susan Collins’ (R-Maine) during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation fight.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:52 pm Let's not forget the real victim of this terrorism/not terrorism.

A day after several leading Democrats were found to have been targeted by package bombs, Republicans have identified one of their own as a victim: President Donald Trump.

...

“Look, it’s the media’s doing what the media does, which is any narrative that they can twist against Trump, they will do so,” Sen Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt.

In an interview with POLITICO, former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who traveled Wednesday with Vice President Mike Pence on Air Force Two, said past incidents in which Republican politicians were threatened drew far less coverage than this week’s attempted bombings, which have dominated news coverage for two days running.

“I don’t think the same level of media scrutiny was received as we are seeing today,” Lewandowski said, citing incidents in which letters with white powder (later found to be harmless) were sent to the president’s sons, as well as threats against Sen. Susan Collins’ (R-Maine) during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation fight.

This is one of the creepier features of the faithful in the cult. You could see this in discussions about Khashoggi. You had folks saying that the true victim was Donald Trump because they betrayed his trust. The Dear Leader act is not at all unsettling.

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:51 pm In what universe is killing someone a form of persuasion?

What do you thin Khashoggi was all about?

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:44 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:51 pm In what universe is killing someone a form of persuasion?

What do you thin Khashoggi was all about?

The context was "persuading the victim".

FBI treating serial bomber as domestic terrorism

Law enforcement officials from New York to Florida are examining clues to find the person or persons who sent 10 packages containing what appear to be explosive materials to prominent Democrats, critics of President Donald Trump, and to CNN's New York offices as authorities classify the incidents as domestic terrorism.

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:15 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:44 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:51 pm In what universe is killing someone a form of persuasion?

What do you thin Khashoggi was all about?

The context was "persuading the victim".

I didn't catch that. In that case, a failed assassination attempt would be much more persuasive.

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:48 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:15 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:44 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:51 pm In what universe is killing someone a form of persuasion?

What do you thin Khashoggi was all about?

The context was "persuading the victim".

I didn't catch that. In that case, a failed assassination attempt would be much more persuasive.

I imagine a lot of Saudi dissidents and critics are feeling rather more persuaded to keep quiet these days.

GreenGoo wrote: Wed Oct 24, 2018 9:00 pm
What a strange post.

What is your issue here? That a guy smart enough to make a bomb but dumb enough to send it to secret service guarded people, was also dumb enough not to take the fact that all mail gets screened long before it gets anywhere near them?

That protections designed for exactly this scenario worked?

That CNN didn't lose their mailroom?

What's the confusion?

We're in the middle of an investigation. More details will be revealed in time. Save your conspiratorial speculation for Facebook.

I am MORE than capable of an odd post.

So, I was reacting to the media breathlessly calling those things "bombs" and wondering why none of them blew up. I think "blows up"
is probably in the definition of bomb (would to be too rude to look it up and quote it). My confusion was that they were not acting like bombs but like Bomb Shaped Objects (BSOs, I am going to claim royalties on that if Maddow uses it).

Now, of course, they are calling them "suspicious packages" or “potentially destructive devices” in media and FBI reports. It looks more like an attention-getting scheme to me now (who would try to reach George Soros via CNN if they really wanted to harm him?).

(In a strange coincidence I may have danced under the nom de guerre "Suspicious Package" in Miami in the late 80s)

But I was questioning things and speculating - as you point out. This is what my teachers told me that the citizens of a republic do in a public forum. I am ill suited to simply waiting for my betters to tell me just what happened at a later date (call it a character flaw if you will). I think your point is that you can't expect logic from a crazy person (bomber) and I see that. But it sure took a lot of logic to: Look up addresses, research postage rates, weigh BSOs, address labels, create BSOs, pack BSOs, etc.

It would BE easy to try a cui prodest approach and speculate about what kind of malefactor did this. I didn't do that. It would be easy link this to my pet issue of the the week with no evidence. I didn't do that. (You know, it sure did take the brutal Jamal Khashoggi murder off of the CNN top headline list right as the audio recording and the bone saw info was coming to light) OK, so I might have done a little of that just now.

Sepiche wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:44 pm FBI treating serial bomber as domestic terrorism

Law enforcement officials from New York to Florida are examining clues to find the person or persons who sent 10 packages containing what appear to be explosive materials to prominent Democrats, critics of President Donald Trump, and to CNN's New York offices as authorities classify the incidents as domestic terrorism.

Both authorities and the media have been calling this terrorism from the moment it was first reported.

Yojimbo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:52 pm It looks more like an attention-getting scheme to me now (who would try to reach George Soros via CNN if they really wanted to harm him?).

The Soros package went to his house.

The only misfires were that the sender seemed to believe that John Brennan was a CNN contributor rather than MSNBC, and the Eric Holder package was mis-addressed and sent back to the (fake) return address.

Trying to kill one person might not be terrorism. Trying to take out many of the Democrat leaders? Terrorism. Even if there was a doubt, it should be dispelled since they're all frequent targets of Trump / right wingnuts. Even De Niro for being publicly critical of Trump.

Maybe you want to quibble with the broad definition out of principle, but the shoe fits even a narrow definition of violence for a political purpose/influence.

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:55 pm

Yojimbo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:52 pm It looks more like an attention-getting scheme to me now (who would try to reach George Soros via CNN if they really wanted to harm him?).

The Soros package went to his house.

The only misfires were that the sender seemed to believe that John Brennan was a CNN contributor rather than MSNBC, and the Eric Holder package was mis-addressed and sent back to the (fake) return address.

My bad - I fear that I have been too busy today to keep up with developments and I was going off old news.

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:55 pm
The only misfires were that the sender seemed to believe that John Brennan was a CNN contributor rather than MSNBC, and the Eric Holder package was mis-addressed and sent back to the (fake) return address.

Also, the one to Biden had insufficient postage.

<deleted because it's repetitive>

Zarathud wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:02 pm Trying to kill one person might not be terrorism. Trying to take out many of the Democrat leaders? Terrorism. Even if there was a doubt, it should be dispelled since they're all frequent targets of Trump / right wingnuts. Even De Niro for being publicly critical of Trump.

Maybe you want to quibble with the broad definition out of principle, but the shoe fits even a narrow definition of violence for a political purpose/influence.

I...am not doing this again. It's terrorism. Have at it.

It kinda seems like only the "old guard" of the democratic party were targeted? Maybe it's a coup d'état by the new socialist wing?

Isn't it kind of hard to get these addresses? NO WAY I'm going to try searching the internet for them, but it can't be that easy?

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:50 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:48 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:15 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:44 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:51 pm In what universe is killing someone a form of persuasion?

What do you thin Khashoggi was all about?

The context was "persuading the victim".

I didn't catch that. In that case, a failed assassination attempt would be much more persuasive.

I imagine a lot of Saudi dissidents and critics are feeling rather more persuaded to keep quiet these days.

I agree, but apparently the context was persuading the assassination victim.

edit: Damn it. I'm too easily dragged back into this.

My comments were not made in a vacuum, and my feelings on terrorism were pretty clear by that point. It is impossible (well, difficult anyway) to read the reams I had written and still think that I believe murdering people to make other people do things is not terrorism.

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:43 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:50 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:48 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:15 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:44 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:51 pm In what universe is killing someone a form of persuasion?

What do you thin Khashoggi was all about?

The context was "persuading the victim".

I didn't catch that. In that case, a failed assassination attempt would be much more persuasive.

I imagine a lot of Saudi dissidents and critics are feeling rather more persuaded to keep quiet these days.

I agree, but apparently the context was persuading the assassination victim.

If the Khashoggi TortureMurder had been carried out without Western media attention (the SA best-case scenario), Middle-Eastern journalists and activists would still have become aware of it, and the message would have been sent.

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:46 pm If the Khashoggi TortureMurder had been carried out without Western media attention (the SA best-case scenario), Middle-Eastern journalists and activists would still have become aware of it, and the message would have been sent.

We all agree. Alefroth, yourself and I. There is no confusion on that subject here.

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:36 pm edit: Damn it. I'm too easily dragged back into this.

My comments were not made in a vacuum, and my feelings on terrorism were pretty clear by that point. It is impossible (well, difficult anyway) to read the reams I had written and still think that I believe murdering people to make other people do things is not terrorism.

It would help if you defined what terrorism *is* and why strict/legal rather than loose/consensual boundaries around that definition matter in this case. I feel as if we (you, honestly) have been arguing semantics all day towards only semantic ends.

Obviously the definition of terrorism matters when the USA is deciding to invade Iraq for 9/11 and Saddam had nothing to do with it, but that's not this thread.

Instead we've been arguing over whether home-made bombs sent to murder the president's most famously named enemies count as "terrorism" or [just? merely?] "politically motivated violence."

Honestly, I'm content with either label so long as we recognize its import. Someone translated violent political rhetoric into actual and potentially fatal weapons. Terror-label or not, where do we go from here?

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:01 pm It would help if you defined what terrorism *is*

I did define what I viewed as terrorism.

It doesn't matter now though. I'm not rehashing it because I've already dominated the conversation in ways that I didn't intend and don't like for longer than I had any intention of doing, and it's not really fair to the rest of the forum readers or to the discussion of the acts themselves.

Let's move on to your question of:

This happened. Now what?

Everyone is forgetting about the one true victim in all of this: Donald Trump.

A day after several leading Democrats were found to have been targeted by package bombs, Republicans have identified one of their own as a victim: President Donald Trump.

As of Thursday afternoon, less than 36 hours after the first packages were discovered, White House officials and outside advisers bitterly protested the notion that Trump’s vitriolic rhetoric might have inspired whoever sent the packages.

The alleged main offender was a familiar one — the news media, which conservatives insisted had rushed to unfair conclusions in an effort to undermine the president less than two weeks before the midterm elections. The blame-casting came a day after Trump issued an uncharacteristic call for political unity.

“Look, it’s the media’s doing what the media does, which is any narrative that they can twist against Trump, they will do so,” Sen Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt.

Remember though, he never encourages violence. That's just the media making stuff up!



I just noticed that video was posted in 2016. So it doesn't include any of the rhetoric since.

This American freelance writer's jeremiad in Al Jazeera is worth reading.

For the past two years, Trump has stirred the putrid cauldron of racial hatred, xenophobia and violence, with divisive rhetoric and dehumanising policies. Now, with this massive, potentially devastating assassination attempt on political leaders less than two weeks from the most important US election in generations, the depravity of Trump's America is laid bare for the world to see.
...
"Trump has unleashed the dogs of hatred in this country," said David Gergen, former adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton. Former Republican strategist Steve Schmidt tweeted that "Trump has stoked a cold civil war in this Country. His rallies brim with menace and he has labelled journalists as enemies of the people. That someone would seek to kill their political enemies is not aberrational but rather the inevitable consequence of Trumps incitement." New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio called the bomb threats "an act of terror," and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo took Trump to task for his rhetoric and called the bomb threats "red versus blue terrorism," referring to the colours of the respective major US political parties.

Holman wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:01 pm

Honestly, I'm content with either label so long as we recognize its import. Someone translated violent political rhetoric into actual and potentially fatal weapons. Terror-label or not, where do we go from here?

This is where I'm at as well. I don't care so much about the label but that we recognize the actions taken are a direct result of our political climate today. Whether this is a right wing nut destroying his Dear Leader's enemies or if he's a screwball left winger who ummm...did something(highly illegal) he thought would help Democrat's cause. Either way it's quite clearly political ends this guy has in mind

Federal authorities discovered two more explosive devices, one addressed to Senator Cory Booker and the other to James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence, law enforcement officials said on Friday.

The package sent to Mr. Clapper was addressed to CNN’s offices in New York, similar to a pipe bomb found Wednesday that was addressed to John O. Brennan, a former C.I.A. director via CNN. The package for Mr. Brennan was found at CNN’s offices in Midtown Manhattan.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/nyre ... -sent.html

Apparently someone's been arrested in connection to the pipe bombs, but no details yet.

If it does turn out to be a mentally unstable liberal who took it upon himself to try to garner sympathy for the dems, you can pretty much consider the mid term elections a lock for the GOP.

hepcat wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:15 am If it does turn out to be a mentally unstable liberal who took it upon himself to try to garner sympathy for the dems, you can pretty much consider the mid term elections a lock for the GOP.

Luckily the very early reports are mid 50s white male driving the stereotypical white van covered in Trump stickers. FALSE FLAG!!

Here's the van:

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1055841794397798400

Yeah, I think maybe I suspect that guy too.

So that's the the MAGA bomber van?

Holman wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:25 am Here's the van:

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1055841794397798400

Yeah, I think maybe I suspect that guy too.

Hard to believe. Time to pull up the fainting couch!