Author Topic: Fox news "homicide bombings"? (Read 1035 times)

funkedup · « **Reply #15 on:** March 29, 2003, 08:39:59 PM »

Quote

All bombings involve homocides.

No not always.

Nash · « **Reply #16 on:** March 29, 2003, 08:46:11 PM »

Ah... yeah true. I was meaning at least *attempting* homocide but even that's not always the case.

I guess the weird thing is that when a newscaster says "A suicide bomber has struck..." I know what it means. If they say "A homocide bomber has struck....", then I don't know if it was a traditional suicide bomber or if it was someone who planted a bomb at an airport.

So unless they've come up with another term, it seems way more vague. Has Fox merely suplanted "suicide" with "homocide" or have they come up with other terms to make the distinction (which was obvious before) clear?

funkedup · « **Reply #17 on:** March 29, 2003, 08:51:58 PM »

They should call them suihomicide bombers!

funkedup · « **Reply #18 on:** March 29, 2003, 08:52:38 PM »

BTW homicide is killing a person.
homocide is a hate crime.

Nash · « **Reply #19 on:** March 29, 2003, 09:02:03 PM »

No... whats a crime is yankin' the spell checker from the BBS.

I aint as bad as HT but pretty dang close.

funkedup · « **Reply #20 on:** March 29, 2003, 09:05:38 PM »

I think homocide is a better spelling anyways.

Nash · « **Reply #21 on:** March 29, 2003, 09:14:10 PM »

Yeah...

homOsapiens = man.

homO = same (ie. man killing man... or man loving man eg. in the case of SOB and Gordo the intimate love that only two men can share)

where'd the freakin' "i" come from?

Arlo · « **Reply #22 on:** March 29, 2003, 09:24:51 PM »

All I know is with an avatar like that I feel compelled to read everything you post now, Nash.

Nash · « **Reply #23 on:** March 29, 2003, 09:28:17 PM »

Heeeeeeeeepmotizing aint it?

Raubvogel · « **Reply #24 on:** March 29, 2003, 10:07:33 PM »

Hey Pei, why should I not **** with the rocketmen?

-tronski- · « **Reply #25 on:** March 29, 2003, 11:05:45 PM »

Geez it's Fox news...they're the ones who put the USA in Usama.

Tronsky

Dowding · « **Reply #26 on:** March 30, 2003, 02:37:39 AM »

lol Pathetic.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #27 on:** March 30, 2003, 02:54:21 AM »

its just fox pandering to their demographic. its kinda funny actually. now i wonder if they will start calling air strikes. homocide strikes. hey and maybe we should rewrite some history. japanese homicide planes has a nice ring to it. ( changeing the name of a word is use is silly)

Dinger · « **Reply #28 on:** March 30, 2003, 10:08:54 AM »

Yeah. It's Fox.
Homicide bombings.
Okay, so let's see logically:

a) this guy committed suicide by blowing himself up in the presence of soldiers.
b) the goal was clearly to kill the soldiers
c) neither side of this war considers the perpetrator anything other than a combatant.
d) in wartime, soldiers are legitimate targets

combining b c d and you get "a legitimate combatant killed legitimate enemies". If Fox wants to call that homicide (literally: the killing of a man), then the US has a lot of homicide airstrikes.
Suicide bombing, on the other hand, describes perfectly clearly what happened: whether anybody else dies or not, the attack remains the same. If the guy blew himself up and didn't kill anybody, you couldn't even according to Fox's logic apply the term "homicide"

funkedup · « **Reply #29 on:** March 30, 2003, 10:17:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dinger
"a legitimate combatant killed legitimate enemies"

That doesn't fly, because he disguised himself as a civilian. He's not a legitimate combatant under the Geneva Convention.

And yes the Convention matters. In this case it's designed to protect civilians. If we legitimize people disguising themselves as civilians and attacking soldiers, then we give the soldiers little choice but to kill civilians. It's going to be a rough time for taxi drivers in Iraq from now on.