Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 01:18 PM Jun 2013

If anyone EVER uses the word "terrorist" in any kind of communication with you


... distrust them and their motives.

The term is a movable feast.

It is used by whichever agency employs it to mean whatever said agency wants it to mean so long as the appropriate emotional charge is applied to the subject of the sentence in which it is used. It isn't a descriptor, it's tone device.

It is not an invitation to discuss or consider, it is not a term that explains or clarifies, it is an invitation (when not a covert instruction) to react emotionally to the individual/s to whom the term is applied.

Some years ago on DU, the vast majority of posters here seemed to know this. ("TERRA, TERRA, TERRA!!!&quot . There are now a large number of extremely confused people here who seem genuinely to believe that the term has some value beyond simple propaganda.

It is disheartening.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If anyone EVER uses the word "terrorist" in any kind of communication with you (Original Post) sibelian Jun 2013 OP
These days I just assume most people who use it define it as "anything I happen to dislike." Posteritatis Jun 2013 #1
and "illegal combatant" - (LAWL!!) and "enhanced interrogation"... sibelian Jun 2013 #2
If anyone ever used that word in any form of communication to me dipsydoodle Jun 2013 #3
Good point...and it's badly overused.... Wounded Bear Jun 2013 #4
A useless rule of thumb. gulliver Jun 2013 #5
Well, naturally. sibelian Jun 2013 #7
Distrust anyone, who ever uses the word? Quantess Jun 2013 #6

Posteritatis

(18,807 posts)
1. These days I just assume most people who use it define it as "anything I happen to dislike."
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 01:25 PM
Jun 2013

Ditto with the word "treason."

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
2. and "illegal combatant" - (LAWL!!) and "enhanced interrogation"...
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 01:54 PM
Jun 2013

and basically the entire "combat" lexicon. The whole basis of communication about warfare - the subset of the English language used to describe it - is totally corrupted.

I can't help but suspect that this was part of the plan all along.

Wounded Bear

(58,440 posts)
4. Good point...and it's badly overused....
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 02:01 PM
Jun 2013

Just saying the term is equivalent to asking if you've stopped beating your wife.

The response is preloaded in the initial comment. After all, noone would support terrorism, right?

gulliver

(13,142 posts)
5. A useless rule of thumb.
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 02:03 PM
Jun 2013

It's really kind of dumb to base trust on message content. Makes no sense whatsoever. Always consider the source.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
7. Well, naturally.
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 02:36 PM
Jun 2013

My point is more that a heightened sense of "hmmmm, what's in it fer you using THAT word, buddy" is a good idea.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If anyone EVER uses the w...