August1991 Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) In a blur, yes. But Mohammed Atta is more like William Calley, don't you think?William Calley? I first thought of Manson but Shwa, your post forced me to start this thread.Maybe Calley is a better example. And maybe I should start a poll... --- Charles Manson organized others to kill innocent people and by all accounts, Manson is certifiably crazy. Mohammed Atta was part of an organization and he killed innocent people too. Atta is now dead so we don't know whether he was crazy. In the West, we have mixed opinions about these two men. They both killed innocent people but in the West, we say that Manson was crazy whereas Atta was a (fanatical) Muslim. In the West, we tend to give attention to Atta's purpose in his actions. We give no attention to the writings/opinions of Manson - except when he carves his forehead. I suppose my thread should really ask whether we should pay attention to Atta, or Manson. Manson is crazy. Maybe Atta is too. ----- Recently in Quebec, a jury found a man charged with killing his children (Guy Turcotte) innocent, because he was "crazy". When members of a Muslim family drowned, some people were quick to draw conclusions: is the family crazy? Or Muslim? This seems strange to me. We in the West excuse the horrific behaviour of our own people saying that they are "crazy". But when foreigners engage in similar behaviour, we say that they are evil, fanatical. ---- 1) Charles Manson is in jail and William Calley spent time in jail. Atta is dead. 2) Were they crazy? Manson, definitely. Calley and Atta, I dunno. 3) Atta killed random people abroad. Manson killed random people at home. Calley, we don't know. Maybe the conclusion is that lunatics kill people at home but truly, dangerous crazy fanatics kill abroad. Edited July 25, 2011 by August1991 Quote
Moonlight Graham Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 Manson is not crazy. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
DogOnPorch Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 I saw a Corcoran State Prison receipt from the 90s for Charles Manson that included a pound of Folger's Coffee. Now that's twisted. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
August1991 Posted July 25, 2011 Author Report Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) I saw a Corcoran State Prison receipt from the 90s for Charles Manson that included a pound of Folger's Coffee. Now that's twisted. You miss the point. Lunatics in Oslo, or lunatics in New York. What's the difference? ---- Frankly, taking a broader view of life, having lived here and there, I don't see a difference. Atta and Manson? As you Americans say, "Same diff." Edited July 25, 2011 by August1991 Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 You miss the point. Lunatics in Oslo, or lunatics in New York. What's the difference? Charles Manson isn't from NYC nor did he commit crimes there. You missed what actually happened. ---- Frankly, taking a broader view of life, having lived here and there, I don't see a difference. Atta and Manson? As you Americans say, "Same diff." Je suis Canadien, Monsieur Bonhomme Carnaval. Didn't Atta have terminal cancer? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
August1991 Posted July 25, 2011 Author Report Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) Charles Manson isn't from NYC nor did he commit crimes there. You missed what actually happened.Son of Sam, a New Yorker, killed young people in New York. Charles Manson killed other Americans, in California. This whacko Norwegian killed other young Norwegians.The Boston Strangler killed people too. What conclusion should I draw? Should I read their writings to understand the ravings of a lunatic? Edited July 25, 2011 by August1991 Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 Son of Sam, a New Yorker, killed young people in New York. Charles Manson killed other Americans, in California. This whacko Norwegian killed other young Norwegians. The Boston Strangler killed people too. What conclusion should I draw? Should I read their writings to understand the ravings of a lunatic? Actually, Charles Manson isn't really credited with any particular murder...charged, yes...but not credited. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Jack Weber Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 Actually, Charles Manson isn't really credited with any particular murder...charged, yes...but not credited. That's right... Manson was/is more of a "Looney Tunes Svengali"... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
DogOnPorch Posted July 25, 2011 Report Posted July 25, 2011 That's right... Manson was/is more of a "Looney Tunes Svengali"... Oh yeah...the ol' bast**d is still tickin'. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
kimmy Posted July 26, 2011 Report Posted July 26, 2011 Recently in Quebec, a jury found a man charged with killing his children (Guy Turcotte) innocent, because he was "crazy". "Innocent" and "not guilty by reason of insanity" don't mean the same thing. The law, a medical professional, and a layman all have different definitions of crazy. To you or me, somebody who would kill 90 teenagers because he hopes to spark some kind of revolution is crazy. To a medical professional, he might or might not be crazy. He might have some sort of psychiatric condition that prevents him from feeling empathy or something like that. Maybe he has a legitimate, diagnosable psychiatric condition, or maybe he doesn't. To the law, he knew exactly what he was doing. He isn't crazy by the definitions the law has set out. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
Oleg Bach Posted July 26, 2011 Report Posted July 26, 2011 Muslims in Canada do drown a lot...come summmer they sink like stones in panic - We corn fed Canadians know how to swim because in Canada we as children have lakes and rivers and the water is our friend...where as those immigrants from dry places die if they go near water...in fact we love water - we bath in it - baptize are children in it ....Just thought I would mention that Canada is water - we still have the biggest and purest supply on the planet...and myself - as a kid I would grab a big rock and jump in to sink thirty feet down...cos - we are water and it is our friend...Christians do not drown...and if they do they are like the witch that does not float....lol Quote
bloodyminded Posted July 27, 2011 Report Posted July 27, 2011 I saw a Corcoran State Prison receipt from the 90s for Charles Manson that included a pound of Folger's Coffee. Now that's twisted. Folger's? Yeah, what's the point? Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
DogOnPorch Posted July 27, 2011 Report Posted July 27, 2011 What's the point??? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_Folger Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bloodyminded Posted July 27, 2011 Report Posted July 27, 2011 What's the point??? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_Folger Ah, interesting. No, when I said "what's the point"? I was asking "what's the point of drinking Folger's?" since I think it's sucky coffee. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
DogOnPorch Posted July 27, 2011 Report Posted July 27, 2011 Ah, interesting. No, when I said "what's the point"? I was asking "what's the point of drinking Folger's?" since I think it's sucky coffee. It is...at least the crap around here. It could have been better in 1969...but, time travel eludes me still. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bloodyminded Posted July 27, 2011 Report Posted July 27, 2011 It is...at least the crap around here. It could have been better in 1969...but, time travel eludes me still. Only so far. I have faith you'll get there. (Damn...now Betsy's gonna be all over me for using "faith.") Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
DogOnPorch Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Only so far. I have faith you'll get there. (Damn...now Betsy's gonna be all over me for using "faith.") Oh, I get to relive the 60s on a regular basis...these days you even get a couple of choices. http://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/Project_Apollo_for_Orbiter http://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/AMSO Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 A few similarities between Breivik and Manson do exist. -Both hoped to start a 'revolution' via their acts. -Both have influences that the public seek or sought to demonize...rationally or irrationally. The Beatles and such for Manson...Geert Wilders and the like for Breivik. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
August1991 Posted July 28, 2011 Author Report Posted July 28, 2011 (edited) Kimmy says: "Innocent" and "not guilty by reason of insanity" don't mean the same thing. I agree. To you or me, somebody who would kill 90 teenagers because he hopes to spark some kind of revolution is crazy.And if the person organized the death of 3000 anonymous people?---- IMV, anyone who deliberately kills random people is crazy, a psychopath. Are Mohammed Atta, Charles Manson, Anders Breivik different? Edited July 28, 2011 by August1991 Quote
Jack Weber Posted July 29, 2011 Report Posted July 29, 2011 A few similarities between Breivik and Manson do exist. -Both hoped to start a 'revolution' via their acts. -Both have influences that the public seek or sought to demonize...rationally or irrationally. The Beatles and such for Manson...Geert Wilders and the like for Breivik. There's another similarity and it's probably the most important one... Neither one of them has ever been in my kitchen!!! Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
eyeball Posted July 29, 2011 Report Posted July 29, 2011 Kimmy says: "Innocent" and "not guilty by reason of insanity" don't mean the same thing. I agree. And if the person organized the death of 3000 anonymous people? ---- IMV, anyone who deliberately kills random people is crazy, a psychopath. Are Mohammed Atta, Charles Manson, Anders Breivik different? By these standard no, these people are no more different than George Bush, Steven Harper or Barack Obama. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Sir Bandelot Posted July 29, 2011 Report Posted July 29, 2011 By these standard no, these people are no more different than George Bush, Steven Harper or Barack Obama. Cha-chinnnggg Quote
August1991 Posted July 29, 2011 Author Report Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) By tno hese standard no, these people are no more different than George Bush, Steven Harper or Barack Obama.You have raised moral relativism to its ultimate conclusion. By your logic, Winston Churchill is no different from Hitler since Churchill approved the bombing of Dresden.By your logic, if the RCMP kill an innocent person it's the same as if teh Hell's Angels kill someone. The Hell's Angels and the RCMP are the same thing. They both kill innocent people. Such is modern Western thinking, Leftist version. ---- Eyeball (and others) my OP posed another question, truly troubling for the Mark Steyns of this world: Is Mohammed Atta any different from Charles Manson? Psychopaths exist. Is psychopathy religious or cultural? Psychopathy seems random. No culture, religion, country seems to have a propensity to produce more psychopaths than any other. If genetic, a "psychopathy gene" predates a "religion gene". ---- So, I return to the OP: Mohammed Atta & Charles Manson, is there a difference? I'm surprised that the question was not asked before. After the tragic events in Norway, I suspect that this question, in different ways using different examples, will be posed in the future. Edited July 29, 2011 by August1991 Quote
bloodyminded Posted July 29, 2011 Report Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) You have raised moral relativism to its ultimate conclusion. By your logic, Winston Churchill is no different from Hitler since Churchill approved the bombing of Dresden. Or how about this from ol' Winston: I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected. It maybe doesn't quite rise to the level of psychopathy, since he magnanimoulsy considers the possibility that the unimportant Savages won't be killed, merely terrorized by the Imperial behemoth. But it's grotesque enough, and as is open admission of terrorism. Edited July 29, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
August1991 Posted July 29, 2011 Author Report Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) Or how about this from ol' Winston:... It maybe doesn't quite rise to the level of psychopathy, since he magnanimoulsy considers the possibility that the unimportant Savages won't be killed, merely terrorized by the Imperial behemoth. But it's grotesque enough, and as is open admission of terrorism. BM, you are so obtuse that, to defend your own viewpoint, you favour Hitler in opposition to Churchill.Sad. ---- Anyway, that's not my point at all in this thread. My point is that terrorists are psychopaths - eg. IRA, Ulstermen or radical Muslims - and psychopathy is likely genetic, spread among all of us. But I dunno. Edited July 29, 2011 by August1991 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.