acd
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infp
- Enneagram
- 9w8 sp/sx
That's one perspective.
2 bombs explode at Boston Marathon-terrorist attack?
- Thread starter Morethanthisbody
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bomb
- MBTI
- .
- Enneagram
- .
I think you could argue that invading Iraq for the 9/11 attack was over kill, many would not and see it as justified. There were a slew of national security types arguing for "boots on the ground" in an Arab country in the aftermath. Given that perspective locking down Boston to get hold of one person that may or may not be linked to al-qaeda seems normal.
this is only temporary
Community Member
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1
Well, yes, it is... and it is hardly just one person's perspective. And your perspective would be what exactly? You'd prefer... what? No lockdown? No manhunt? No living suspect in custody, just a dead guy on a boat and a bunch of rumors and conspiracies? Barack Obama appearing on TV saying, "Oh, yes, we planned it all along. Now give us your guns, your freedom, and your daughters. Thanks."
Locking down Boston for a couple of days hardly equates to Iraq, or a police state, and though I'm not from Boston, I am fairly certain the people who do live there would agree that they wanted the suspects caught, preferably alive. And during the whole thing, I think they had to consider multiple possibilities, including repeat performances and hostage situations. They didn't know WHO he was linked to, or what he could have been planning.
acd
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infp
- Enneagram
- 9w8 sp/sx
These responses are exactly what is concerning. The justifying of a US city basically being invaded by its own law enforcement and military to capture one person.
You guys can justify it and feel a-ok about it, but like I said, I find it concerning. I don't personally think we should be so comfortable to let our government put us on lock down. I'm not comfortable handing that much power and control over. And besides, doesn't that reaction kind of play right into the aims of terrorists? To prevent people from going about their day and lives normally and without fear?
You guys can justify it and feel a-ok about it, but like I said, I find it concerning. I don't personally think we should be so comfortable to let our government put us on lock down. I'm not comfortable handing that much power and control over. And besides, doesn't that reaction kind of play right into the aims of terrorists? To prevent people from going about their day and lives normally and without fear?
acd
Well-known member
- MBTI
- infp
- Enneagram
- 9w8 sp/sx
Yes. Exactly. I prefer no more lock downs.
i don't necessarily care what Bostonians prefer. It's a precedent set.
I am concerned about other heavy handed police state legislation Obama has tried to, or has already passed---on top of this epic show of force. I don't have any theories. I am not versed in conspiracies, but it doesn't look good to me.
this is only temporary
Community Member
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1
I would feel a lot more concerned about the lock-down of Boston if it was more severe and ongoing, and universal.
There are several reasons I'm not too concerned about it, primarily that it was temporary, and it was somewhat justified given the circumstances (well, people may disagree but that is certainly up for debate...). It did not seem like the first step towards martial law, which seems to be what many people are fearing. If I thought we were all about to be placed under martial law, of course I'd be concerned, but I don't.
For one thing, the resources, manpower, and coordination are not there. The government can't even enforce many currently existing laws or effecitvely control large swathes of the population, who are arguing and rebelling and disagreeing and generally being as stubborn and ornery and out of control as ever. Exhibit A: When gun control laws were threatened, the area where I lived experienced such an upsurge in weapons permit applications they had to hire more people just to fill out the paperwork; gun sales went up, and people generally rebelled. Exhibit B: is the number of people who are determined to run marathons now. That's the point -- they're NOT letting terrorists control them, and they understood the temporary situation in Boston for what it was -- temporary.
To be fair, if cities continue to be locked down and we truly become a police state I will stand up and admit I was wrong. Just don't see it happening anytime soon, that's all.
There are several reasons I'm not too concerned about it, primarily that it was temporary, and it was somewhat justified given the circumstances (well, people may disagree but that is certainly up for debate...). It did not seem like the first step towards martial law, which seems to be what many people are fearing. If I thought we were all about to be placed under martial law, of course I'd be concerned, but I don't.
For one thing, the resources, manpower, and coordination are not there. The government can't even enforce many currently existing laws or effecitvely control large swathes of the population, who are arguing and rebelling and disagreeing and generally being as stubborn and ornery and out of control as ever. Exhibit A: When gun control laws were threatened, the area where I lived experienced such an upsurge in weapons permit applications they had to hire more people just to fill out the paperwork; gun sales went up, and people generally rebelled. Exhibit B: is the number of people who are determined to run marathons now. That's the point -- they're NOT letting terrorists control them, and they understood the temporary situation in Boston for what it was -- temporary.
To be fair, if cities continue to be locked down and we truly become a police state I will stand up and admit I was wrong. Just don't see it happening anytime soon, that's all.
Cornerstone
Well-known member
- MBTI
- Pisces
- Enneagram
- Metal Goat
Well, yeah. I suppose. Especially those people.
But I find people who would blow up others to be somewhat warped so...it's almost ironic that by doing such a thing you prove beyond doubt that you are not the person to be given any kind of influence over creating a new world. In my opinion, using violence against defenceless people is an automatic self-blackballing from a rational society.
So they're not the Status Quo, but they're not an ally. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend for that reason - my enemy is my friend. I really think it's the only way.
A new society would still have to have law and order and there would still be a backlog of nutjobs who like hurting people for a multitude of reasons.
They need to be taken away from the steering wheel though. As soon as possible - it's getting ridiculous.
The separation of state and commerce will have to be the next church vs state and I think it will be even tougher.
That is, unless a new spirituality comes about. Or rather, people look at the one we've had all along and learn that a misinterpretation can be rectified.
If we can get over our monumental slip-up of thinking that things happen to us and not due to us...the rest is a piece of cake.
No issue will be as difficult to look at as our relationship with ourselves - once that centuries-old backlog of guilt and shame is eased, it won't be so hard to examine the rest honestly.
It will take time, sure. But it is impossible to recreate the human condition until we re-examine the human condition.
Or we continue to live under the one that meets some obvious needs but practically none of the rest.
And it actively suppresses attempts at advancement because they're not 'profitable'. S'crazy...
Last edited:
Nixie
Resurrected
- MBTI
- ENTP
I agree with [MENTION=564]acd[/MENTION]. There are many things that we must guard against. Like, I don't know, the creation of a branch designed JUST to watch over all of us. The limits on travel in place. Used to be you didn't have to get molested to fly somewhere. Now the lockdown of an entire city for one suspect. The idea that demands can be placed upon people without any sort of recourse IS frightening. I understand all the implications of having someone intent on bombing/causing destruction on the loose but I agree that the show of force was out of the bounds of reasonable.
It is the same macho bs crap that causes people to Rah Rah Rah and fly the flag and point accusing "you ain't American" fingers if you don't hoot and hollar with us proproganda too. Where the idea of "questioning" what happened is somehow purdeee Unamerican Commie Bastard BS....
It is the same macho bs crap that causes people to Rah Rah Rah and fly the flag and point accusing "you ain't American" fingers if you don't hoot and hollar with us proproganda too. Where the idea of "questioning" what happened is somehow purdeee Unamerican Commie Bastard BS....
Apone
Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- MEGA
- Enneagram
- MAN
It happened in Canada in 1970:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Crisis
…and I promise that Canada hasn't become a scary police state in the meantime. It was also far more serious and far scarier than a lockdown-- it was basically martial law and the police could search your home or take you in if they wanted to. Interestingly enough, there was also widespread support for the measure. My history teacher also told us that there was absolutely no way that the president of the US would ever be able to get away with it.
One of the biggest differences between Canada and America is that Americans tend to be a lot more paranoid and prone to persecution complexes, which I believe is also why it's a far more violent society. They probably don't want terrorists running around on a bombing spree, but they don't want to make it easier for the police to stop them because they're afraid that the police are going to turn on them. Ironically enough, it's this same paranoia and this same persecution complex that drove the bombers to do what they did.
Maybe it is overkill, but I think the reasoning is that overkill is better than letting a dangerous person escape and do it all over again. Terrorism is always a huge cause for concern-- normal murder/theft is typically done out of desperation and an isolated incident but terrorism could easily involve multiple incidents that could also escalate and generally spread panic and fear, which is dangerous in and of itself.
So what exactly is the alternative here? Just let everything stay lax and hope that these people make a dumb mistake?
Last edited:
this is only temporary
Community Member
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1
But surely Boston would not have been shut down so easily without the cooperation of its residents, who, I imagine, might have resented having their city attacked? And most of whom really wanted to see the bombers caught? I don't think there were armed guards at every door, people were told to stay in their houses, and mostly, they cooperated. If they refused to comply it would have been a different story -- and I wonder how many people didn't comply. Probably not many. I would love to hear from someone who was actually in Boston at the time -- I suspect getting out of your house and out of the city would have been a simple matter if anyone really wanted to try it, people weren't rebelling and storming the gates.
Just like going through TSA requires cooperation from people who -- oh, I don't know -- would like to go on a flight without dying? (fascist bastards.)
I fly and go through TSA fairly regularly too, and the only thing that bothers me about that is I think TSA is really rather inept, and there are too many loopholes. I've never been "molested" and I don't mind cooperating, since it seems like a reasonable request in the world we live in today. All they do is make you walk through a scanner and take your shoes off. (Although I should say the "naked scanner" thing does not bother me, perhaps it should. Mostly I just feel sorry for the TSA agents who have to look at that all day. :S ) Seriously, I've never gotten so much as a pat-down.
Apone
Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- MEGA
- Enneagram
- MAN
So what you're saying is that we should all just change into better people and then things will be perfect?
Why has no one thought of this before?
CindyLou
Get over it
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 6w5
I can honestly say if I was in Boston I wouldn't be leaving or taking my daughter to school that day so...
I've been patted down multiple times but just a normal pat down it was not inappropriate by any means, and my hands screened for explosives twice. Lol! However, I haven't seen the xray scanner in any airport I've been in since last summer. I think they got rid of those? The scanner is the same but the image is a cartoon sketch kinda like a body outline and not the actual image anymore.
this is only temporary
Community Member
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1
Is it now? I have only ever walked through them, not ever seen what it looks like on the other end, or paid attention to that, so I'm not sure how much detail there is. (The skeptic in me assumes TSA can see anything they please, and there's probably a "naked" button they can push, and voila, there you are, body cavities and all.) I know it differs depending on what airport you're in.
I remember there was a big brouhaha about people feeling over-exposed in the scanners. I've seen several signs reassuring people that if they are uncomfortable going through the scanner, they don't have to, they can have a TSA agent screen them personally.
I don't know... I do fly, and I find TSA to be not a huge problem, and I'd rather not disband them, but I have my doubts they are all that effective. Also, If there ever is a bombing in my city, I certainly hope there is a massive manhunt and/or lockdown, and they catch who did it. However, I recognize that others may not agree and that is fine with me.
Cornerstone
Well-known member
- MBTI
- Pisces
- Enneagram
- Metal Goat
Yeah, yeah...
But it's because there is no structure. It's fully left up to you.
But if you want to destroy yourself all you need to do is be 'normal'.
Apone
Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- MEGA
- Enneagram
- MAN
What's normal?
And how do you know we're destroying ourselves?
Maybe things are slowly getting better.
Cornerstone
Well-known member
- MBTI
- Pisces
- Enneagram
- Metal Goat
They are, they absolutely are!
There are loads of people trying so hard to make positive change and they're doing a wonderful job.
Sustainable communities are popping up at an increasing rate and all of the 'green' issues, I think, come from a good place.
It's just difficult to tell what is rhetoric from corporations and what is genuine when you don't know who owns what and who is funding who.
The money issue is a really big one and it has taken precedence over everything in a way that is never has before.
Even when people were considered 'superior' in England in a pre-industrial, pre-capitalistic age; it was not really because of their wealth or material possessions that they were highly regarded. They had free time to develop character and were known and set apart from the lowest workers who had little identity other than 'peasant'.
Nowadays, money ends every conversation.
Take Cadbury for example - the chocolate makers. Their original factory is in Bournville, close to where I live.
They built the entire town for their workers including utilities and everything else...and it is a nice place.
Other workers at the same time in smaller industries and those run by less philanthropic owners did not get this.
There is history in that town and it is one that shows Capitalism CAN have a middle ground...it can be pretty decent...because it just depends on having a decent CEO.
But when a sale came up, there were two bidders.
One was Kraft Foods. One was Hershey.
Hershey is so much more in line with everything Cadbury have stood for...they built their workers a theme park (sort of).
Yet Kraft upped their offer (not a LOT more) but enough over Hershey's that it went to Kraft and there isn't anything Kraft offer that any other major conglomerate couldn't.
Just money - the same as everyone else.
That is not coming back now. There is no way to get that back because it's gone to a company that only a handful of others could possibly outbid.
Yet they're nowhere near the level of market domination to start tripping of monopoly alarms in government and the competition commission because they have Mars, Rowntree etc who are HUGE competitors...but having many HUGE companies just below the legal level before they are considered monopolies...makes effective monopolies and does shut down the possibility of new business. Or if anyone starts up it is inevitable that if they are successful their business will belong to one of these companies eventually. Every idea is dead in the water unless society can restructure itself.
Capitalism isn't bad. It has gotten too greedy and it has forgotten that it is not the only means of social organisation.
Good is being done but 'bad' (not necessarily malice) has got way too much money behind it.
You can be as 'good' as you want but eventually if you really pursue that path something will give and then you can either just 'do nice things' or you can know why you should and realise how the world is arranged to make this as difficult as possible.
I wouldn't tell anyone that they HAVE to live a certain way.
But there will come a time when humanity has to acknowledge what is good for them, even if they plan on doing the exact opposite.
There will come a time when this will have faded into obscurity...our evolution is a movement toward love and togetherness...it's taken a long time.
When you get close to something that has been worked so hard for it is very tempting to say you have done enough when in fact there is more to go.
It can be tempting to say 'this is it', 'this is far as I want to/need to/believe I can go. This might just be humanity taking a breather.
But the ones who do seek to take away Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness from ordinary people are not resting...and it may cost us.
Sorry, that was long...and maybe a little jumpy. But I don't think we have the basics and need to fill in the details...at all.
I think we're so, so far from understanding...even if in practice we are often doing the right thing more and more each day.
Understanding would speed everything up, I feel. But you can't have understanding and the current social order...they are chalk and cheese.