Terrorists and fighting their narrative

[onesteptwostep]

This somewhat ties into the lions thread.

Let's say a group of terrorists have taken a number of hostages, let's say 3 terrorists to 5 hostages. Government forces come in, and whether by accident, collateral damage, or failure, they manage to kill both the terrorists and the hostages. If the point of the terrorists is to inflict fear into the populace, would it be justifiable to say, this might be counter intuitive, that all 8 killed were terrorists? This could or not could, be a part of a larger ideological conflict that's been spanning for quite a while.

The media may receive a different story than the family and loved ones. What do you think?

What might be the consequences of this?

 

[Sinny91]

This somewhat ties into the lions thread.

Let's say a group of terrorists have taken a number of hostages, let's say 3 terrorists to 5 hostages. Government forces come in, and whether by accident, collateral damage, or failure, they manage to kill both the terrorists and the hostages. If the point of the terrorists is to inflict fear into the populace, would it be justifiable to say, this might be counter intuitive, that all 8 killed were terrorists? This could or not could, be a part of a larger ideological conflict that's been spanning for quite a while.

The media may receive a different story than the family and loved ones. What do you think?

What might be the consequences of this?

I think those tactics are pulled all the time in regular psy-ops.

For example those bodies on MH17 were dead long before that plane ever hit the floor.

In fact, the things I have been discovering about the levels of deception between the government and media are almost beyond belief.

Of course, that's the point.

META! Muvafuckers.

 

[Rook]

It already happens, commonly with drone strikes.
Strikes aren't always done against viable targets, with men of a certain age killed by them automatically deemed terrorists without justifiable evidence.

The children, grandparents and other civilians killed in such strikes, and other forms of aerial massacring, are also not given much attention in western media.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Well yeah, but the question I'm asking here is, is it justifiable? What's the greater good here?

 

[Sinny91]

Well yeah, but the question I'm asking here is, is it justifiable? What's the greater good here?

No it's not.

UK, USA and Israel organise most this terrorist shit, and then spin it in their media rags.

'The War on Terror' is a western concept, and an unwinnable one.
It's designed to be cyclical.

I'm sure the rest of the world utilise similar methods.

I mean like what do Bush/Clintons, Cameron, Assad, and Putin all have in common? Secret oaths and secret agendas.

The government are pushing Islamaphobia, whilst simultaneously creating Islamic radicals/jihadists, most of whom are just private mercenaries loyal to none.

The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.

Oh and the 'greater good' is arms deals, and land grabs.

 

[onesteptwostep]

I think you're starting with a different premise here. If we go with your premise with the question at hand, then the question here is non-applicable.

 

[ruminator]

I'm trying to understand your scenario - is what justifiable? the terrorists pretending to have hostages? the US killing all 8? the US lying about it?

 

[onesteptwostep]

To put it short some hostages were killed along with terrorists, the government reports as all being terrorists who were eliminated, while family and loved ones receive the true story. The question is what would this entail, and would the results justify it?

 

[Jennywocky]

IOW, the government would look better claiming all the dead were terrorists (and just apologizing privately to the families), versus admitting they screwed up and/or weren't able to save people while taking down the terrorists?

It's hard to believe that one or more family wouldn't leak, in a scenario like that. (unless the government took one of them as a hostage. Ooops, ironic recursion!)

 

[ruminator]

To put it short some hostages were killed along with terrorists, the government reports as all being terrorists who were eliminated, while family and loved ones receive the true story. The question is what would this entail, and would the results justify it?

I don't think the results justify it. I think the innocents that died deserve to have their story told, and not get lumped in with terrorists.

 

[TBerg]

Truth is a social master category. Without it, you have no way of determining whether anything has a certain value.

Suppose someone told you that there was a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. You want to find gold, right? And you need to have directions to get to the end of the rainbow, which seems to have labyrinthine obstacles in between your departure point and your destination. How would you know you were going the right way? How would you know the pot of gold even existed? You could be meeting all kinds of dead ends, dangerous situations, and phantasmagorical destinations if the truth did not hold. That is why lying and hypocrisy is seen so unfavorably in the public eye.

 

[Sinny91]

Truth is a social master category. Without it, you have no way of determining whether anything has a certain value.

Suppose someone told you that there was a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. You want to find gold, right? And you need to have directions to get to the end of the rainbow, which seems to have labyrinthine obstacles in between your departure point and your destination. How would you know you were going the right way? How would you know the pot of gold even existed? You could be meeting all kinds of dead ends, dangerous situations, and phantasmagorical destinations if the truth did not hold. That is why lying and hypocrisy is seen so unfavorably in the public eye.

Oh, that guy I linked you to before, Jason Horsely, would have some very liminal stuff to say about that.

It's often said tat the British talk about the weather so much to avoid talking about other, more pertinent matters.

For a society who 'value' 'truth' so much, we sure are talented at obfuscating it, avoiding it, and hiding from it.

Not sure how much longer I'm online, but I'll see if I can find any of the relevant material... Make up for my earlier SF talk, haha. (SF, could easily stand for Shadow Function)

Just in case I can't find them - (articles, podcasts), try .. somewhere ..here:
http://auticulture.com/

 

[onesteptwostep]

Well a lot of this does have to do with truth, but this also has a bit to do with political momentum, just to provide some perspective. A year or so back, Japanese journalists were taken hostage and were killed, putting the nation in an uncomfortable position. Later on, this event eventually triggered the removal of the 'MacArthur' constitution which used to bar Japan from holding arms to wage war. Same with South Korea. Terrorist threats have allowed the passing of an information act which provides the intelligence agency of the state more authority at the expense of some civil liberties. The leftist party in Korea held a week long filibuster so they can stop the ratification of it, which in the end was fruitless.

There are ramifications and consequential costs it seems, when terrorists manage their objective, which is striking fear.

 

[Pyropyro]

Can we handle the truth?

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtpOtFIEkbs

Seriously though, it's best for the gov't to simply face the music. That way, protocols can be set on how to avoid this kind of scenario. They can also build damage control protocols to fix collateral and PR issues.

 

[Sinny91]

Can we handle the truth?

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtpOtFIEkbs

Seriously though, it's best for the gov't to simply face the music. That way, protocols can be set on how to avoid this kind of scenario. They can also build damage control protocols to fix collateral and PR issues.

Damage control like crisis actors and fake airplane disappearances!!

Youknow, just to keep us guessing!

 

[Cognisant]

The shrewd thing to do would be to be totally honest about it and put the individual government agents on trial, now the trial will either conclude that they were incompetent in which case it was their fault[/B] so they go to jail and justice is served. Or the trial will reveal that the terrorists did the Joker thing with hostages tied up with guns taped to their hands in which case the agents get therapy and everyone gets to hate the terrorists even more.

In government* never assume there's a conspiracy where the explanation could be incompetence.

*: The public service, not that circus with the politicians.

It's not like I work for the government or anything.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Well yeah, but the question I'm asking here is, is it justifiable? What's the greater good here?

That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

When government is acting on its own agency ignoring the consent of the governed and the rights of the citizens there is zero justification for its terrorist policy.


It may be an effective strategy who knows, concealing information works to the governments advantage anyway so could we even know if their "strategy" backfired and put us in a worse place? Maybe that's what caused the 9/11 attacks in the US?

That's why I'd say transparency is always the overriding goal, once your country is infiltrated by terrorists and you cannot tell civilian from militant you're going to need the trust, courage, and efficacy of the populace to keep the country from tearing itself apart.

 

[Haim]

Fear is but one tool of terrorist, the public emotions are all the tools."We are but a small group of "freedom" fighters/citizens fighting the evil big country" talking right to the public irrationality, and it is working, costing the country unproportionally to a small weak groups.

Sinny, who are and where are exactly are these so called American and Isreali (Jewish) terrorist?where can you sign in?do you have any line of logic that actually make sense beyond your wishfull thinking?that USA tell lies and might have some low possibly interest for 9/11 does not make it realty as the chance for it is very low.

 

[Sinny91]

Fear is but one tool of terrorist, the public emotions are all the tools."We are but a small group of "freedom" fighters/citizens fighting the evil big country" talking right to the public irrationality, and it is working, costing the country unproportionally to a small weak groups.

Sinny, who are and where are exactly are these so called American and Isreali (Jewish) terrorist?where can you sign in?do you have any line of logic that actually make sense beyond your wishfull thinking? that USA tell lies and might have some low possibly interest for 9/11 does not make it realty as the chance for it is very low.

I'm afraid I don't have the bandwidth to open that can of worms Haim!!!

LOL.

Really I don't, I could get cut off any minute.

Not like anything I say will alter your Jewish Justifications anyway.

 

[Haim]

Of course terrorists work on emotions, emotions that skip any facts,logic,realty and arguments.I know very well that all I say is ignored, as the source of these opinions are emotions, I don't even speak that language.Basically it is me speaking to myself, having fun by thinking.
I can not counter your feelings, even when they blind you to realty which is more than only black and white like your conspires, the realty is even more than grey, there are no divisions at all,things just happen.Terrorists are using your emotions, your hate for occupation makes you label all occupations as the same evil thing without considering case by case, makes you ignore that almost every land on earth was occupied at some time and that occupations had benefits.The mind is a simple thing ideas are connected to emotions, link "bad" emotions to the ideas you want and you make that person opinion to your favor, every time he will think on these ideas a connotation to the emotions will be made, that person ideas source are emotions, therefore changing known facts contradicting logic does not matter .

 

[TBerg]

I wonder how many similarities Jewish Justification shares with Irish Justification.

 

[Sinny91]

I wonder how many similarities Jewish Justification shares with Irish Justification.

In fact, it's not the Jewish cause that the Irish reflect, it is the Palestinian first and foremost... All that liberal democracy your neo-con friends are spreading just won't keep it's self out of other peoples lands.

'Bombs of freedom' will be met with bombs of freedom.

 

[TBerg]

Is that why so many Irish nationalists supported the Nazis against the British too?

 

[Haim]

In fact, it's not the Jewish cause that the Irish reflect, it is the Palestinian first and foremost... All that liberal democracy your neo-con friends are spreading just won't keep it's self out of other peoples lands.

'Bombs of freedom' will be met with bombs of freedom.

The mind is a simple thing, just link "Palestinian situation" idea and the emotions you have on Irish situation, and you will feel them every time you think of the Palestinians, and that feelings guide you to think a certain things which are not objective,not a clear look on the realty of things(hence wishful thinking, feelings that make ideas).
From wiki "Wishful thinking is the formation of beliefs and making decisions according to what might be pleasing to imagine instead of by appealing to evidence, rationality, or reality."

 

[Sinny91]

The mind is a simple thing, just link "Palestinian situation" idea and the emotions you have on Irish situation, and you will feel them every time you think of the Palestinians, and that feelings guide you to think a certain things which are not objective,not a clear look on the realty of things(hence wishful thinking, feelings that make ideas).

That may be the case, but I don't get your point.

You are Israeli, therefore you are steeped in just as much emotional investment as me or anyone in a even remotely similar situation.

I don't recognise your nation states right to exist, I view your nation state as an occupying terrorist organisation.

 

[Sinny91]

Is that why so many Irish nationalists supported the Nazis against the British too?

Why are you making this about Ireland?

Nothing compares to America, EXCEPT bloody Britain. (and Israel)
When it come's to Nazi's, or anything for that matter.

Britain was and still is occupying Ireland. What more needs to be said.

Israel is the arm of US & UK foreign policy...

I really don't see whats up for debate.

 

[TBerg]

I suppose all Irish need to check their ancestral records to see which of them can stand as the One True Irishman.

 

[Sinny91]

Rich, coming from an 'American'.

Anyway, I really don't think a debate between me a Neo-Con and an Israeli will achieve anything productive.

lol.

 

[TBerg]

Are you really saying that I am not Irish just because my ancestors may or may not have been from Ulster and may or may not have mixed with Scots and Anglo-Normans?

My Irish name dates back to a king of Ulster.

 

[Sinny91]

You quite clearly identify as American, based on your pro #Murica! posting history.

If you are making a claim to Irish identity it's a weak one, and is inconsequential... and I don't see what bearing it has on our conversation?

 

[TBerg]

Your whole contention is that the residents of Ulster are occupiers who are not entitled to vote on their own political future. How will you realize this? More bombs? And will those who fled the famine not be entitled to a right of return? Will you hold Ireland to the same standard as Palestine?

 

[Haim]

Yes I am human too, but I try to look beyond labels of good and bad, looking at the world of just things that happen,like a series of systems.The system is made of people, where one person is also a system by himself, and if you look at the world as just that your own emotions will have less influence.
For example "Bob hit my friend Martin", of course you will have emotions in favor of Martin, but if your idea of the situation is not linked to your emotions of it you can think of it as cause and effect, than you will ask "why?" and you will get somewhere.Most people will just automatically label Bob as bad, the key is by not labeling but to actually look at the case which is a conflict of interests.

When politician promise things and do not make them most people will just label the politician as untrustworthy and finish the day, I will think of why systematically he does that, well at first he need votes or he might actually believe his promises, but then faced with the realty of the government he will need to compromise with other politicians and budget and actually implementing the promise in realty is a lot more complex and he will probably realize it was a bad promise in the first place if it was made to realty.

It is not that I think Palestinian "bad" Israeli "good" but as some of the Palestinians interests conflicting Israel interests, and I try to look beyond, why don't they make a proper country for themselves now?what systematic reason makes them hate Israel?(if you were to know and understand Palestinians you will see than they don't really care for occupation, and no they are very different from the Arabs you know and from the Irish, it is all a mask for the world, they use the world emotions as a tool)
The source of my opinion is not the hate of Palestinians and not a love for my country, but just and observation of realty, from that observation then come emotions.It is not that I think my country is perfect and I am not blind to that we make the Palestinians life hard in some aspects(and better in others), I don't ignore facts nor arguments.