Terrorism 101 - continued

Terrorism is defined as the use of violence or intimidation for political gain. Intimidation is an attempt to coerce a person into doing something by using threats or by instilling fear into them. Bullying is a form of intimidation.

Social media is an effective means of communication. Almost everyone uses it. We are constantly viewing data. Sometimes what we view makes us laugh, sometimes it makes us cry. Sometimes it offends us and sometimes it outrages us.

Often, we share what we find with other like minded individuals  whom we feel will also laugh, cry, be offended or be outraged by what we have seen. Then, these people we share with, likewise share with their friends and their friends share with other friends and, in a matter of minutes, hundreds of people have viewed the data. In a few hours, thousands of people have laughed, cried, were offended or outraged. By the end of the day, the number might be in the millions. And most of them are completely unaware of the origin of the information. They shared it because someone they know shared it. They may not even realize that the reason their friend shared it was because one of his or her friends shared it. That's how social media works.

As a writer, I know it is wise to verify the source of information. For example, our government now is a recently elected government. There are numerous posts being shared on social media sites claiming that our newly elected leader is doing and saying all kinds of things that he is not doing or saying. Most people know the facts and they, like myself, disregard the information because it originates from an unknown and therefore untrusted source.

Just because someone says "I saw this on Channel 7 news!" doesn't mean it was on the news or that they themselves actually watched the broadcast. They are just reposting what someone else posted. I usually Google it to see if it was on the news and then read or watch corroborating stories from other networks. But, not everyone has time to do that and some people are just gullible. They believe it because they saw it on the internet. It never occurs to them that they are not getting all the facts. And, it never occurs to them that someone might be deliberately misleading them.

Thanks to this amazing tool known as the internet, I can capture special moments in photos and share those moments with family and friends in this country and in almost any country on the globe. Photos. Text messages. Whatever I want to share. And I can do it in the blink of an eye.

So, if you want to spread dissent, to subtly bully others into feelings of guilt and shame, cause them to doubt their political leaders or even their beliefs about what is right and what is wrong, you don't need to hold them at gunpoint. Just post a message on social media scolding them for paying too much attention to one tragedy and not enough to another. It seems to be working with the Paris vs Beirut vs Kenya tragedies. They blame the media, they blame you, they blame our governments, they blame everyone except the people responsible.

In the aftermath of these tragic events, what difference does it make which one of these nations I cried for the most. Who would even consider downplaying the Paris attack because there wasn't enough media coverage for the Lebanon attack. Someone who is trying to spread discontent over the way we run our lives or trying to disillusion us by pointing out how barbaric our governments are or how our media only shows us what they want us to see. Someone with an agenda. A terrorist, perhaps.

We don't spot this type of terrorism right away because there are no guns or suicide bombers. The weapons of mass destruction in this case are words. Words when wielded by an expert carry much weight.

The pen often is mightier than the sword. And in these times, we don't even need a pen. We just tap the screens on our phones, tablets, laptops, iPads, whatever device we use to communicate with.

So believe what you choose to believe. Grieve for whomever you choose to grieve for and feel no guilt or shame for being human. Do not let the terrorists win.

And I wouldn't worry too much about letting them into the country. Thanks to modern technology, they're already here.

Not topical enough

I guess my letter to the newspaper wasn't "topical" enough. I didn't see it in any of the issues I read. I didn't read them all, but it's been 18 days since I sent it in and although I received an auto-response email I haven't heard anything else. This is what my letter said:

Do I Crosswalk or Jaywalk?

Baker Drive in the Russell Lake area is a busy street. It connects Portland Street to Mount Hope Drive and the Woodside Ferry. There are seniors homes on Baker Drive. It has a bank, a Sobeys, a drugstore and walk in clinic, a bus route, a Subway, even a Tim Horton's. In fact, the only thing it doesn't have is a crosswalk. Oh, there is a crosswalk at the bottom of the hill - did I mention there was a hill? There is a hill and it's quite a long climb from the bottom to the top. The top of the hill is where the other crosswalk is located. Basswood is that street's name. 

When you come out of the first senior's complex (there's more than one) and look across the street, you see a bus stop. That stop will connect you to buses heading to downtown Dartmouth, Dartmouth Crossing, Cole Harbor, all the main arteries. But, there's no way to get to the bus stop, unless you walk to the bottom of the hill, decide to be energetic and hike to the top of the hill, or take your life into your hands and cross the street without using a crosswalk. That's called jaywalking isn't it.

I walked up Baker Drive. I'm getting up there in years, but I'm not quite a senior yet. I had a difficult time crossing the street at my age in my physical condition. I presume the task would be considerably more difficult if I was in a walker or a wheelchair.

We tried to bring this to the mayor's attention. One of his assistants sent us a nice email advising us that a study will be conducted in the fall to determine if there is a need for a crosswalk on that street. I'm not clear on why a study needs to be conducted. Seniors. Bus stop. No access to the bus stop. Crosswalk needed. It's not rocket science.

Council has approved half a million dollars to repair the pedestrian bridge in North Dartmouth, what we northenders call the catwalk. That's great to hear. It could certainly use some sprucing up. But what about approving crosswalks on Baker Drive and other streets where they are needed?

I wonder how much a can of crosswalk paint costs. And an overhead crosswalk light too, of course. I'm sure the amount wouldn't be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

While Council is figuring it out, the seniors, who might be your mother, your uncle, or your grandmother, will just have to take their chances in the traffic.

Do I Crosswalk or Jaywalk

There are numerous busy streets in Dartmouth. One of them is Baker Drive in the Russell Lake area. It connects Portland Street to Mount Hope Drive and the Woodside Ferry.

There are seniors homes on Baker Drive. It has a bank, a Sobeys, a drugstore and walk in clinic, a bus route, a Subway, even a Tim Horton's. In fact, the only thing it doesn't have is a crosswalk. Well, there is a crosswalk at the bottom of the hill - oh did I mention there was a hill? There is a hill and it's quite a long climb from the bottom to the top. The top of the hill is where the other crosswalk is located. Basswood is that street's name.

It's odd, when you come out of the first senior's complex (there's more than one) and look across the street, you see a bus stop. That stop will connect you to buses heading to downtown Dartmouth, Dartmouth Crossing, Cole Harbor, all the main arteries. The only trouble is, there's no way to get to the bus stop, unless you walk to the bottom of the hill, decide to be dangerously energetic and hike to the top of the hill, or take your life into your hands and cross the street without using a crosswalk. That's called jaywalking isn't it.

I walked up Baker Drive, took a few pictures, made a short video. I'm getting up there in years myself but I'm not a senior yet. I'm still ambulatory. I had a difficult time crossing the street at my age in my physical condition. I presume the task would be considerably more difficult if I was in a walker or a wheelchair. By the way, it's a 10-minute walk to the bottom of the hill and a 30-minute walk to the top. I suppose a person could take the bus to the top of the hill, cross the road, and catch a bus from up there.

We tried to bring this to the mayor's attention. One of his assistants sent us a nice email advising us that a study will be conducted in the fall to determine if there is a need for a crosswalk on that street. I'm not clear on why a study needs to be conducted. Seniors. Bus stop. No access to the bus stop. Crosswalk needed. It's not rocket science.

I wonder how much a can of crosswalk paint costs. And an overhead crosswalk light too, of course. 

While Council is figuring it out, the seniors, who might be your mother, your uncle, or your grandmother, will just have to take their chances in the traffic.

To Plow or Not To Plow

I see all the salt trucks and snow plows making a mad dash back to the depot before the storm hits. I remember in 2009 they used to take strategic positions around the city every time a storm was coming so they could start working when they were needed and not when it was too late. I don't know whose idea it was to stop doing that but I do know that person should be fired or at least retrained.

Justice? or Terrorism

Do the ends justify the means? Can I break one law to uphold another law? Can I assume I am above the laws and rights to privacy of one group of people in order to bring to justice another group of people? Can I use evidence obtained illegally to solve a crime or an injustice? Do I have the right to use terrorism (threats, coercion, extortion) to uphold the rights of those I feel have been harmed by the actions of another? Can I define justice to suit my actions?

Most if not all of us would say no. And then in the next set of sentences we applaud the efforts of an anonymous group of vigilante terrorists whose trademark is the breaking of laws to uphold laws. In the recent situation with the facebook group that posted misogynist comments about female students, the vigilante group Anonymous threatened to expose the names of the facebook group members if justice was not meted out to their satisfaction. The question of guilt concerning the men in question is not an issue. What they did was wrong. But what Anonymous did was also wrong.

A secret facebook group means that no one who is not a member of the group has access to the group. If Anonymous has access to the names of the group members then they came by that information illegally. They are not a police force. Granted, those they expose are guilty of their crimes. But if Anonymous protects us from the criminals, who protects us from Anonymous?