The threat of TERROR.

This is intended as a discussion about TERROR instead of the merits of each case, as in the deeper reasons why in such cases as like the murder of Trayvon Martin and the newest murder of Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri that the population reacted so negatively.

As example when a slave Plantation with maybe 100 slaves then they hang one (1) slave and yet every other of the 99 get the message to live in fear, because just one death is a threat of terror to them all.

This is the same process as done in old Rome when they crucified Jesus on top of a high hill so then the entire city got the message of threat and terror and fear.

That is why the police supporting the murder of Trayvon Martin and of supporting the murder of Michael Brown is a threat of violence against all African American citizen which is a realistic threat of violence and of terrorism.

On the old slave Plantations the white "masters" saw that as enforcing their power over the slaves, while the African slaves saw it as a threat - PERSPECTIVE.

So today with in Ferguson Missouri the white people do not feel that threat so keenly with the unarmed black teenager being summary executed on the street by the police, and that is because that terrorism is not directed at us whites.

It simply is not necessary to kill hundreds or thousands because just one (1) demonstration of violent cruelty sends the same message to everyone concerned.

One of the infamous Roman Dictators Caligula worded the idea like this = "Let them hate us so long as they fear us."

The people (some of us white folk too) protest as a way of defying the terror by showing that we are not afraid of the murderers or of the police.

True terrorism is a philosophy and a psychology of physical control, but it is morally and ethically weak.

JP Cusick said:

This is intended as a discussion about TERROR .

Click to expand...

It looks more like trolling to me in its use of some really idiotic agitprop coupled with dishonest framing techniques.

JP Cusick said:

This is intended as a discussion about TERROR instead of the merits of each case, as in the deeper reasons why in such cases as like the murder of Trayvon Martin and the newest murder of Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri that the population reacted so negatively.

As example when a slave Plantation with maybe 100 slaves then they hang one (1) slave and yet every other of the 99 get the message to live in fear, because just one death is a threat of terror to them all.

This is the same process as done in old Rome when they crucified Jesus on top of a high hill so then the entire city got the message of threat and terror and fear.

That is why the police supporting the murder of Trayvon Martin and of supporting the murder of Michael Brown is a threat of violence against all African American citizen which is a realistic threat of violence and of terrorism.

On the old slave Plantations the white "masters" saw that as enforcing their power over the slaves, while the African slaves saw it as a threat - PERSPECTIVE.

So today with in Ferguson Missouri the white people do not feel that threat so keenly with the unarmed black teenager being summary executed on the street by the police, and that is because that terrorism is not directed at us whites.

It simply is not necessary to kill hundreds or thousands because just one (1) demonstration of violent cruelty sends the same message to everyone concerned.

One of the infamous Roman Dictators Caligula worded the idea like this = "Let them hate us so long as they fear us."

The people (some of us white folk too) protest as a way of defying the terror by showing that we are not afraid of the murderers or of the police.

True terrorism is a philosophy and a psychology of physical control, but it is morally and ethically weak.

Click to expand...

Good points, although I don't think that creating fear is usually the perpetrators intent, it is often the result, which explains why police killings are not taken lightly among some communities. The same is true of hate crimes, which by definition have an intention to create widespread fear and/or keep a group of people in their place. I believe that hate crimes should be relabeled as domestic terrorism so that people understand the intent of those laws better.

JP Cusick said:

This is intended as a discussion about TERROR instead of the merits of each case, as in the deeper reasons why in such cases as like the murder of Trayvon Martin and the newest murder of Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri that the population reacted so negatively.

As example when a slave Plantation with maybe 100 slaves then they hang one (1) slave and yet every other of the 99 get the message to live in fear, because just one death is a threat of terror to them all.

This is the same process as done in old Rome when they crucified Jesus on top of a high hill so then the entire city got the message of threat and terror and fear.

That is why the police supporting the murder of Trayvon Martin and of supporting the murder of Michael Brown is a threat of violence against all African American citizen which is a realistic threat of violence and of terrorism.

On the old slave Plantations the white "masters" saw that as enforcing their power over the slaves, while the African slaves saw it as a threat - PERSPECTIVE.

So today with in Ferguson Missouri the white people do not feel that threat so keenly with the unarmed black teenager being summary executed on the street by the police, and that is because that terrorism is not directed at us whites.

It simply is not necessary to kill hundreds or thousands because just one (1) demonstration of violent cruelty sends the same message to everyone concerned.

One of the infamous Roman Dictators Caligula worded the idea like this = "Let them hate us so long as they fear us."

The people (some of us white folk too) protest as a way of defying the terror by showing that we are not afraid of the murderers or of the police.

True terrorism is a philosophy and a psychology of physical control, but it is morally and ethically weak.

Click to expand...

i have to wonder about your use of the term "murder" in respect to both cases

in the first one, the defendant was found not guilty

in the second case, it is much to early to know whether or not murder was committed

you can call it a tragic shooting that may result in charges....but we dont know they yet, do we?

Gardener said:

It looks more like trolling to me in its use of some really idiotic agitprop coupled with dishonest framing techniques.

Click to expand...

You and anyone are free not to participate in this thread, as giving a protest of avoiding it.


===================================

Hard Truth said:

Good points, although I don't think that creating fear is usually the perpetrators intent, it is often the result, which explains why police killings are not taken lightly among some communities. The same is true of hate crimes, which by definition have an intention to create widespread fear and/or keep a group of people in their place. I believe that hate crimes should be relabeled as domestic terrorism so that people understand the intent of those laws better.

Click to expand...

You might have a point that it may not be the perpetrator's intent, but it is the intent of the higher powers, as like the Police are given both the weapons and the authority which thereby produces the effects.

Somehow I do believe that anyone who applies to be in law enforcement would have to have some basis idea of that concept, so pretending innocent thereafter is rather hard to qualify.

I have to say that it is more than being similar to a hate crime, since somewhere behind the action there is hatred lurking in the corners.

I disagree with labeling anything as "terrorism" because terror is just an emotion, and laws must not be based on emotions.

The thing that really impressed me so to start this thread is that in Ferguson Missouri the law enforcement refuses to do anything or to say anything which directly confronts the grievance of the protesters, but instead they escalate with more weapons and more troops and demands for surrender and submission which just means that the law wants those people to live in fear and to shut up otherwise.

It is terror tactics against that population.

If it is organized terror, who gave the order? If it's a rogue terrorist, where is the evidence.

Gardener said:

It looks more like trolling to me in its use of some really idiotic agitprop coupled with dishonest framing techniques.

Click to expand...

Look who posted it.

ecofarm said:

If it is organized terror, who gave the order? If it's a rogue terrorist, where is the evidence.

Click to expand...

It is a system and not a person.

It was started long long ago.

JP Cusick said:

It is a system and not a person.

It was started long long ago.

Click to expand...

I agree racism is systemic. I don't believe its existence rests on a particular case.

ecofarm said:

I agree racism is systemic. I don't believe its existence rests on a particular case.

Click to expand...

The point here and the thread topic too is about TERROR and terrorism as this is not about racism.

Of course it is utterly absurd to claim that racism or terrorism does not happen in any one particular case.

Of course you or anyone might view things that way when you are on the side of the hangers and not the hangees, on the side of the killers and not of the killed, on the side of the terrorist and not the terrorized, on the side of the police and against the citizens.

There is always that matter of perspective.


=========================================

JP Cusick said:

It is a system and not a person.

It was started long long ago.

Click to expand...

Another example is the USA misusing the drone bombings to murder people in Pakistan, where the population must live with killer aircraft circling overhead just waiting to kill and murder without any trial or justice or any warning.

They live in that form of terrorism, and yet we never hear of them crying in fear.

JP Cusick said:

The point here and the thread topic too is about TERROR and terrorism as this is not about racism.

Of course it is utterly absurd to claim that racism or terrorism does not happen in any one particular case.

Of course you or anyone might view things that way when you are on the side of the hangers and not the hangees, on the side of the killers and not of the killed, on the side of the terrorist and not the terrorized, on the side of the police and against the citizens.

There is always that matter of perspective.

Click to expand...

I thought you meant the terrorism inherent in racial bigotry supported by systemic injustice - racism, not terror from the police.

ecofarm said:

I thought you meant the terrorism inherent in racial bigotry supported by systemic injustice - racism, not terror from the police.

Click to expand...

Well I am not excluding any of that - certainly not.

Plus terror by the police is the strong-arm of the law since the people meet the government when we meet the police.

The Congress and Presidents and Governors and the Court Judges do not really enforce anything.

There is no "system" without the Police that enforce the system onto the population.

To en-force means to use brute force which thereby means the local Police on the streets.

As such whether it is driven by racism or injustice or cruelty or just incompetence - the desire to terrorize the population is the means of control.


==========================================

JP Cusick said:

The people (some of us white folk too) protest as a way of defying the terror by showing that we are not afraid of the murderers or of the police.

True terrorism is a philosophy and a psychology of physical control, but it is morally and ethically weak.

Click to expand...

The active defiance as like public protesting is one big way of demonstrating that we are not afraid of the ongoing threats and that we are are not terrorized by the State sanctioned murders by the police as in happening now in Ferguson MO in the police killing of Michael Brown.

People always adapt - so when people are afraid they adapt, and when people have courage then they adapt in a different way.

gdgyva said:

i have to wonder about your use of the term "murder" in respect to both cases

in the first one, the defendant was found not guilty

in the second case, it is much to early to know whether or not murder was committed

you can call it a tragic shooting that may result in charges....but we dont know they yet, do we?

Click to expand...

What I find is that most people simply bow down to the overwhelming FORCE and we just conform as if we choose to do as we are FORCED to do.

As like myself being a privileged white-man then I know that the police are NOT going to shoot me down in the streets, and that makes a huge difference between people.

If I go to any place along with an African American friend or if I were to have an African American girl-friend then in both cases I would definitely feel the outside pressure against me from doing that, because the threat against them would thereby be shared with me in spite of my white privilege which would not be shared with them being with me.

As such it is a cowardly stance to view the police as on our side when the police are not on everyone's side, and we are simply choosing to join in with the brutes and bullies in order to maintain our own feelings of safety.

If Trayvon Martin had been a white child then that would have been murder - but otherwise no.
If Michael Brown had been a white teenager then that would have been murder - but otherwise no.

JP Cusick said:

What I find is that most people simply bow down to the overwhelming FORCE and we just conform as if we choose to do as we are FORCED to do.

As like myself being a privileged white-man then I know that the police are NOT going to shoot me down in the streets, and that makes a huge difference between people.

If I go to any place along with an African American friend or if I were to have an African American girl-friend then in both cases I would definitely feel the outside pressure against me from doing that, because the threat against them would thereby be shared with me in spite of my white privilege which would not be shared with them being with me.

As such it is a cowardly stance to view the police as on our side when the police are not on everyone's side, and we are simply choosing to join in with the brutes and bullies in order to maintain our own feelings of safety.

If Trayvon Martin had been a white child then that would have been murder - but otherwise no.
If Michael Brown had been a white teenager then that would have been murder - but otherwise no.

Click to expand...

i disagree on both

but go on...make these and other cases about race

not about stupidity....

not about teenage testosterone

not about "standing up and being a man" for your bro's

we have far too many young men in this country dying every year....

race has little to nothing to do with it

their community, their parents, their elders, and their role models have everything to do with it

gdgyva said:

i disagree on both

Click to expand...

That is just so classic indeed.

The one (1) most important thing that matters to you is that the two black guys are dead.

You do not give any disagreement with my commentary (and I appreciate that) but you must indeed disagree with the "both" as the 2 black guys dead is the bottom line for you.

It does not matter that they are black but just so long as they are dead and gone.

gdgyva said:

but go on...make these and other cases about race

Click to expand...

Those 2 are about race / about the white murder of black men, and I am not making it that way.

BUT - but, for the record, I am saying that it was done by the police as terror and to terrorize.

gdgyva said:

not about stupidity....

Click to expand...

I do not see anyone as "stupid".

Being violent and racist and bigoted and some were innocent and defenseless - but I see no one as being stupid.

I must guess that you view getting shot and killed by the police as the "stupid" thing for the victim to do? would that be accurate?

gdgyva said:

not about teenage testosterone

Click to expand...

I do not doubt that you would view them that way.

Our white folk have always had a thing about black sexuality.

gdgyva said:

not about "standing up and being a man" for your bro's

Click to expand...

You might criticize that, but I see the African American people trying to stand up for their bro' who got shot dead.

But if you mean me standing up for my white bro' policeman who murdered Michael Brown - then to condemn his actions is the way that I stand up with him.

gdgyva said:

we have far too many young men in this country dying every year....

Click to expand...

I really see that claim as a smoke-screen to cover up the reality, and I hear it a lot on TV.

Death and dying is not a real concern for people, as death and dying is a part of life which most people accept and deal with.

The problem is not that people die - it is that they are murdered, and the injustice of it, and of course the racism of the killings matter too.

A black person kills another black person, just as a white person killing another white person - that is a part of life and of humanity, but some police officer gunning down an unarmed teenager is a different story.

gdgyva said:

race has little to nothing to do with it

Click to expand...

That is rather easy to say for us white folk, because our whiteness is to our benefit.

When the dominating white power takes unjust actions against African American people then THEN race has a lot to do with it.

gdgyva said:

their community, their parents, their elders, and their role models have everything to do with it

Click to expand...

That has such a sound of legitimacy and yet it is a total cop-out.

JP Cusick said:

gdgyva said:

i disagree on both

their community, their parents, their elders, and their role models have everything to do with it

Click to expand...

That has such a sound of legitimacy and yet it is a total cop-out.

Click to expand...

To followup because it needs to be explained.

The only logical reason to blame that list above is by using a presumption of guilt, in that it presumes that the community, the parents, the elders, the role models, all failed at their functions.

That presumption is the very fundamental meaning of prejudice.

As white people we get a presumption of innocence, while black people are given a presumption of guilt.

Racial prejudice is just as simplistic as that, and yet it does very great harm to us all.

Why not give the view that the community does the best that they can? the parents do the best that they can? the elders do the best that they can? the role models do the best that they can?

It is a matter of presumption.

If white people would stop presuming the black people in negative terms then the never-ending racial prejudice would finally be at its end.

JP Cusick said:

That is just so classic indeed.

The one (1) most important thing that matters to you is that the two black guys are dead.

You do not give any disagreement with my commentary (and I appreciate that) but you must indeed disagree with the "both" as the 2 black guys dead is the bottom line for you.

It does not matter that they are black but just so long as they are dead and gone.


Those 2 are about race / about the white murder of black men, and I am not making it that way.

BUT - but, for the record, I am saying that it was done by the police as terror and to terrorize.


I do not see anyone as "stupid".

Being violent and racist and bigoted and some were innocent and defenseless - but I see no one as being stupid.

I must guess that you view getting shot and killed by the police as the "stupid" thing for the victim to do? would that be accurate?


I do not doubt that you would view them that way.

Our white folk have always had a thing about black sexuality.


You might criticize that, but I see the African American people trying to stand up for their bro' who got shot dead.

But if you mean me standing up for my white bro' policeman who murdered Michael Brown - then to condemn his actions is the way that I stand up with him.


I really see that claim as a smoke-screen to cover up the reality, and I hear it a lot on TV.

Death and dying is not a real concern for people, as death and dying is a part of life which most people accept and deal with.

The problem is not that people die - it is that they are murdered, and the injustice of it, and of course the racism of the killings matter too.

A black person kills another black person, just as a white person killing another white person - that is a part of life and of humanity, but some police officer gunning down an unarmed teenager is a different story.


That is rather easy to say for us white folk, because our whiteness is to our benefit.

When the dominating white power takes unjust actions against African American people then THEN race has a lot to do with it.


That has such a sound of legitimacy and yet it is a total cop-out.

Click to expand...

i disagree with your use of the term "murder" in both cases....in the first one, the defendant was found not guilty by a jury of his peers, hence no murder. In the second one, the case is ongoing, and it is much too early to classify it as a murder.

BUT - but, for the record, I am saying that it was done by the police as terror and to terrorize. ...no....one was done by a CITIZEN by the name of George Zimmerman...he wasnt a cop. The other was shot by an officer in the line of duty....whether or not that shooting should have happened is what the investigation will determine.

Acting "stupid" or "tough" in front of cops is a fast and good way to die. If you want to argue that is being smart, then we can differ in what makes an intelligent human being

You, and others like you, want this to be about race. why? because it gives the black community more excuses as to what is happening to their children. Sorry...i dont see it that way.

I see too many young black men growing up without fathers, without role models, without a good moral compass to guide them. They wander, and they end up "hanging" with the wrong type of people. Instead of hearing about work ethic, and drive, and ambition....they are learning about drugs, and drive bys, and gang tats.

You want to fix something....fix that. Fix the fact that over what 60% of young black men dont grow up with a father. Their "role models" are basketball players with 5-6 baby mamas, who pay so much in child support they are literally broke 4 years after leaving the game. That isnt a "race" problem....that is a cultural problem.

gdgyva said:

i disagree with your use of the term "murder" in both cases....in the first one, the defendant was found not guilty by a jury of his peers, hence no murder. In the second one, the case is ongoing, and it is much too early to classify it as a murder.

BUT - but, for the record, I am saying that it was done by the police as terror and to terrorize. ...no....one was done by a CITIZEN by the name of George Zimmerman...he wasnt a cop. The other was shot by an officer in the line of duty....whether or not that shooting should have happened is what the investigation will determine.

Click to expand...

Zimmerman never was the real issue, and it is a deliberate sidetrack done by whites to cover up the real issues.

The real issue was the racist police and the racist prosecutors and the racist Republican rule in the racist State of Florida.

Zimmerman was just a petty pawn, and Z murdered Trayvon for the State and not for his own purpose.

The police officer who murdered Michael Brown is just another petty pawn who murders for the State and not for his own purpose.

The protest in Ferguson Missouri is not against that bloody cop - no, it is a protest against the racist police who fail to arrest the criminal, and against the racist prosecutors who fail to prosecute, and against the racist system which allows and empowers all of this to go onward.

gdgyva said:

Acting "stupid" or "tough" in front of cops is a fast and good way to die. If you want to argue that is being smart, then we can differ in what makes an intelligent human being

You, and others like you, want this to be about race. why? because it gives the black community more excuses as to what is happening to their children. Sorry...i dont see it that way.

Click to expand...

The thing is that you are violating their boundaries because you are acting as if you are their Judge and their "Master" which you are neither.

Many white people still today have and maintain our old slave-Plantation-mentality that we whites get to over-view and to over-rule the black people as if they are children which they are not.

That is what you are doing in those words by pretending to be up there on your own high white pedestal where we do not belong.

And FYI - Jesus Christ stood defiantly in front of the police of that time, and His action were not "stupid" but righteous.

gdgyva said:

I see too many young black men growing up without fathers, without role models, without a good moral compass to guide them. They wander, and they end up "hanging" with the wrong type of people. Instead of hearing about work ethic, and drive, and ambition....they are learning about drugs, and drive bys, and gang tats.

You want to fix something....fix that. Fix the fact that over what 60% of young black men dont grow up with a father. Their "role models" are basketball players with 5-6 baby mamas, who pay so much in child support they are literally broke 4 years after leaving the game. That isnt a "race" problem....that is a cultural problem.

Click to expand...

Actually those are legal problems based on immoral laws which violate the families and turn parenting into a crime and turns parents into criminals.

As in if the black fathers do nor behave as the whites demand then we just put them into jails and prisons and then they will really be gone.

This is truly the same thing done to the African slaves under the same old Plantation mentality, and then blame the slaves.

wow

okay dokie

be sure to wear the shiny side out on that new hat of yours

have a great day

ecofarm said:

If it is organized terror, who gave the order?

Click to expand...

When it is an organization doing the terror then it does not so much matter as to which individual gave the order since the entire org would share the guilt.

And with an org then that is so much easier to identify.

As like the USA using our drone-bombings against civilian targets around the entire planet, so the US President is not the only one guilty of our terrorism as all of us Americans share that guilt.

ecofarm said:

If it's a rogue terrorist, where is the evidence.

Click to expand...

I really do not believe there is ever such a thing as a rogue terrorist, because any person acting alone is thereby just a criminal.

The only evidence which would really matter would be to find out if they were NOT acting alone.


================================

gdgyva said:

wow

okay dokie

be sure to wear the shiny side out on that new hat of yours

have a great day

Click to expand...

It is because of people like this one quoted that we need bigger protest and more effective ways of resistance in order to show them the light.

I certainly do have to believe that the day ( "a great day" ) will come in due time, and the sooner the better.

JP Cusick said:

I really do not believe there is ever such a thing as a rogue terrorist, because any person acting alone is thereby just a criminal.

Click to expand...

Terrorism, unlike racism, does not require systemic (or even organized) backing.

ecofarm said:

Terrorism, unlike racism, does not require systemic (or even organized) backing.

Click to expand...

I say that is because you are confusing terrorism with cowardice.

Just because you (or people) become afraid or terrorized then that does not make the event into an act of terrorism.

That is one huge problem in defining a crime in terms of the peoples' emotions.

JP Cusick said:

I say that is because you are confusing terrorism with cowardice.

Just because you (or people) become afraid or terrorized then that does not make the event into an act of terrorism.

That is one huge problem in defining a crime in terms of the peoples' emotions.

Click to expand...

Please, don't insult my intelligence. I know what "makes" an event terrorism - targeting civilians for political gain.

JP Cusick said:

This is intended as a discussion about TERROR instead of the merits of each case, as in the deeper reasons why in such cases as like the murder of Trayvon Martin and the newest murder of Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri that the population reacted so negatively.

As example when a slave Plantation with maybe 100 slaves then they hang one (1) slave and yet every other of the 99 get the message to live in fear, because just one death is a threat of terror to them all.

This is the same process as done in old Rome when they crucified Jesus on top of a high hill so then the entire city got the message of threat and terror and fear.

That is why the police supporting the murder of Trayvon Martin and of supporting the murder of Michael Brown is a threat of violence against all African American citizen which is a realistic threat of violence and of terrorism.

On the old slave Plantations the white "masters" saw that as enforcing their power over the slaves, while the African slaves saw it as a threat - PERSPECTIVE.

So today with in Ferguson Missouri the white people do not feel that threat so keenly with the unarmed black teenager being summary executed on the street by the police, and that is because that terrorism is not directed at us whites.

It simply is not necessary to kill hundreds or thousands because just one (1) demonstration of violent cruelty sends the same message to everyone concerned.

One of the infamous Roman Dictators Caligula worded the idea like this = "Let them hate us so long as they fear us."

The people (some of us white folk too) protest as a way of defying the terror by showing that we are not afraid of the murderers or of the police.

True terrorism is a philosophy and a psychology of physical control, but it is morally and ethically weak.

Click to expand...

Are you serious about this or just trying to get a rise out of people?

ecofarm said:

I know what "makes" an event terrorism - targeting civilians for political gain.

Click to expand...

I agree with that.

And under that definition then the 9/11/2001 attack was not a true terrorist attack because they only targeted and only hit political targets, while the civilians killed were as our side calls them = collateral damage.

Even with Timothy McVeigh he only targeted a political and government building, so that was not terrorism either.

The USA bombing people around the world with drones (or with any weapon) is terrorism in its lowest and most dastardly form.


=======================================

Lutherf said:

Are you serious about this or just trying to get a rise out of people?

Click to expand...

That really is a silly question.

How about me asking this = Are you a real person? or are you just an anonymous computer generated icon?