Reuters Journalism "Definition" Of Murder, Today
Leonardo Been
15 October 2003
"Definitions" used by established journalism, in today's news:
1. murder = "harsh human rights records"
2. murder = "violence between Muslims and Christians in the region
following months of relative peace"
murdered = "have died"
3. murder = "attack that killed"
4. attempted murder = "a car-tire explosion"
5. exposing crimes of murder and torture = "showing disrespect"
"causing trouble"
6. murderers = "rebels"
7. murder = "an incident occurred"
___________
References:
- 'The First International Law (Version 2.0) - {HRI 20021124-V2.0}'
(24 November 2002 - Version 2.0 on 23 Sept 2003)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0309230512.8925eb9%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
- 'The Trinity Of Science - Truth, Love and Beauty (Version 2.0)
{HRI 20030307-pi-1-V2.0}' (7 March 2003 - V2.0 on 5 October 2003)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0310051126.7e9b6a32%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
___________________________
For in-depth understanding:
'The Mafia Code Against Mankind (Version 2.0)
- {HRI 20021018-V2.0}' (18 October 2002 - V2.0 on 10 October 2003)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0310101357.3ecabe19%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
________
Sources:
1. murder = "harsh human rights records"
'Saudi Arabia, facing international criticism over its harsh human
rights record, is joining a regional trend toward cautious
experiments with liberalization.'
(Wednesday, October 15, 2003 2:50 a.m. ET - RIYADH (Reuters))
2. murder = "violence between Muslims and Christians in the region
following months of relative peace"
murdered = "have died"
'At least 10 people died in attacks on four mostly Christian villages
on Friday and Saturday, raising fears of an upsurge in violence
between Muslims and Christians in the region following months of
relative peace.
At least 2,000 people have died since the conflict first erupted in
1999.'
3. murder = "attack that killed"
'The attacks on Saturday by similarly dressed groups killed at least
eight people in three villages. Police have said that they are
investigating the raids but have made no arrests.'
4. attempted murder = "a car-tire explosion"
'Central Sulawesi police spokesman Agus Sugianto downplayed the
reports, saying: "We can't say that it was a bomb at this stage. It
could've been a tire explosion."'
(Wednesday, October 15, 2003 2:47 a.m. ET - JAKARTA (Reuters))
5. exposing crimes = "showing disrespect," "causing trouble."
'Thai religious authorities have warned Falun Gong members not to
show disrespect to Chinese leaders during the APEC summit,'
'"The Thai government has told Falun Gong not to cause trouble
during APEC,"'
(Wednesday, October 15, 2003 1:31 a.m. ET - BEIJING (Reuters))
6. murderers = "rebels"
7. murder = "an incident occurred"
'Wednesday October 15, 09:27 AM - Rebels kill 22 in Uganda bar attack
- KAMPALA (Reuters) - Rebels of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA)
have raided a bar in Lira district in northern Uganda, rounding up
bar patrons and gunning them down, killing all 22 of them, an army
spokesman says.
"The incident occurred just after 7 p.m. local time (5 p.m. British
time) when about 15 rebels rounded up the four women and 18 men and
shot them to death," army spokesman, Second Lieutenant Chris Magezi
told Reuters.'
----- End
David Johnston
wrote:
>Reuters Journalism "Definition" Of Murder, Today
>
> 15 October 2003
>
>"Definitions" used by established journalism, in today's news:
>
>1. murder = "harsh human rights records"
I'm sorry, were you unaware that if a killing is legal, it isn't a
murder?
Leonardo Been
We have had 're-definition of words' described in the famous book
'1984' by George Orwell.
Whether it has been made legal or not, to murder someone is still
murder. Whether it is called by the name of 'redrum' or
'expialidocious,' murder is still murder.
This is precisely where journalism comes in: To undo such cover-ups,
such hiding of murder, by Criminal Minds.
Murder is very precisely definable, regardless of whether some murder
is "legal" or not, in some country or system.
You can define 'murder' already by looking at the emotions of it, so
it really is not that difficult.
Now must I assume, that you earn a living at Reuters?
Yours kindly,
Leonardo
rgo...@telusplanet.net (David Johnston) wrote in message news:<3f8d250c...@news.telusplanet.net>...
Alun Harford
> 6. murderers = "rebels"
> 7. murder = "an incident occurred"
>
> 'Wednesday October 15, 09:27 AM - Rebels kill 22 in Uganda bar attack
> - KAMPALA (Reuters) - Rebels of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA)
> have raided a bar in Lira district in northern Uganda, rounding up
> bar patrons and gunning them down, killing all 22 of them, an army
> spokesman says.
>
> "The incident occurred just after 7 p.m. local time (5 p.m. British
> time) when about 15 rebels rounded up the four women and 18 men and
> shot them to death," army spokesman, Second Lieutenant Chris Magezi
> told Reuters.'
I'd argue that they weren't murderers, nor were they rebels.
As abducted children, they didn't exactly have a lot of choice about
what they were doing.
The following is taken from Huamn Rights Watch: Abducted and Abused
(an up-to-date report)
It's long, so I snipped it quite seriously. The origional is avaliable
from http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/uganda0703/uganda0703a-04.htm#P670_110726
.
I also highlighted some bits that particularly highlight my point.
It's quite long, but it's a big issue. (and most people find it
shocking at first so at least it's boring)
Abduction and Abuses Against Abductees
That night, the LRA came abducting people in our village, and some
neighbors led them to our house. They abducted all five of us boys at
the same time. I was the fifth one. . . . We were told by the LRA not
to think about home, about our mother or father. If we did, then they
would kill us. Better to think now that I am a soldier fighting to
liberate the country. There were twenty-eight abducted from our
village that night. . . . We were all tied up and attached to one
another in a row. After we were tied up, they started to beat us
randomly, they beat us up with sticks.
Martin P., abducted in February 2002 at age twelve.
What did I do with the LRA during my time in captivity? Killed people,
beat up people, and looted property. This was under order from the
commanders.
James K., abducted in May 2002 at age sixteen
Conservative estimates place the total number of children abducted by
the LRA since the beginning of the conflict in 1986 at more than
20,000. The abducted children who survive deliberate killing and
disease are brutalized, are forced to serve the LRA army as conscripts
and sex slaves, and are forced to commit crimes themselves.
An estimated 8,400 children have been abducted in the year of June
2002-May 2003- more than any previous year of the conflict and a sharp
increase from the less than one hundred children abducted in 2001. For
the entire period of 1990-2001, UNICEF says that 12,000 children were
registered as abducted, making more than 20,000 child abductees. Based
on reports from local volunteers, the ARLPI reports that in the period
starting in 2002, children account for approximately three of every
four abductions.
...
The children who are abducted are younger than before. A priest
familiar with LRA abuses in the north referred to cases where children
aged twelve and older were sent back home by the LRA. "They want
younger children, those whose minds can be transformed in a matter of
weeks."9 The director of the World Vision rehabilitation center for
former LRA soldiers in Gulu told Human Rights Watch, "Now, children of
nine or ten are being abducted. It used to be thirteen, fourteen or
fifteen. Now, children of fifteen and sixteen are being released. [The
LRA is] more interested in the younger ones."
...
For children who are abducted, captivity can last for years.
Re-abduction is not uncommon, and the World Vision rehabilitation
center for former LRA abducted child soldiers in Gulu reported that
since 2000, at least eighteen children who passed through the center
were re-abducted and escaped for a second time.
*****************************************************************************
Mark T., seventeen, from Pader district, has an older brother named
Julius who had been abducted by the LRA several years ago. After
Julius escaped in 1997, the LRA went to his village to look for him
and when they failed to find him, killed his parents instead. Julius
was re-abducted in August 2002.
*****************************************************************************
Preadolescent girls are among the favorite LRA abduction targets; the
LRA believes these girls are free of sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs). They are subjected to continual beatings as servants of LRA
officers and soldiers after capture. When they are deemed sexually
mature, they are "given" to LRA officers as "wives."
Susan A. was abducted in October 2002 when she was twelve. She was
returning from her grandmother's house with her older sister at about
four in the afternoon when they met a group of eight LRA men. They
beat her older sister badly and left her on the roadside. "They wanted
to know where the gumboots (rubber boots) were, but she wouldn't tell
them," Susan A. said. As they moved through the bush with Susan A.,
the LRA abducted more children, including an eleven-year old girl whom
Susan A. knew.
Janet W. was also twelve when she was abducted in late November 2002
together with two of her sisters. At another house, the LRA abducted
four boys, perhaps thirteen or fourteen years old, and then proceeded
to the home of Janet W.'s uncle. There, Janet W. and her sisters found
that their father had also been abducted. The LRA tied the young
abductees together and gave them loot to carry.
Janet W. reported, "Thirty-two were abducted from the village, both
children and adults. I was the youngest, at age twelve."
The following day the LRA beat the adult captives, among them Janet
W.'s father, whom they left for dead. They "told the old people,
including my father, to lie down on the ground. They started beating
them with a machete. They cut him badly and left him there." Later,
she heard that her father managed to survive and reach home. Of her
two sisters, one was eventually released; the other is still in
captivity.
Children are often taken in large numbers. John W. reported that
thirty-eight children, mostly boys and girls in primary school, were
taken when he was abducted in July 2002. Martin P. was taken with
twenty-eight boys from his village in February 2002. Grace T. said
that in July 2002, she was abducted with seven other children, but
soon joined a larger group of at least seventy new abductees.
Children and adult abductees are repeatedly told they will be killed
if they try to run away. When Edward T. was abducted from his home in
July 2002, he was tied to other abductees and forced to carry a large
bag of posho (maize meal) on his head. "I kept thinking that I would
run away as soon as I could, but then I saw someone who tried to run,
was captured and killed. He was shot. After I saw that, I was afraid
and realized I may never be able to run away."
A day or two after their abduction, the adults and children not
released or killed by the LRA are initiated. First they are beaten,
purportedly to "harden" them to life as soldiers. Thirteen-year-old
Martin P. was told by the LRA that "they were beating us to give us
strength, so not to fear what would lie in store for us in the
future."
Children were warned not to cry during the beatings or they would be
killed. Sixteen-year-old John W. was beaten together with fourteen
others; a fifteen-year-old boy in his group cried out. That boy was
clubbed on the back of the head and killed.
Seventeen-year-old Mark T. described how the LRA soldiers beat the
group of twenty-three new recruits:
They gave us 150 strokes of the cane, and eight slaps with the machete
on the back. . . . For the cane we were made to lie on the stomach and
then the soldiers would beat us on the buttocks. . . . For the
machete, we were made to bend over at the waist, and then the soldiers
would use the blunt end of it to beat us on the back.
Grace T. told Human Rights Watch that after she was abducted in July
2002, the LRA told her and the other abductees, "Now we want to train
you to be soldiers, but first we must harden you by beating you twenty
strokes." This sixteen-year-old was abducted with two of her sisters
and a younger brother, age fourteen. She said they were all stripped
naked in preparation for beating.
One of Grace's sisters asked to put on her clothes before being
beaten. The LRA threatened to kill her. Grace T. and her other sister
and brother pleaded for her life, offering to serve as LRA soldiers
willingly. All were then beaten on the back repeatedly (not just the
twenty strokes promised), first with a stick, and then with a machete.
****************************************************************************
After the beatings, a ritual usually took place. Children were smeared
with shea nut oil. The oil was placed on each child's forehead, chest,
back, hands, and feet in the sign of the cross. Brenda O. explained
what this meant: after being smeared with oil, "then you are no longer
with your mother and father, but for the LRA. If you leave, they will
kill you." Some abductees were told or believed that the shea nut oil
would make it easier for the LRA to find them should they try to
escape. Samuel B. said that when he was anointed with shea nut oil, he
was told "that it would make us not escape, for if we would try, this
would help them track us down and find us."
****************************************************************************
[NOTE: As a tactic, the above seems to work fairly well. It seems to
form the backbone of the LRAs semi-religious bits]
Brutality
Early on when we were captured, the LRA explained to us that all five
brothers couldn't serve in the LRA because we would not perform well.
So they tied up my two younger brothers and invited us to watch. Then
they beat them with sticks until the two of them died. They told us it
would give us strength to fight. My youngest brother was nine years
old.
Martin P., age thirteen
Many of the abducted children and adults interviewed for this report
were forced to assist in the killing of others, often children and
even relatives. Those made to participate in the beating or trampling
of fellow abductees received a powerful message about their fate if
they attempted escape.
The practice of using the recently abducted children and adults to
collectively kill fosters guilt and fear among them and acts as a
deterrent from attempting escape. These brutal and dehumanizing
tactics-used to control the children especially-make their personal
rehabilitation and reintegration into their home communities that much
more difficult.
Many former captives interviewed by Human Rights Watch, if not forced
to participate in crimes, were forced to watch helplessly the
beatings, tying of abductees, killings, abductions, rape, and
slaughtering of others, sometimes their closest relatives.
*****************************************************************************
Robert O., a twelve-year-old boy from Opit camp-who was in early 2003
staying in Gulu town for safety-was abducted in July 2002 and forced
to watch the LRA kill his mother in front of him. A fourteen-year-old
boy and his younger brother abducted on August 19, 2002 were forced to
watch when the LRA killed their father. "We were forced to watch other
captives to be killed with bayonets. You were not allowed to turn your
head [away]."
*****************************************************************************
*****************************************************************************
A twenty-year-old woman, abducted in March 1996 by the LRA from Pabbo
in Kilak County, was held by -or "stayed with," as the ex-captives
describe it-the LRA for more than six years. She was forced to kill
four people with sticks, and was threatened that if she refused to
kill them, she would be killed herself.
*****************************************************************************
*****************************************************************************
Some of the children, while too afraid to refuse the orders of the
LRA, nevertheless spoke later with difficulty about performing these
killings. They feared the spirits of the dead children and possible
revenge. They had recurring memories of the brutality they were forced
to perform.
*****************************************************************************
James K. told Human Rights Watch:
[A] group of children escaped. Two girls, aged fourteen, were
[re]captured. They were given to the group of child abductees and we
were told that we must kill them with clubs. Every one of the new
recruits was made to participate. We were warned that if we ever tried
to escape, we would be killed in the same manner.
According to seventeen-year-old Samuel B., he was spared from killing
personally-but he was forced commit another reprehensible act: to
mutilate the corpse of a boy beaten to death by other child abductees,
because the boy had tried to escape. "One time I was ordered to cut up
a dead body with a knife. I was then forced to pick up the pieces of
flesh and throw them down on the ground to show my loyalty."
Mark T., also seventeen years old, spoke of one death by trampling,
also administered by new recruits under orders, which occurred when
the abductees were marching towards Pajule in Pader district. The
eighteen-year-old male victim had tried to escape. Mark T. said,
"Soldiers laid him on the ground and told us to step on him. All the
new recruits participated-we trampled him to death."
During his time with the LRA, other children escaped, and seven of
these were caught. They were all killed, either by or in front of the
other young abductees: "Two were hacked to death with machetes and
five were clubbed or trampled. We were either made to participate or
watch the killings. The youngest recruit killed was maybe nine or ten
years old."
Edward T., age eighteen, was with the LRA for six months and during
this time "many abductees escaped." Not all succeeded. One boy tried
to escape and was caught, tied up, and marched back to camp, Edward T.
remembered. All the recruits from the various companies were told that
they were never going home, that they were fighting with the LRA, "so
as a symbol of our pledge to fight on, this boy would be killed and we
would help."
The LRA soldiers who gave the orders then laid the boy on the ground.
The soldiers stabbed him three times with a bayonet until the blood
began seeping from the wounds. Then we new recruits approached the boy
and beat him on the chest, each one had a turn and could only stop
once the blood from the body splashed up on to you. This boy was
sixteen years old. We were beating him with sticks, each recruit was
given a stick.
Murder was not the only crime the abducted children and adults were
forced to commit. Alet O., a fourteen-year-old boy abducted in July
2001 with three other children from his household, was tortured and
forced to show the rebels the way to other children to be abducted. He
was forced to burn people in their houses in retaliation when the
children of the area escaped from the rebels. The LRA suspected that
residents reported them to the UPDF.
...
Sondra O. said that children who could not continue to march, or who
stopped to rest, were killed. Three children in her group tried to
stop because their legs were swollen and they had difficulty walking.
"The LRA tied the children's hands behind their backs and ordered the
others to beat them to death with sticks as big as my arm," she said.
Later the LRA soldiers removed the victims' clothing and threw their
bodies into a swamp. This happened as well to weaker and older adults
who could not keep up the pace set by the LRA.
Christopher W., age fifteen, marched on bare feet, got bad blisters
and an infection from thorns embedded in the soles of his feet. In
addition to that, he was beaten when he fell behind. "Eventually, I
could no longer keep up and the commander who had initially abducted
me told me I was `useless' as I could not walk," he said. "Two
soldiers, in full uniform, approached and started beating me with the
heavy end of their RPG's [rocket propelled grenade launchers]. I was
repeatedly beaten on the head and body and left for dead. Two days
later, a local farmer found me."
John W. confirmed that the LRA soldiers themselves would sometimes
kill children who got blisters and could no longer walk. "Other times,
the leaders would make the new abductees come and help with the
clubbing. Those who refused, risked death themselves," he said.
****************************************************************************
In addition to killing those who attempted escape, abducted children
and adults were also made to kill and beat civilians in the raided
villages and displaced persons camps. Some expressed confusion as to
why this was done and how some victims were chosen. James K.
explained, "When we approached a village, some persons would be
singled out. We were never told why these people and not others, we
were simply told that this one had to be killed."
****************************************************************************
Edward T. spent some of his time stealing from homes as well. When his
LRA unit arrived at a village or camp, the soldiers would break into
small groups. The officers would stay outside and send the recruits
like eighteen-year-old year old Edward T. and fifteen-year-old
Christopher into the houses to steal and bring the goods outside. "We
would loot as much as we could carry and then move off together in a
group." Sometimes LRA soldiers would attack the army detachments; if
the attack was successful, "when the shooting abated, we recruits
would be given the all-clear sign and then break into the houses and
shops."
According to children interviewed for this report, the weapons used
for the beatings include sticks made from branches of trees, the butts
of weapons, and other instruments. Sixteen-year-old John W. explained
that in addition to the cane, a piece of wire normally used for
locking a bicycle was the LRA instrument used to punish him. Other
times, the wooden end or the blunt side of a machete was used to beat
the buttocks of a child. Soldiers beat John with both during his seven
months with the LRA.
...
Jules O., a sixteen-year-old boy from Pacong, was abducted by the LRA
in June 2002, and was nearly killed after he accidentally got a tape
wet in the river.
I had to carry a radio tape when we crossed the river in Kitgum. The
tape got wet because the river was deep. When we reached shore, [the
soldiers] shouted at me: "Why is the tape wet? We will kill you." They
tied me with a rope and called other abducted children to kill me.
Only because Commander Odiambo came and told them not to kill me, I
was spared.
Life in Captivity
As we moved from place to place, we would have to sleep on the grass,
under trees or in the sand. I had to fetch water, wash clothes and
cook the meals. The "wives" would sometimes beat me or make me carry
heavy loads. If I walked slowly, I was beaten. I was beaten
practically every day.
****************************************************************************
Susan A., age twelve
The LRA uses Joseph Kony's alleged spiritual power to keep its young
captives in permanent fear. Kony, the LRA soldiers and officers say,
is possessed by a strong spirit and his decisions are unpredictable.
When he appears to switch personalities, it often has a traumatizing
effect on abductees, who attribute this to his omnipotence.
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
Phillip Lutara, head of the Concerned Parents Association, told Human
Rights Watch about a Sunday religious service in a local church in
Gulu district that reflected the fear not only of children but also of
adults in northern Uganda:
The priest asked the congregation: "Who rules the world? The United
States? God? The rebels?"
The congregation answered in unison: "It is the rebels."
"When they are coming everybody, even the soldiers, are running.
Everybody is helpless and in fear when the rebels come."
****************************************************************************
...
Christopher W., aged fifteen, explained that his main job with the LRA
was cooking and watching the fires-and beating the women, girls and
boys who let the fires grow too large. "The leaders would get very
angry if too much smoke was coming from the fires as this could
attract enemy aircraft," he explained. "If I didn't do my job well, I
risked being beaten myself."
...
The children serving in Uganda had the additional responsibility of
abducting new recruits, often while looting villages and camps. Thomas
O., who was with the LRA from August until December 2002, never went
to Sudan but stayed in Uganda, mostly moving around Pader district.
"During our time, we abducted more people, even girls were abducted in
Lira district. We abducted them during a looting raid on a village
there." He added that a few days later, three of these girls were
released.
Fifteen-year-old Matthew A., who spent four years with the LRA, said
while in Uganda he had to abduct children. In four months, he abducted
four girls and seven boys during raids. When he was responsible for
choosing new recruits, he would ask questions, he said. One time he
released some children. "I didn't like to take two children from the
same house, so one time, I took one sister and left the other."
Alun Harford
> I also highlighted some bits that particularly highlight my point.
> It's quite long, but it's a big issue. (and most people find it
Alun Harford
Leonardo Been
Thank you for the additional data and the description of the methods
that these murderers use to try and force others to murder, and their
methods to enforce that murder is "normal" and so on.
Still, in all those cases, it is murder. And that is so because it is
resolved by treating it as murder, and only resolved by treating it as
murder.
Calling it anything else than what the activity actually is, is
hindering or even preventing it from being handled and stopped.
Solomon Been too
alunh...@yahoo.com (Alun Harford) wrote in message news:<f890d8e3.0310...@posting.google.com>...
Steve Hayes
>Reuters Journalism "Definition" Of Murder, Today
>
> 15 October 2003
>
>"Definitions" used by established journalism, in today's news:
>
>1. murder = "harsh human rights records"
>2. murder = "violence between Muslims and Christians in the region
> following months of relative peace"
> murdered = "have died"
>3. murder = "attack that killed"
>4. attempted murder = "a car-tire explosion"
>5. exposing crimes of murder and torture = "showing disrespect"
> "causing trouble"
>6. murderers = "rebels"
>7. murder = "an incident occurred"
None of the sources yuo cite appear to support your asertions.
There's a gap in your logic somewhere, and life's too short to try to
second-guess your convoluted thought processes.
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
David Johnston
wrote:
>Dear David,
>
>We have had 're-definition of words' described in the famous book
>'1984' by George Orwell.
>
>Whether it has been made legal or not, to murder someone is still
>murder.
Which of course means nothing. Legal killing isn't murder.
Never has been. Never will be. The definition of murder has
been "The act of unlawfully killing a human being with
premeditated malice" for centuries now. (Unless of course
you are using it in the metaphorical sense, and journalists
aren't supposed to rely much on metaphors.)
>You can define 'murder' already by looking at the emotions of it,
Bullshit. People commit murder calmly, or in great fury. Doesn't
make a difference. It's still murder as long as you "unlawfully kill
a human being with premeditated malice". Grow up.
Leonardo Been
'It is further the standard practice of criminal minds, to make them-
selves feel as if they are
"standing above others."
And they have to do so, and do so indeed, by means of the most
severe and the most atrocious lying, about themselves and
about those "they stand above," and they do so
especially by sneering about the very decent and about the
very caring - about you too,
either openly, or if the circumstances require it,
then very secretly, or silently.
That is not merely "their view of life" or "their entitled and
democratic opinion about another person"
- but it is the mechanism they use to try and smash and
pull away and so obtain Life Energy from others, from
you, that is, too.'
Taken from:
'Standard Responses Of Criminal Minds' (9 May 2003)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0305090914.75e26917%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
Alun Harford
>
>
> Thank you for the additional data and the description of the methods
> that these murderers use to try and force others to murder, and their
> methods to enforce that murder is "normal" and so on.
Their methods to enforce that murder is "normal" are suplementary to
their methods of killing anybody who doesn't.
>
>
> Still, in all those cases, it is murder. And that is so because it is
> resolved by treating it as murder, and only resolved by treating it as
> murder.
So just how far are you going to blame people?
Are you going to blame the rebel commanders? (I say yes)
Are you going to blame the kids the abduct, who have no real choice in
what they are going becuase the rebel commanders have a gun to their
heads? (I say no)
Are you going to blame the guns they use?
>
> Calling it anything else than what the activity actually is, is
> hindering or even preventing it from being handled and stopped.
The Ugandan government has been taking your line for 17 years, and the
'activity' is yet to be stopped, nor will it be stopped in the near
future.
Alun Harford
Steve Hayes
>The respondent is understood well, as follows:
Who's the respondent?
Who's the deponent?
>'It is further the standard practice of criminal minds, to make them-
> selves feel as if they are
>
> "standing above others."
>
> And they have to do so, and do so indeed, by means of the most
> severe and the most atrocious lying, about themselves and
> about those "they stand above," and they do so
From C1, it follows that any associated supporting element is,
apparently, determined by a descriptive fact. On the other hand, the
theory of syntactic features developed earlier does not affect the
structure of the traditional practice of grammarians. It must be
emphasized, once again, that the natural general principle that will
subsume this case cannot be arbitrary in a parasitic gap construction. If
the position of the trace in (99c) were only relatively inaccessible to
movement, a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort can be defined
in such a way as to impose the requirement that branching is not tolerated
within the dominance scope of a complex symbol.
>
> especially by sneering about the very decent and about the
> very caring - about you too,
>
> either openly, or if the circumstances require it,
> then very secretly, or silently.
>
> That is not merely "their view of life" or "their entitled and
> democratic opinion about another person"
>
> - but it is the mechanism they use to try and smash and
> pull away and so obtain Life Energy from others, from
> you, that is, too.'
Analogously, the natural general principle that will subsume this case
is rather different from an important distinction in language use. This
suggests that a subset of English sentences interesting on quite
independent grounds is not subject to the extended c-command discussed in
connection with (34). Suppose, for instance, that the speaker-hearer's
linguistic intuition is not quite equivalent to nondistinctness in the
sense of distinctive feature theory. Thus the earlier discussion of
deviance is, apparently, determined by a parasitic gap construction. On
our assumptions, any associated supporting element does not affect the
structure of the requirement that branching is not tolerated within the
dominance scope of a complex symbol.
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
Leonardo Been
he is in his present life, or has been in his past lives ('for some
centuries now,' to quote the respondent) a "legal" murderer.
So was it Jews that he "legally" murdered, or Cambodians, or Chinese,
or Russians, or Japanese, or Tibetans, or Iraqis for that matter,
etc. etc. because some Criminal Mind(*) had made it "legal" at some
time and some place to murder those people?
Now whether your neighbors or your family members are murdered
"legally" or 'illegally' - it would be all the same to them, and
indeed so it was.
Some people - of the decent variety - can FEEL something, they have
emotions, about others being murdered. This I mentioned, as a way
for people to understand and know or 'feel' the definition of murder.
Murder is very simply and very clearly 'the malicious
killing of someone.' And that is how it always has been
defined and how it always will be defined, no matter whether
some Criminal Mind managed to make it "legal" in some place
for some time.
I suggest the footnote be read by those who wish to know more.
Solomon Been too
(*) - 'The First International Law (Version 2.0) - {HRI
Leonardo Been
Thanks for your comments.
It is the activity of catching the murderers - in this case, to catch
those who instigate and perpetuate the murdering, of course.
That is standardly a police function, aided by the army if they can
not do it alone. And it is hunting down ONLY the murderers, in this
case ONLY those who instigate and perpetuate the murders.
Not an impossible task - and one can ask and can get international
help for that too.
Leonardo Been
alunh...@yahoo.com (Alun Harford) wrote in message news:<f890d8e3.03101...@posting.google.com>...
David Johnston
wrote:
>The respondent suggests - by his justifying murder as "legal" - that
Not at all. By definition murder is not legal.
Bob LeChevalier
>>Whether it has been made legal or not, to murder someone is still
>>murder.
>
>Which of course means nothing. Legal killing isn't murder.
There is more than one law. Perhaps the Holocaust killings were legal
under Nazi law. They were murder under international law.
>>You can define 'murder' already by looking at the emotions of it,
>
>Bullshit. People commit murder calmly, or in great fury. Doesn't
>make a difference. It's still murder as long as you "unlawfully kill
>a human being with premeditated malice".
To those that subscribe to certain "higher law", capital punishment is
unlawful, and also killing with "premeditated malice".
War usually involves killing with premeditated malice, and it is
always "lawful" in the eyes of the combatants.
lojbab
--
lojbab loj...@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
William December Starr
plato...@yahoo.com (Leonardo Been) said:
> Reuters Journalism "Definition" Of Murder, Today
Any particular why you crossposted this to rec.arts.tv?
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
Leonardo Been
Alun Harford
> Dear Alun,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> It is the activity of catching the murderers - in this case, to catch
> those who instigate and perpetuate the murdering, of course.
>
> That is standardly a police function, aided by the army if they can
> not do it alone. And it is hunting down ONLY the murderers, in this
> case ONLY those who instigate and perpetuate the murders.
>
> Not an impossible task - and one can ask and can get international
> help for that too.
The LRA is ~2000 strong. The conflict is a war - and wars are fought
by the military.
And if you take out "those who instigate and perpetuate the murdering"
- ie. Joseph Kony - then he'd be replaced by somebody who is probably
a more competent commander.
The morale of the Ugandan military (practically zero), and the
resources avaliable to it (Uganda is not a rich country), mean that
the LRA can put up one hell of a fight.
As for international support, I hope the Ugandan president doesn't get
any. A man who marched into Kampala surrounded by 'bodyguards', few of
whom were older than 10, does not deserve international support.
Alun Harford
Leonardo Been
Your viewpoint is incorrect.
Already, you show your desire to have the murdering perpetuated, by
now calling it again "a conflict," even "a war."
But "conflict" and "war" are words that specifically deny a viewpoint
on both the victims of the murdering, AND - which is much, much worse
- on those that are acting to stop the murdering.
You crave attention, and by not creating and not holding a viewpoint,
you want others to give you their Energy.
In common terminology, you are then called a 'fake' - meaning that you
pretend to, but have no desire to take responsibility, and also desire
for others not to take it (responsibility: Acting correctly by means
of and born by a correct viewpoint).
I thank you for the enlightening conversation.
Solomon Been too
alunh...@yahoo.com (Alun Harford) wrote in message news:<f890d8e3.03101...@posting.google.com>...
Alun Harford
> Dear Alun,
>
> Your viewpoint is incorrect.
>
> Already, you show your desire to have the murdering perpetuated, by
> now calling it again "a conflict," even "a war."
for murder.
>
> But "conflict" and "war" are words that specifically deny a viewpoint
> on both the victims of the murdering, AND - which is much, much worse
> - on those that are acting to stop the murdering.
I couldn't disagree more. It is a war - the crimes committed by the
LRA are war crimes.
That denies nobody a viewpoint - what it denies is the right of
thousands of people to LIFE.
>
>
> You crave attention, and by not creating and not holding a viewpoint,
> you want others to give you their Energy.
There's already too many opinions from people who know nothing of the
situation. I realise that despite studying the situation for 5 years,
I know very little about what's going on, so I say very little about
it. There's already plenty of mis-information, mis-interpretation and
propoganda around, so I see no need to add my own.
I only write something about the LRA when I'm sufficiently certain
that I'm right.
Opinions are worth nothing.
>
> In common terminology, you are then called a 'fake' - meaning that you
> pretend to, but have no desire to take responsibility, and also desire
> for others not to take it (responsibility: Acting correctly by means
> of and born by a correct viewpoint).
I make no pretence of knowing what the best action is, but I do know
that some actions would have appalling concequences. I also have too
few facts to form a useful viewpoint.
Alun Harford