There is trouble in Iran

[WolfOfOdin]

Was Neda gunned down because she didn't have her head garment on in public? She has been labeled a "terrorist" by Iran forces... what... a 16 year old musician who wants a revote stands for terrorism in that country? Man, that video was brutal.

She was shot down by the government, if they didn't label her terrorist it would be as good as accepting they weren't entitled to kill her, and that's not wise.

The worst is that they're denying her any type of memorial service.....and the government is burying all the people killed in graves set aside, the bodies taken by the government.

 

[Denbrought]

Was Neda gunned down because she didn't have her head garment on in public? She has been labeled a "terrorist" by Iran forces... what... a 16 year old musician who wants a revote stands for terrorism in that country? Man, that video was brutal.

She was shot down by the government, if they didn't label her terrorist it would be as good as accepting they weren't entitled to kill her, and that's not wise.

The worst is that they're denying her any type of memorial service.....and the government is burying all the people killed in graves set aside, the bodies taken by the government.

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

 

[JCM]

GB did evict two Iranian ambassadors, I think.

Gasbandit?

Anyway, fuck Brazil and our neutrality, which means even if Iran´s president is a pedophile who eats roasted babies and kittens for dinner while masturbation over the pope, we still will allow Iran to have its embassies and not do anything.

 

[Espy]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

 

[Denbrought]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

 

[bhamv2]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

Do you mean people who have been deemed terrorists in Spain aren't even allowed a funeral? If so, I agree that's a bit much. But if it's just that the terrorist acts etc of the person aren't allowed to be publicly lauded, then there isn't really anything wrong with that.

Hmm, now that I've typed it out, it seems there's a rather large gap between those two options.

 

[Denbrought]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

Do you mean people who have been deemed terrorists in Spain aren't even allowed a funeral? If so, I agree that's a bit much. But if it's just that the terrorist acts etc of the person aren't allowed to be publicly lauded, then there isn't really anything wrong with that.

Hmm, now that I've typed it out, it seems there's a rather large gap between those two options.

It's more of a legal witch hunt syndrome. Unless you cry out loud that you are enraged at their mere existence and spend a copious amount of time and effort in demonstrating so, you'll be labelled antidemocratic or somesuch (and that leads to whole political parties being outlawed, people being harassed, etc). I'll look it up later but iirc we do have laws against honouring the memory of such people.

But hey, it's also illegal to burn a picture of the king, so what do I know.

 

[Chibibar]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

So remembering a person (basically is what memorial is about, remember the deed of the person more or less) a drunk driver = terrorist?

edit: I don't think we should "idolize" i.e. memorial of a terrorist, but refuse them to be buried is a different matter I think.

 

[JCM]

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

Do you mean people who have been deemed terrorists in Spain aren't even allowed a funeral? If so, I agree that's a bit much. But if it's just that the terrorist acts etc of the person aren't allowed to be publicly lauded, then there isn't really anything wrong with that.

Hmm, now that I've typed it out, it seems there's a rather large gap between those two options.

It's more of a legal witch hunt syndrome. Unless you cry out loud that you are enraged at their mere existence and spend a copious amount of time and effort in demonstrating so, you'll be labelled antidemocratic or somesuch (and that leads to whole political parties being outlawed, people being harassed, etc). I'll look it up later but iirc we do have laws against honouring the memory of such people.

But hey, it's also illegal to burn a picture of the king, so what do I know.

Not to mention that every other year, some terrorist group suddenly becomes a freedom fighter in the eyes of the West (IRA for example), and some freedom fighters the West supports are cast as terrorist (the Taliban, post-Sept 11)

 

[Espy]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

How would that go...

"Bob was a good guy, let's remember him for his 9-5 job at the convenience store back in 88, the macaroni art he made for his mom in 79 and the 32 schoolchildren he killed when he blew himself up, the families who have been torn apart, the bus driver who was literally torn in half by the bomb blast."
Yeah... I agree. They should be memorialized as long as we can be honest.

 

[Denbrought]

Terrorists in Spain aren't allowed a memorial or any kind of remembrance either, for good or for bad (I find it despicable, but hey, that makes me antidemocratic).

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

How would that go...

"Bob was a good guy, let's remember him for his 9-5 job at the convenience store back in 88, the macaroni art he made for his mom in 79 and the 32 schoolchildren he killed when he blew himself up, the families who have been torn apart, the bus driver who was literally torn in half by the bomb blast."
Yeah... I agree. They should be memorialized as long as we can be honest.

People make errors, they still existed. Also, omitting the truth is not lying, and in a memorial you're supposed to showcase the good in one person's life.

 

[sixpackshaker]

People make errors, they still existed. Also, omitting the truth is not lying, and in a memorial you're supposed to showcase the good in one person's life.

Strapping dynamite to your chest is not an error. It is an act of volition. The group that the terrorist belongs to will use the occasion to walk down the streets, wave propaganda, and tell everyone what a good boy he was in killing a bunch of school children.

 

[Denbrought]

People make errors, they still existed. Also, omitting the truth is not lying, and in a memorial you're supposed to showcase the good in one person's life.

Strapping dynamite to your chest is not an error. It is an act of volition. The group that the terrorist belongs to will use the occasion to walk down the streets, wave propaganda, and tell everyone what a good boy he was in killing a bunch of school children.

So you believe people are not capable of errors of judgement? Oh man, how wonderful the world you live in must be. Sorry but I'll keep on believing that most people, to not say all, go on their lives misled and are tantamount to little children. So I'm not judgemental after they're dead.

 

[Chibibar]

People make errors, they still existed. Also, omitting the truth is not lying, and in a memorial you're supposed to showcase the good in one person's life.

Strapping dynamite to your chest is not an error. It is an act of volition. The group that the terrorist belongs to will use the occasion to walk down the streets, wave propaganda, and tell everyone what a good boy he was in killing a bunch of school children.

So you believe people are not capable of errors of judgement? Oh man, how wonderful the world you live in must be. Sorry but I'll keep on believing that most people, to not say all, go on their lives misled and are tantamount to little children. So I'm not judgemental after they're dead.

People ARE capable of error in judgment, but there is a fine line where you cross it. Lets say you want to blow up your school and you decide to threat first, that is error in judgment, but if you plan it for months even YEARS and eventually go with it, that is no longer an error in judgment.

 

[Denbrought]

Given enough misguidance and delusion, a man is capable of going to great lengths to be wrong.

 

[Chibibar]

Given enough misguidance and delusion, a man is capable of going to great lengths to be wrong.

Then it is no longer error in judgment.

Given in any society even if the rest of the population maybe "brain wash" (like China since it is only reference I can make from experience) there are some people who rise above the delusion and misguidance and make the right decision on their own. That is what Free will is all about. Sure you can blindly follow someone, but you chose to do so cause you don't choose to think for yourself. It is a choice. It is an act that YOU do. I am not sure on the fact on these suicide bombers, but most of them are volunteer if I read it correct cause they believe in something. They believe that killing everyone else who doesn't follow them is a good thing. Many religion in the past did thought the same thing but has grown past that (like the Crusade) because genocide is a bad thing (well killing people is just bad overall)

 

[Denbrought]

I'm not getting you. Are you saying that just because it's a person's decision it automatically is their path to trace, and it marks their worth? I believe that a person's only quality is their existence and, once dead, their having existed. Deeds and crimes are of little importance once you're gone, might as well accept that and don't judge those that can't defend their footsteps.

 

[Chibibar]

I'm not getting you. Are you saying that just because it's a person's decision it automatically is their path to trace, and it marks their worth? I believe that a person's only quality is their existence and, once dead, their having existed. Deeds and crimes are of little importance once you're gone, might as well accept that and don't judge those that can't defend their footsteps.

that is how it is in almost all society.

How do you judge your worth? how does other judge you? by your action, by your deeds. Even in most holy book (any really) are judge by your action, your decisions, your deed in life.

I have lost a few friends and relatives and all their memorial service reflect their deeds, action and kind of person they once was and we cherish that.

Some crime can be forgiven, but some crime last a lifetime and beyond. If that crime is genocide (like Hitler), he shouldn't be idolize and worship (like some white supremist do) cause what he did was bad. He made that choice and made other people follow that idealism.

Memorial service is a service to reflect the memory of the person. We are talking about a memorial for a person. If a person is just going to buried and forgotten I have no problem with that. But I do have a problem people "memorize" (I think that is a good word) a person who commit nothing but bad deeds in their live and destroy lives of many (one, ten, hundred, thousands)

 

[Denbrought]

And that's why it's my opinion and not yours. I'm explaining myself, not trying to convert you :tongue:

 

[MindDetective]

Why does a person automatically deserve a memorial?

 

[Chibibar]

And that's why it's my opinion and not yours. I'm explaining myself, not trying to convert you :tongue:

Well I am trying to understand that, in your view, everyone should have a memorial? or everyone should have the right be buried? (I think what spark this debate is Spain will not allow memorial of terrorist, I wasn't sure about the bury part)

 

[Denbrought]

It's more that I hate when people will judge, iconify, martirize, damn, blah blah blah the dead. Too many heroes and villains have been created once dead.

 

[Espy]

... you find it despicable that terrorists aren't given a memorial or remembrance? I just want to make sure I'm reading you right...

Yeah, they're still human beings that died due to some stupid decisions. I see them the same as drunk drivers that get killed in an accident along with another car's whole family.

How would that go...

"Bob was a good guy, let's remember him for his 9-5 job at the convenience store back in 88, the macaroni art he made for his mom in 79 and the 32 schoolchildren he killed when he blew himself up, the families who have been torn apart, the bus driver who was literally torn in half by the bomb blast."
Yeah... I agree. They should be memorialized as long as we can be honest.

People make errors, they still existed. Also, omitting the truth is not lying, and in a memorial you're supposed to showcase the good in one person's life.

...I'm speechless.

Well, except for that.
And this.
And this.
Dammit.

 

[sixpackshaker]

It's more that I hate when people will judge, iconify, martirize, damn, blah blah blah the dead. Too many heroes and villains have been created once dead.

I think that is why Spain denies the memorials for terrorists, to cut down on making heroes/villains out of these guys. Just see how out of control the funerals for terrorists get in Gaza and other places.

 

[@Li3n]

Ah, good all salting the earth... weirdly we still know about Carthage...

 

[strawman]

In before Godwin's law is invoked all over Denbought's perspective...



-Adam

 

[Denbrought]

It's more that I hate when people will judge, iconify, martirize, damn, blah blah blah the dead. Too many heroes and villains have been created once dead.

I think that is why Spain denies the memorials for terrorists, to cut down on making heroes/villains out of these guys. Just see how out of control the funerals for terrorists get in Gaza and other places.

Yet they make heroes, martyrs and the epitomes of hispanic valour of each and every one of the victims. I don't like one sided crap.

 

[strawman]

Yet they make heroes, martyrs and the epitomes of hispanic valour of each and every one of the victims. I don't like one sided crap.

Why should society provide the same benefits for one that chooses not to participate in that society? Why should they recognize someone that hates that society? What benefit does society get from allowing others to laud and honor such a person?

This is no different than putting someone in prison - if they choose not to participate in society by breaking the laws and rules, they are locked up and the rights they enjoyed are denied.

Further, they knew when they decided to be terrorists that if they died they would not be honored, so they must have accepted that outcome.

Given that they don't deserve it, and they chose not to have such honor, what argument still exists that it is a "right" they should have as a human being?

Lastly, if they are dead, then what rights do they have at all?

At best, one might argue that their living family should have to right to mourn them in whatever fashion they so desire - they may have rights that are being trampled on by the gov't, but the dead certainly have few, if any, rights, especially if they intentionally chose a path divergent from what society has deemed acceptable.

-Adam

 

[Denbrought]

Stieny, the dead victims didn't choose to be given homage ~_~ I don't argue that society shuns or stops shunning yadder yadder. I'm just saying I don't like posthumous interaction other than to acknowledge the person and for history-keeping purpouses.

Behind the game of societies we live in there's a bigger one called race, I choose to dance in that groove.

 

[GasBandit]

GB did evict two Iranian ambassadors, I think.

Gasbandit?

Oh is THAT who those guys were? All I know is I rolled up my sleeves and grabbed these two trouble makers, threw em off the curb and said "Listen here, pally! I..."

Oh wait, I think he meant Great Britain.

 

[Denbrought]

GB did evict two Iranian ambassadors, I think.

Gasbandit?

Oh is THAT who those guys were? All I know is I rolled up my sleeves and grabbed these two trouble makers, threw em off the curb and said "Listen here, pally! I..."

Oh wait, I think he meant Great Britain.

Or any of these: http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/GB

 

[@Li3n]

This is no different than putting someone in prison - if they choose not to participate in society by breaking the laws and rules, they are locked up and the rights they enjoyed are denied.

Like the right to be Spanish even if you don't want to?!


And unless the government is providing the funeral this is denying them a right some might consider basic. (that's why they don;t torture people in jails anymore).

Further, they knew when they decided to be terrorists that if they died they would not be honored, so they must have accepted that outcome.

And that's where you proven that you haven't even tried to think why ppl would blow themselves up...

 

[strawman]

This is no different than putting someone in prison - if they choose not to participate in society by breaking the laws and rules, they are locked up and the rights they enjoyed are denied.

Like the right to be Spanish even if you don't want to?!

I don't understand what you mean by this. My best guess is that you believe that the right to be spanish is denied to dead terrorists? Sorry if I misunderstand...

And unless the government is providing the funeral this is denying them a right some might consider basic. (that's why they don;t torture people in jails anymore).

Yes, some people believe that burials and memorial services should be basic rights fundamental to human beings.

Some don't.

Participate in your political process if you believe this should be changed, and see if you can get society as a whole to agree with you.

Further, they knew when they decided to be terrorists that if they died they would not be honored, so they must have accepted that outcome.

And that's where you proven that you haven't even tried to think why ppl would blow themselves up...

They blow themselves up to KILL other innocent human beings to get attention.

They may think their cause is greater than the life of an uninvolved child, and therefore they feel it's ok to blow up a bus full of children.

There are perishingly few causes that are worth that cost.

Please tell me the causes that you believe are worth far more than a few uninvolved human beings - who had rights that the terrorist chose to remove from them. Then explain to me how killing these people will, with certainty, move the cause forward significantly.

Now give me some examples where "revolutionaries" targeted innocent civilians, and succeeded primarily due to the murders they caused.

-Adam

 

[Chibibar]

It's more that I hate when people will judge, iconify, martirize, damn, blah blah blah the dead. Too many heroes and villains have been created once dead.

I think that is why Spain denies the memorials for terrorists, to cut down on making heroes/villains out of these guys. Just see how out of control the funerals for terrorists get in Gaza and other places.

Yet they make heroes, martyrs and the epitomes of hispanic valour of each and every one of the victims. I don't like one sided crap.

Ah. I understand now. I think.

I can see that you don't agree the one sided view on the homage of the dead. I don't think it is FOR the dead per se. It is for the living. People are funny creature. People need something to look up to. A person who lived a good life and show GOOD example of what a "good" person should be or at least did a good deed (or several like Mother Theresa) to set example of other living people to follow it. Technically, the person is dead. The dead itself probably doesn't really care if they have a memorial or not. It is the living. The society closure or acceptance.

The memorial service is to show the good person or what people should follow. Restricting the "celebration" for the "bad" people (i.e. Terrorist) so they are not "worship" or "idolize" like the good people.

That is what I see.

 

[Denbrought]

Yes, and it irks me. But eh, that's like you not liking a type of food, personal preferences 'n all.