4 ms·
Well, who said the video captures the whole of the attack? Now, slightly off-topic, but I don't like words like "collateral damage". It's not a building demol
by pretoriusB 14y ago
Well, who said the video captures the whole of the attack?
Now, slightly off-topic, but I don't like words like "collateral damage".
It's not a building demolition we're talking about, in this context collateral damage is newspeak for "innocent bystanders murdered".
If someone did an attack on some target in the US, even a deplorable one (like some bloodthirsty third world dictator living there to avoid prosecution in his country), would anyone in the media dare to speak about innocent nearby people killed as "collateral damage"?
It's equally bad, and very racist to use this word exclusively in the case of third world, middle-eastern, etc people.
- yozmsn 14y agoActually yes. Innocent bystanders killed in targeted attack of some foreign national or just regular criminal are often referred to as "collateral damage" in CIA, FBI, and Police reports.
- pretoriusB 14y agoDo you have any example where innocent american bystanders, in american soil, are referred to as "collateral damage" in "CIA, FBI, and Police reports"?
- yozmsn 14y agohttp://bit.ly/TKxLAw http://bit.ly/TKxLAw
- pretoriusB 14y agoLOL. Check how every one of those links is invalid... One is from Malawi. Two refer to a report comparing "collateral damage" in balistic tests (in gelatin used for the testing, not people). Another is from people outraged at the police risking people to be "collateral damage", another one is a freetype font with the same name, etc etc.
- malandrew 14y agoActually, I'm not a fan of the word myself, but it's habit and it's a term only two words long that everyone is familiar with so it's convenient. It's so well known a term among people that it doesn't even do a good job of masking or downplaying what it actually means anymore.