Australian police shoot dead 'radicalized' teen
dw.com
The boy attack stabbed another man in an incident police said had the "hallmarks" of terrorism but was yet to be declared a terrorist act.
Western Australia police shot dead a "radicalized" 16-year-old boy on Saturday night after he stabbed a man in Perth.
State Premier Roger Cook said the teenager attacked a man and then "rushed" at police officers, armed with a kitchen knife.
The police responded by shooting him twice with Tasers before firing a single fatal shot.
Why are "hallmarks", "radicalized" and "rushed" all in quotes? I could see an argument for radicalized, but hallmarks of terrorism is pretty standard stuff, and rushing is just a basic English language verb, synonymous with running. Odd to emphasize them as quotes.
They are quotes surrounded by quotation marks.
The newspaper isn't an authority on radicalization, they are quoting a source.
Then a lot more should be within quotes. How do they know he was armed with a knife, were they there watching?
Go learn about journalistic practices in headlines and titles.
A claim is a claim. The attacker "rushing" is no different from the attacker being armed with a "knife". Both are quotes from the police.
Again, just go look up the standards.
Not sure why you're trying to convince me it should be different, I'm not gonna change it even if I agreed.
You responded to me, I am defending my statement.
The article is inconsistent with standard practices, by only selectively putting quote marks around certain parts of officers claims. Apparently pointing this out bothers you.
No, you haven't grasped the concept and I implored you to seek and authoritative source.
Yeah, you're just pulling shit out of your ass. If you're claiming "an authoritative source" backs your argument, it's on you to support your claim instead of tossing out "do your own research" accusations.
I'm general yes, but this is shit they teach in highschool and I'm bored of this. I don't need to Google things for you
Uh huh. Or you're just making up bullshit to obscure the very simple fact that the article features some officer claims in quote marks and other officer claims in no quote marks, which is not actually standard practice or taught in any high school.
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=when+to+use+quotes+in+a+news+article+title
"attack stabbed". He was really serious
The wording reminded me of Demolition Man
Better source from Australia
CCTV footage
Because the cops got a tip from a Muslim about a teen who at one point used the internet?
Uhh...?
Nah, I think it was the part where he stabbed a dude and then rushed at the cops afterwards.
Not just stabbed. Attack stabbed.
A stabbing is a stabbing. It's not terrorism, and the article provided no evidence of any "radicalization".
Media literacy?
He appears to have been radicalized. This other source shows his message that he posted to other people before the attack.
https://www.9news.com.au/national/perth-teen-shot-dead-by-police-was-self-confessed-jihadist/83dbbd5d-c6a1-4a6b-8eab-a3a638f0c4ab
Thanks for the better source
But was he brown? Then he was 100% terrorism. Else mental disorder.
He looks white to me. White people can be terrorists too.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-08/willetton-knife-attack-victim-speaks-out-from-hospital/103813580
I don't know, seems like an unfortunately common health crisis.
But "terrorism" sure gets clicks.