Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Boston Bomber - Should the root causes of such violence be explored? Or lock em up and throw away the key?

This is the debate that is happening in Canada right now.

One side says there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded, completely at war with innocents, at war with a society. Where do those tensions come from? What are the root causes? All this plus condemning the tragedy and punish severely.

But another side says when you see this kind of violent act, you do not sit around trying to rationalize it or make excuses for it or figure out its root causes. You condemn it categorically, and to the extent that you can deal with the perpetrators, you deal with them as harshly as possible. And throw away the key.

So which side do you fall under?

by Anonymousreply 4004/20/2013

What a stupid fucking question at this stage of the game.

by Anonymousreply 104/17/2013

Um, why does there have to be a "root cause," in this case? You'd do much better to start with the root causes of crime in general, not the acts of an extremist nutbag (regardless of whether a teabagger, a radical Muslim or someone else, we can all agree this was extreme).

by Anonymousreply 204/17/2013

R1 this is the debate that is happening in Canada right now?

by Anonymousreply 304/17/2013

Second option, then first option.

by Anonymousreply 404/17/2013

Why not both?

by Anonymousreply 504/17/2013

Because critics say option one is hugging a thug

by Anonymousreply 604/17/2013

Conservatives say this is not an act of exclusion. From Wolfe Tone to the September 11th bombers there is a long history of people being fully integrated into society but taking up armed struggle against it. Someone feels excluded so they commit acts of terrorism; so we need to get to the root causes of this exclusion so terrorism ceases to exist?

by Anonymousreply 704/17/2013

I think you can do both. Anyways, it's no mystery - they are just screwed-up hateful people.

by Anonymousreply 804/17/2013

r1, this kind of debate has been happening in Canada for a few years now around issues of paedophilia and mental illness primarily.

Immigration is also at a crossroads here. Because of this, the Boston bombings are seen as a continuation of the debate.

I realize this is in the "it's Canada, who cares" category, but r3 asked.

Also, it is very relevant to American interests, not least because of the shared border and different laws.

I have the feeling there will be a combination Charles Ng/Omar Khadr nightmare case in the near future.

by Anonymousreply 904/17/2013

From another forum (the way conservatives are seeing this issue)

"There is no justification, absolutely none, for something like this. Whoever did it took a long time in planning, done a lot of study and research, and a lot of meticulous work. Today, in the year 2013, there is no excuse for it, wether about native indians, muslims, bullied school kids, israelis, palestinians or whatever other group you may think of. It is a barbaric act of terror. Period."

That is the viewpoint of the conservatives. There is NO NEED to rationalize or look for root causes. Lock em up and throw away the key.

by Anonymousreply 1004/17/2013

This is a person crying out for love. A hug, a kiss,a cuddle and then some prison lovin.

by Anonymousreply 1104/17/2013

R11 Conservatives call that 'Hug a Thug' mentality.

They want to be 'tough on crime' and just throw away the key.

by Anonymousreply 1204/17/2013

No they really don't though, r12.

It's just an easy way to get votes, particularly with crime and immigration issues.

That's what really bugs me, just like Stephen Harper's fake Evangelical Christianity.

(I say that as an independent, not a PC basher.)

by Anonymousreply 1304/17/2013

What are you referring to when you say "PC"?

by Anonymousreply 1404/17/2013

Sorry, r14. Progressive Conservative.

Old name for the Conservative Party.

by Anonymousreply 1504/17/2013

They are not "Progressive Conservatives" anymore. They dropped the "progressive" in 2003. They are not the same party. They have Reform Party members.

by Anonymousreply 1604/17/2013

It depends, OP, on what celebrity twitter reactions are to this burning question.

by Anonymousreply 1704/17/2013

Who gives a shit about his motives? I don't even care if his IQ if 150 or 30. People who commit crimes of great violence and whose freedom comes at the expense of others' safety should be locked the fuck up -- for ages.

by Anonymousreply 1804/17/2013

Lock 'em up with Jodi Hairyass

by Anonymousreply 1904/17/2013

If I'm right and a right-wing "angry white male" (or males) is behind this, they didn't do it because they feel excluded, but because they're angry that the world has denied them the exalted status they feel they deserve. Inclusion wouldn't make them happy, what they want is power and deference.

There's no saving these people. Any attempts at counseling is perceived as an assault on the self, or his "rights". Removing them from society is the only way to deal with them.

by Anonymousreply 2004/17/2013

[quote]People who commit crimes of great violence and whose freedom comes at the expense of others' safety should be locked the fuck up -- for ages.

You're right, R18. We can start by locking up Obama (and Bush and Brennan and Cheney and Tenet and Rumsfeld and etc etc).

List of children killed by drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen:

Noor Aziz | 8 | male Abdul Wasit | 17 | male Noor Syed | 8 | male Wajid Noor | 9 | male Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male Ayeesha | 3 | female Qari Alamzeb | 14| male Shoaib | 8 | male Hayatullah KhaMohammad | 16 | male Tariq Aziz | 16 | male Sanaullah Jan | 17 | male Maezol Khan | 8 | female Nasir Khan | male Naeem Khan | male Naeemullah | male Mohammad Tahir | 16 | male Azizul Wahab | 15 | male Fazal Wahab | 16 | male Ziauddin | 16 | male Mohammad Yunus | 16 | male Fazal Hakim | 19 | male Ilyas | 13 | male Sohail | 7 | male Asadullah | 9 | male khalilullah | 9 | male Noor Mohammad | 8 | male Khalid | 12 | male Saifullah | 9 | male Mashooq Jan | 15 | male Nawab | 17 | male Sultanat Khan | 16 | male Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male Noor Mohammad | 15 | male Mohammad Yaas Khan | 16 | male Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male Ziaur Rahman | 17 | male Abdullah | 18 | male Ikramullah Zada | 17 | male Inayatur Rehman | 16 | male Shahbuddin | 15 | male Yahya Khan | 16 |male Rahatullah |17 | male Mohammad Salim | 11 | male Shahjehan | 15 | male Gul Sher Khan | 15 | male Bakht Muneer | 14 | male Numair | 14 | male Mashooq Khan | 16 | male Ihsanullah | 16 | male Luqman | 12 | male Jannatullah | 13 | male Ismail | 12 | male Taseel Khan | 18 | male Zaheeruddin | 16 | male Qari Ishaq | 19 | male Jamshed Khan | 14 | male Alam Nabi | 11 | male Qari Abdul Karim | 19 | male Rahmatullah | 14 | male Abdus Samad | 17 | male Siraj | 16 | male Saeedullah | 17 | male Abdul Waris | 16 | male Darvesh | 13 | male Ameer Said | 15 | male Shaukat | 14 | male Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male Salman | 12 | male Fazal Wahab | 18 | male Baacha Rahman | 13 | male Wali-ur-Rahman | 17 | male Iftikhar | 17 | male Inayatullah | 15 | male Mashooq Khan | 16 | male Ihsanullah | 16 | male Luqman | 12 | male Jannatullah | 13 | male Ismail | 12 | male Abdul Waris | 16 | male Darvesh | 13 | male Ameer Said | 15 | male Shaukat | 14 | male Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male Adnan | 16 | male Najibullah | 13 | male Naeemullah | 17 | male Hizbullah | 10 | male Kitab Gul | 12 | male Wilayat Khan | 11 | male Zabihullah | 16 | male Shehzad Gul | 11 | male Shabir | 15 | male Qari Sharifullah | 17 | male Shafiullah | 16 | male Nimatullah | 14 | male Shakirullah | 16 | male Talha | 8 | male Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male Abdel- Rahman Anwar al Awlaki | 16 | male Abdel-Rahman al-Awlaki | 17 | male Nasser Salim | 19

by Anonymousreply 2104/17/2013

Could you not trot out the names of some younger children, R21?

The younger they are, the more innocent, and more deserving of our tears and rending of garments. Babies, for instance...babies really turn on the waterworks.

by Anonymousreply 2204/18/2013

bump for more discussion

by Anonymousreply 2304/19/2013

Um... why can't we lock em up AND explore the roots of this violence?

by Anonymousreply 2404/19/2013

[quote] AND explore the roots of this violence?

Because conservatives say that is the 'hug a thug' mentality.

by Anonymousreply 2504/19/2013

We already know the rrot cause: radical islam.

convict the bastard and execute him.

by Anonymousreply 2604/20/2013

R26 is the Conservative opinion.

by Anonymousreply 2704/20/2013

Conservatives feel looking for 'root causes' is akin to a group-therapy "why-can't-we-all-get-along" kind of thinking.

More concerned about understanding a terrorist's psychological circuitry and early-childhood abuses than hunting terrorists down. Like a group hug.

by Anonymousreply 2804/20/2013

Because conservatives have no concept of prevention, them being retarded.

by Anonymousreply 2904/20/2013

This is the Conservative viewpoint in Canada about root causes.

The “root cause” argument for terrorism was popular among left-learning academics after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States in 2001. Terrorism, they argued, is rooted in poverty, frustration over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and memories of empire. Western exploitation of “others” is the source of terrorism. If only western societies were more “inclusive,” if freedom and democracy, along with the cornucopia of consumer goods and technology, were extended to the whole world, nobody would want to kill and maim children and young women with shrapnel-loaded pressure-cookers.

The fact is that many, if not most, terrorist events of recent years — whether the 9/11 attacks, the 2004 Madrid train bombing, the London Underground bombing in 2005, Sweden’s 2010 Christmas season bomber, for example — have been carried out by those who’ve grown up in relative prosperity, enjoyed decent educations and general societal acceptance.

The “root cause” of their turn to terrorism is not poverty or even societal disaffection. Indeed, CONS would argue the Islamists, like the Nazis and Communists, are motivated more by spiritual disease.

They see themselves are specially chosen, whether by God, the Fuhrer or History, and justify their killing as sanctioned by a higher purpose. You’re not going to deflect them from that purpose with talk of inclusion and feel-better socialization.

Liberals, on the other hand, with concern for the ‘feelings’ of bomb-makers, fretting over their sense of exclusion, seems to think we can come together to sing “We Are The World.” They do not apparently understand that modern societies have enemies, whether foreign Islamists or domestic neo-Nazis — there are close ideological ties between Islamic terrorism and Nazism, but that’s another topic — devoted to destruction of the western world in large part because they hate its progressivist notions of inclusion, toleration and multiculturalism. It is ideas like freedom, democracy and equality that the terrorists, whether Islamist or Aryan, loathe.

And what they loathe they seek to destroy, exploiting naive notions of cultural relativism and diversity that actually make it easier for them to attack.

The irony is obvious. The cosmopolitan consensus dictates embracing the moral equivalence of all cultures. To do so, however, is to effectively renounce any moral capacity to oppose the illiberal ideologies of those who hate modernity. Whether jihadis or self-proclaimed aryans, they variously promote racism, gender apartheid, religious intolerance, hatred of homosexuals, and the maintenance of an oppressive patriarchy.

Yet, Liberals seems to think that making such people feel accepted, easing their “tensions,” is the solution.

Of course, the world doesn’t work that way, and never has.

Again this is the CONS point of view in Canada that should not be looking for root causes. Just lock up and throw away the key.

by Anonymousreply 3004/20/2013

"One side says there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded."

No question? Seems to me, according to all reports, that in this case both brothers -- and especially the younger one -- weren't "excluded" from American society by any means.

by Anonymousreply 3104/20/2013

One of the brothers wrote on his web site he had no friends in America.

by Anonymousreply 3204/20/2013

I think when this kid talks, he's not going to know a lot of what happened behind the scenes. I would bet that his brother, who was the fanatic and who went to russia a few years ago, dealt solely with whatever groups that supplied them with these weapons and bombs. They had no money when they carjacked some guy and his car. They let the guy go after they stopped at an ATM and he gave them money and his cellphone. So when the police got the car they also got the cellphone so they probably can see who they called.

by Anonymousreply 3304/20/2013


by Anonymousreply 3404/20/2013

[quote]This is the debate that is happening in Canada right now.

With regard to what?

by Anonymousreply 3504/20/2013

On Monday and Tuesday the CONS will introduce their Terror Bill to punish home-grown terrorist.

by Anonymousreply 3604/20/2013

Root causes? He's going to blame his brother for everything.

by Anonymousreply 3704/20/2013

Canada's Parliament will be having a debate on Monday and Tuesday as to whether Canada should focus more on 'root' causes toward terrorism. Or if we should just lock up terrorists and throw away the key.

by Anonymousreply 3804/20/2013

I vote for the examination.

I want to move away from [italic]terrorism[/italic] mentality of a number of Americans who act like starting and fighting wars are like some cool, powerful video game.

by Anonymousreply 3904/20/2013

Do we even know for sure why they did what they did?

by Anonymousreply 4004/20/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!