Another Palin gem

[TheMadHatter]

Brian Williams: Is an abortion clinic bomber a terrorist under this definition?

Sarah Palin: (Exasperated sigh.) There’s no question that Bill Ayers by his own admittance was one who thought to destroy our U.S. Capitol and our Pentagon. That is a domestic terrorist. There is no question there. Now others who would want to engage in harming innocent Americans or facilities that it would be unacceptable to, I don’t know if you’re gonna use the word "terrorist" there.

[tp2021]

I'll be honest. I can't offer an opinion because I am not sure what she is saying.

[TheMadHatter]

I'll be honest. I can't offer an opinion because I am not sure what she is saying.

Basically she is saying that William Ayers is a domestic terrorist because he bombed the Pentagon and other government buildings, but people who bomb abortion clinics are not domestic terrorists.

[dg7md]

Basically she is saying that William Ayers is a domestic terrorist because he bombed the Pentagon and other government buildings, but people who bomb abortion clinics are not domestic terrorists.

This woman is INSANE.

[TheMadHatter]

5qty8kuS7Vo

[Buddy Holly]

Oh geez, how do you spin this republicans?

[timvp]

Meh, that's not that bad. It depends how wide of a net you want to cast with the word "terrorist". A person can bomb an abortion clinic without being necessarily a terrorist, unless you want to classify everybody who murders a person or bombs anything a terrorist.

Personally, a precondition for me to label someone a terrorist is the person has to have political gain as an objective in their action. Otherwise, anyone on earth who does anything evil could be considered a terrorist. Now whether someone bombs an abortion clinic for political reasons is probably based on a case by case basis.

Pretty bad answer to the question but she's not blatantly wrong when it comes to the actual wording. She probably needed another sentence to explain better.

[timvp]

The funniest part of that segment to me was how McCain was acting. Him sitting there squirming in his chair is hilarious. He's acting like he took his girlfriend to his parents house and is hoping his girlfriend doesn't slip up while getting grilled by the parents :lol

[cool hand]

did bill ayers acutually bomb anything? did he do prison time? how can he be a professor? wouldn't he be a felon?

you guys take what ever they say at face value and its bullshit.

[Buddy Holly]

Meh, that's not that bad. It depends how wide of a net you want to cast with the word "terrorist". A person can bomb an abortion clinic without being necessarily a terrorist, unless you want to classify everybody who murders a person or bombs anything a terrorist.

Personally, a precondition for me to label someone a terrorist is the person has to have political gain as an objective in their action. Otherwise, anyone on earth who does anything evil could be considered a terrorist. Now whether someone bombs an abortion clinic for political reasons is probably based on a case by case basis.

Pretty bad answer to the question but she's not blatantly wrong when it comes to the actual wording. She probably needed another sentence to explain better.

One of the definitions of terrorism:


the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

You don't think these politically abortion bombers aren't trying to scare those who run the clinic or those who freely go to these to get the abortion?

Or aren't trying to have them submit to being operational.

They are terrorists, just as Timothy McVay was a terrorist and the Animal Liberation Front are a terrorist group and so on and so force.

[timvp]

I said there were multiple definitions of "terrorist". That liberal definition you offered would consider a school bully a terrorist. Do you think school bullies are terrorists?

[Buddy Holly]

I said there were multiple definitions of "terrorist". That liberal definition you offered would consider a school bully a terrorist. Do you think school bullies are terrorists?

Yes, that bully would be a terrorist if he were terrorizing other people.

I'm sorry the actual word doesn't fit your pre-conditioned version but that's your deal.

Though bullying in school is on a different level of terrorism as bombing buildings, one is against school conduct while the other is unlawful. Nevertheless, it is terrorism.

Just because racism is more completely brought up in reference to white and black doesn't mean racism only applies to people who are white and black. The same with terrorists or terrorism.

[TheProfessor]

Meh, that's not that bad. It depends how wide of a net you want to cast with the word "terrorist". A person can bomb an abortion clinic without being necessarily a terrorist, unless you want to classify everybody who murders a person or bombs anything a terrorist.

Personally, a precondition for me to label someone a terrorist is the person has to have political gain as an objective in their action. Otherwise, anyone on earth who does anything evil could be considered a terrorist. Now whether someone bombs an abortion clinic for political reasons is probably based on a case by case basis.

Pretty bad answer to the question but she's not blatantly wrong when it comes to the actual wording. She probably needed another sentence to explain better.
I think getting into subjective intent with abortion clinic bombers is kind of bizarre.

Also, according to Black's Law Dictionary:

terrorism, n. The use or threat of violence to intimidate or cause panic, esp. as a means of affecting political conduct.

While affecting political conduct is not a prerequisite, I would argue that bombing abortion clinics has an immense socio-political impact on this country, it's a divisive tactic used to drive policy considerations, often backed by extreme fundamentalist views. Sound familiar?

[MaNuMaNiAc]

I have to disagree with timvp here as well. An abortion clinic bomber is most definitely a terrorist. How you could consider it anything other than that is beyond me. Plus, even if you wish to add a political agenda to the definition of terrorism, I'm not sure how that makes a difference? What exactly is the purpose of bombing an abortion clinic? what is it if not political??

[DarrinS]

Why is the man with pancake makeup asking her that question to begin with?


You almost expect B.O. to come out and get his knob polished by Brian Williams during the interview.


Geez.

[hater]

Meh, that's not that bad. It depends how wide of a net you want to cast with the word "terrorist". A person can bomb an abortion clinic without being necessarily a terrorist, unless you want to classify everybody who murders a person or bombs anything a terrorist.



:lmao dude, you sound like Palin.

someone bombs clinic. its a terrorist by the very definition.

[LnGrrrR]

I have to disagree with timvp here as well. An abortion clinic bomber is most definitely a terrorist. How you could consider it anything other than that is beyond me. Plus, even if you wish to add a political agenda to the definition of terrorism, I'm not sure how that makes a difference? What exactly is the purpose of bombing an abortion clinic? what is it if not political??

A note: usually, the definition of terrorism includes a political/social impact. You'll rarely find the term terrorist thrown out there without those political/social connections.

[Trainwreck2100]

Why is it that anybody using a bomb is labeled as a terrorist?

[JohnnyMarzetti]

She's better off sticking to interviews with Hannity since he's further up her ass than whottt is.

[LnGrrrR]

Why is it that anybody using a bomb is labeled as a terrorist?

It's not anyone using a bomb. Usually, it refers to anyone targeting a civilian population using a method designed to create terror, in order to further some political goal.

Bombs just happen to be a good way to inspire terror. However, terrorists could also, say, use guns to hold people hostage.

Bombs can also be used by non-terrorists (i.e. military).

The most borderline case would probably be the Unabomber. He was not necessarily a terrorist because he wasn't trying to enact political change, but some people might list him as one. I personally would not.

[Shastafarian]

Meh, that's not that bad. It depends how wide of a net you want to cast with the word "terrorist". A person can bomb an abortion clinic without being necessarily a terrorist, unless you want to classify everybody who murders a person or bombs anything a terrorist.

Personally, a precondition for me to label someone a terrorist is the person has to have political gain as an objective in their action. Otherwise, anyone on earth who does anything evil could be considered a terrorist. Now whether someone bombs an abortion clinic for political reasons is probably based on a case by case basis.

Pretty bad answer to the question but she's not blatantly wrong when it comes to the actual wording. She probably needed another sentence to explain better.

:rollin

[MaNuMaNiAc]

It's not anyone using a bomb. Usually, it refers to anyone targeting a civilian population using a method designed to create terror, in order to further some political goal.

Bombs just happen to be a good way to inspire terror. However, terrorists could also, say, use guns to hold people hostage.

Bombs can also be used by non-terrorists (i.e. military).

The most borderline case would probably be the Unabomber. He was not necessarily a terrorist because he wasn't trying to enact political change, but some people might list him as one. I personally would not.

Even so, how does that not make an abortion clinic bomber a terrorist?

[only1wwff]

oh dude...do you need a flow chart?

[DarkReign]

Absolutely its terrorism. That isnt a debate.

[romad_20]

Why is it that anybody using a bomb is labeled as a terrorist?

Not everyone using a bomb is a terrorist. Maybe a bomb is just your tool for killing someone. You only want to kill that group or person. But someone using bombs to effect the long term behavior of people who perform or who want to get an abortion is most definitely terrorism.

[Shastafarian]

Absolutely its terrorism. That isnt a debate.

No you see if you bomb an abortion clinic, it's only terrorism if there is some political motivation. I'm not sure what that motivation could be though...

[hater]

No you see if you bomb an abortion clinic, it's only terrorism if there is some political motivation. I'm not sure what that motivation could be though...

if it's a clinic of black ppl, it could be racial motivation and still be terrorism. It does not have to be political.

On the other hand, after some thought. It could not be terrorism at all. For example it could be a mob hit or even the CIA killing off somebody which isnt really terrorism.

IMO terrorism is when you do something to instill fear in a group of people.

[Shastafarian]

if it's a clinic of black ppl, it could be racial motivation and still be terrorism. It does not have to be political.

On the other hand, after some thought. It could not be terrorism at all. For example it could be a mob hit or even the CIA killing off somebody which isnt really terrorism.

IMO terrorism is when you do something to instill fear in a group of people.

...I was mocking someone

[Trainwreck2100]

There's a discrimination there that i wouldn't equate to terrorism

[I Love Me Some Me]

I don't think the terrorists that attacked the WTC were politically motivated. They seemed motivated by their religious beliefs.

[AntiChrist]

Ahhhh, Brian Williams, another one of my minions.


Getting fired upon from a helicopter is terrorism -- if you're a wolf. I think that was going to be his next question.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

There's a discrimination there that i wouldn't equate to terrorism

I don't understand exactly what you're talking about

[only1wwff]

When violence is used in order to create an atmosphere of fear, whether it is ideological, political or religious, it's a political expression. The way I see it, if I were going to blow up my ex-husband's car, there isn't anything political about that, it's just me thinking he's a dick...but if I were going to blow up an abortion clinic, it's because I have an ideological problem with abortion and want to change the fact that it's legal by scaring the shit out of potential patients...man I hope that didn't sound stupid.

[DarkReign]

When violence is used in order to create an atmosphere of fear, whether it is ideological, political or religious, it's a political expression. The way I see it, if I were going to blow up my ex-husband's car, there isn't anything political about that, it's just me thinking he's a dick...but if I were going to blow up an abortion clinic, it's because I have an ideological problem with abortion and want to change the fact that it's legal by scaring the shit out of potential patients...man I hope that didn't sound stupid.

Someone who doesnt agree with you will say it does. But it didnt.

[hater]

When violence is used in order to create an atmosphere of fear, whether it is ideological, political or religious, it's a political expression. The way I see it, if I were going to blow up my ex-husband's car, there isn't anything political about that, it's just me thinking he's a dick...but if I were going to blow up an abortion clinic, it's because I have an ideological problem with abortion and want to change the fact that it's legal by scaring the shit out of potential patients...man I hope that didn't sound stupid.

what if you decide to blow up your husband while he is at the clinic? do you become a terrorist?

[romad_20]

what if you decide to blow up your husband while he is at the clinic? do you become a terrorist?

Multi-tasking terrorist? :huh Say it isn't so.

[only1wwff]

lol...well...him getting blown up is just bonus...but it's not the intent

[Extra Stout]

Yes, that bully would be a terrorist if he were terrorizing other people.

I'm sorry the actual word doesn't fit your pre-conditioned version but that's your deal.
If you were President, would you send school bullies to Gitmo?

[romad_20]

If you were President, would you send school bullies to Gitmo?

http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2008/2/30feb27-super-wedgie.jpg

Yes.

[Findog]

WILLIAMS: Who is a member of the elite?

PALIN: Oh, I guess just people who think that they're better than anyone else. And-- John McCain and I are so committed to serving every American. Hard-working, middle-class Americans who are so desiring of this economy getting put back on the right track. And winning these wars. And America's starting to reach her potential. And that is opportunity and hope provided everyone equally. So anyone who thinks that they are-- I guess-- better than anyone else, that's-- that's my definition of elitism.

WILLIAMS: So it's not education? It's not income-based? It's--

PALIN: Anyone who thinks that they're better than someone else.

WILLIAMS: --a state of mind? It's not geography?

PALIN: 'Course not.

WILLIAMS: Senator?

MCCAIN: I-- I know where a lot of 'em live. (LAUGH)

WILLIAMS: Where's that?

MCCAIN: Well, in our nation's capital and New York City. I've seen it. I've lived there. I know the town. I know-- I know what a lot of these elitists are. The ones that she never went to a cocktail party with in Georgetown. I'll be very frank with you. Who think that they can dictate what they believe to America rather than let Americans decide for themselves.

Wasn't DC and NYC attacked on 9/11?

[Shastafarian]

Wasn't DC and NYC attacked on 9/11?

Yeah but only non-elitists died. The real americans were in those buildings. The fake ones must have been on the street kidnapping young women and selling them as sex slaves. Or doing copious amounts of drugs.


I can see why Jon Stewart got so mad...

[Oh, Gee!!]

I know what a lot of these elitists are. The ones that she never went to a cocktail party with in Georgetown.

Has McCain never been to a cocktail party? I have, and I probably have 1/1000 the money and influence he has. (Make that 1/1,000,000,000.)

[AntiChrist]

Retarded questions deserve retarded answers.

[Ya Vez]

I guess joe biden is a terrorist...

CASTLEWOOD, VA — Memo to Barack Obama: don’t mess with Joe BIden’s guns.

At a fish fry for mine workers in rural Southwest Virginia, the Delaware Senator commiserated on being from coal country himself — and did his damndest to convince the blue collar, mostly white Democrats he’s on the ticket to win over that Obama’s one of them as well.

One of rural Democrats’ biggest fears about Obama? That he’ll come after the Second Amendment. Not so, said Biden — and he’d better not try.

“I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey,” Biden said angrily. “They’re going to start peddling that to you.” “I got two, if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem.”

But I guess not cause Beretta doesn't make shotguns... priceless Joe...

[clambake]

But I guess not cause Beretta doesn't make shotguns...

you should change your name to stupid.

[romad_20]

I guess joe biden is a terrorist...

CASTLEWOOD, VA — Memo to Barack Obama: don’t mess with Joe BIden’s guns.

At a fish fry for mine workers in rural Southwest Virginia, the Delaware Senator commiserated on being from coal country himself — and did his damndest to convince the blue collar, mostly white Democrats he’s on the ticket to win over that Obama’s one of them as well.

One of rural Democrats’ biggest fears about Obama? That he’ll come after the Second Amendment. Not so, said Biden — and he’d better not try.

“I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey,” Biden said angrily. “They’re going to start peddling that to you.” “I got two, if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem.”

But I guess not cause Beretta doesn't make shotguns... priceless Joe...

I'm sure Beretta does indeed make shotguns.

[JohnnyMarzetti]

I'm sure Beretta does indeed make shotguns.

http://www.berettausa.com/product/product_field_guns_main.htm

They sure do.

[Ya Vez]

yes they do my mistake...

[romad_20]

yes they do my mistake...

Not only does Biden own guns, he owns rare guns you've never even heard of. He's a regular NRA member.

[Ya Vez]

but the point still on topic here.... does Joe Biden making a threat like that.. would it qualify him as a terrorist...

[romad_20]

but the point still on topic here.... does Joe Biden making a threat like that.. would it qualify him as a terrorist...

Joe Biden a terrorist?? No it makes him what he always is, a gaffe machine.

[ploto]

I couldn't care less about the use of the word terrorist to identify the person. I am much more concerned with this:

"Americans or facilities that it would be unacceptable to": Does that mean that there are some that are acceptable to harm- for example abortion clinics- but she is only concerned about the ones that are unacceptable to harm like the Pentagon?

[DarkReign]

I couldn't care less about the use of the word terrorist to identify the person. I am much more concerned with this:

"Americans or facilities that it would be unacceptable to": Does that mean that there are some that are acceptable to harm- for example abortion clinics- but she is only concerned about the ones that are unacceptable to harm like the Pentagon?

No, no, no...."acceptable" is by definition a subjective term.

She just subjected "abortion clinic bombing" to her definition of terrorism and found it not so fitting, because she doesnt find abortion "acceptable".

The better question is, what else does she not find acceptable?

[only1wwff]

the motivation is to control other people

[ElNono]

I just have this mixed thing of both sadness and hilarity when I see that McCain has to be present whenever Palin gives an interview. I mean, if that is not destroying your image right there, I just don't know what it is.

[ploto]

No, no, no...."acceptable" is by definition a subjective term.

She just subjected "abortion clinic bombing" to her definition of terrorism and found it not so fitting, because she doesnt find abortion "acceptable".

The better question is, what else does she not find acceptable?

Seems to me- she did not imply abortion is unacceptable, she implied bombing abortion clinics IS acceptable.

[boutons_]

Back on pitbull bitch:

Sarah Palin Gives Up on Muslim Attacks

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/104499/sarah_palin_gives_up_on_muslim_attacks/

[DarkReign]

Seems to me- she did not imply abortion is unacceptable, she implied bombing abortion clinics IS acceptable.

Ahhh....touché, good sir/madam (idk).

[timvp]

This thread has a lot of gems. School bullies are terrorists. Anyone who uses a bomb is a terrorist. Anyone who causes any type of fear is a terrorist. Basically, we are all currently or have been a terrorist at some point or another. Great reasoning in this thread. Oh and don't forget the take that the 9/11 attackers didn't have political motives. More greatness :tu

Another question for this thread to ponder. If a parent is pissed that an abortion clinic gave an abortion to their daughter and decides to bomb the abortion clinic in an attempt to injure the doctor, is that parent a terrorist? Thank you, thread, thank you.

[JoeChalupa]

Yes, IMO, that parent would be a terrorist.

[romad_20]

This thread has a lot of gems. School bullies are terrorists. Anyone who uses a bomb is a terrorist. Anyone who causes any type of fear is a terrorist. Basically, we are all currently or have been a terrorist at some point or another. Great reasoning in this thread. Oh and don't forget the take that the 9/11 attackers didn't have political motives. More greatness :tu

Another question for this thread to ponder. If a parent is pissed that an abortion clinic gave an abortion to their daughter and decides to bomb the abortion clinic in an attempt to injure the doctor, is that parent a terrorist? Thank you, thread, thank you.


No offense, but did you read any of the responses? It was said a couple of times that just because you use a bomb it doesn't mean you're a terrorist, but if you're using that bomb to scare people to change their behavior, then yes. No you wouldn't be a terrorist for a bombing a clinic because you're pissed about your daughter, you'd just be a piece of shit murderer. The school bully thing was obviously a joke.

The 9/11 terrorist were motivated by religion which directly influenced their politics.

[timvp]

No you wouldn't be a terroristExactly.


The 9/11 terrorist were motivated by religion which directly influenced their politics.Exactly.

[romad_20]

Exactly.

Exactly.

Ok, I thought you may have skipped over those parts of the thread :lol

[TheMadHatter]

No offense, but did you read any of the responses? It was said a couple of times that just because you use a bomb it doesn't mean you're a terrorist, but if you're using that bomb to scare people to change their behavior, then yes. No you wouldn't be a terrorist for a bombing a clinic because you're pissed about your daughter, you'd just be a piece of shit murderer. The school bully thing was obviously a joke.

The 9/11 terrorist were motivated by religion which directly influenced their politics.

He doesn't read responses. Like I have said many times before, his reading comprehension is deplorable. He likes to make wide accusations against liberals, Democrats, and Obama supporters to fit his preconceived notions of what they are.

By his own definition of a terrorist, abortion clinic bombers would clearly be domestic terrorists:


Personally, a precondition for me to label someone a terrorist is the person has to have political gain as an objective in their action. Otherwise, anyone on earth who does anything evil could be considered a terrorist. Now whether someone bombs an abortion clinic for political reasons is probably based on a case by case basis.

But somehow he comes to this conclusion about abortion clinic bombers:


A person can bomb an abortion clinic without being necessarily a terrorist, unless you want to classify everybody who murders a person or bombs anything a terrorist.

Newsflash Tim, abortion IS a political issue, especially in this country, and people who bomb abortion clinics are TRYING to make a political statement to incite fear into those who support abortion. I've never seen someone draw such horrible conclusions as you in my lifetime, you and whottt must be smoking the same shit :hat

[timvp]

Another example of TheMadHatter being amazingly dumb. I don't even know why I'm wasting this keystrokes . . .


By his own definition of a terrorist, abortion clinic bombers would clearly be domestic terrorists:Obviously. That's why I said abortion clinic bombers can definitely be terrorists.



But somehow he comes to this conclusion about abortion clinic bombers:In other words, not all abortion clinic bombers are terrorists.

You want proof? Read the damn words you just just quoted.


No you wouldn't be a terrorist for a bombing a clinic because you're pissed about your daughter

So, again, TheMadHatter owns himself within his own post.

What a dumb mufuka.

[boutons_]

"The 9/11 terrorist were motivated by religion which directly influenced their politics."

OBL said 9/11 was to punish the occupying, American boots defiling his sacred Saudi Arabia after the Gulf WAr.

Yes, American actions (oil-motivated) "caused" 9/11, according to OBL.

[romad_20]

Nm

[Shastafarian]

This thread has a lot of gems. School bullies are terrorists. Anyone who uses a bomb is a terrorist. Anyone who causes any type of fear is a terrorist. Basically, we are all currently or have been a terrorist at some point or another. Great reasoning in this thread. Oh and don't forget the take that the 9/11 attackers didn't have political motives. More greatness :tu

Another question for this thread to ponder. If a parent is pissed that an abortion clinic gave an abortion to their daughter and decides to bomb the abortion clinic in an attempt to injure the doctor, is that parent a terrorist? Thank you, thread, thank you.

Are you stepping back from your proposal that terrorism can only be defined as being politically motivated?

[TheMadHatter]

Terrorism does not have to be politically motivated. I absolutely disagree with that notion.

Terrorism is any act whose primary purpose is to spread fear and terror amongst its targets. 9/11 is a great example, the primary aim of the terrorists was to spread fear and panic amongst the American public and not to simply kill innocent civilians or destroy the WTC.

[only1wwff]

Terrorism does not have to be politically motivated. I absolutely disagree with that notion.

Terrorism is any act whose primary purpose is to spread fear and terror amongst its targets. 9/11 is a great example, the primary aim of the terrorists was to spread fear and panic amongst the American public and not to simply kill innocent civilians or destroy the WTC.

I respect your opinion here, but someone is generating that fear for a larger purpose.

[timvp]

Are you stepping back from your proposal that terrorism can only be defined as being politically motivated? Sarcasm.

[timvp]

Terrorism does not have to be politically motivated. I absolutely disagree with that notion.

Then you better take it up with dictionaries around the world:


Anyone who uses terror as a weapon in a political struggle, frequently in an attempt to coerce a more powerful opponent, such as a government.

link (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/terrorist)



a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

link (http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=terrorist)


One who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant.

link (http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/definitions.htm)

You can disagree with me all you want, but some of us put limits on what constitutes terrorism. If you don't put such limits, then just about any violent act can be considered terrorism. You can disagree with me and others who put similar limitation, but you can't say I'm wrong since there is no universally recognized definition of "terrorism", which means there isn't a universally recognized definition of a "terrorist".


Terrorism is any act whose primary purpose is to spread fear and terror amongst its targets.Sounds like you need to contact the leaders of the free world considering you have it all figured out. Oh and contact Webster while you're at it.


9/11 is a great example, the primary aim of the terrorists was to spread fear and panic amongst the American public and not to simply kill innocent civilians or destroy the WTC.No kidding. Who said differently?

[Shastafarian]

Sarcasm.

Yes I know. But I was asking legitimately whether you wanted to go back on your assertion from your first post.

[timvp]

Yes I know. But I was asking legitimately whether you wanted to go back on your assertion from your first post.Uh, no. Did you read the post right above yours?

[Shastafarian]

Uh, no. Did you read the post right above yours?

No...I'll do it now

[Shastafarian]

Do religion and ideology always fall into the category of "politics"?

[timvp]

Do religion and ideology always fall into the category of "politics"?Usually. You'd have to provide examples.

[only1wwff]

Do religion and ideology always fall into the category of "politics"?

religion, by virtue of it's need to spread the word, is political in that it seeks to sway opinion

[Shastafarian]

Usually. You'd have to provide examples.

Ok.

Two religious sects are fighting. One of them bombs a school of the other. Is that terrorism and is that politically motivated?

[timvp]

Ok.

Two religious sects are fighting. One of them bombs a school of the other. Is that terrorism and is that politically motivated?Yes and yes. Religion based conflicts virtually always have political undertones.

[Shastafarian]

Yes and yes. Religion based conflicts virtually always have political undertones.

Virtually always?

[timvp]

Virtually always?Always in real life situation. It's possible not to in theory but I don't know of any such occurrence in real life.

What is your definition of a terrorist?

[Shastafarian]

Always in real life situation. It's possible not to in theory but I don't know of any such occurrence in real life.

What is your definition of a terrorist?

I'll try and think of some religious conflicts where it was just two groups of people fighting. By nature, fighting usually leads to taking over of land so I guess that's where you're coming from with the political undertones of all religious conflict.

My definition of a terrorist is someone who commits violent acts or threatens violent acts with legitimate chance of such acts being undertaken with the purpose of terrorizing a person or people. I don't think in this day and age one can confine the word "terrorist" only to the political realm.

[timvp]

My definition of a terrorist is someone who commits violent acts or threatens violent acts with legitimate chance of such acts being undertaken with the purpose of terrorizing a person or people. I don't think in this day and age one can confine the word "terrorist" only to the political realm.So a high school bully is a terrorist? And someone who leaves a drunken, threatening voicemail is a terrorist. Basically, a large percentage of violent criminals are terrorists.

That doesn't seem like too wide of a brush to paint with?

[Shastafarian]

So a high school bully is a terrorist? And someone who leaves a drunken, threatening voicemail is a terrorist. Basically, a large percentage of violent criminals are terrorists.

That doesn't seem like too wide of a brush to paint with?

Would it help if I used "extremely violent or damaging acts"? I haven't exactly gone through drafts of my own definition of terrorist. I didn't know there was gonna be a quiz.

[timvp]

Would it help if I used "extremely violent or damaging acts"? I haven't exactly gone through drafts of my own definition of terrorist. I didn't know there was gonna be a quiz.So you agree with me that your first definition is too broad? That was my original point in this thread. You have to put some sort of restraint on the definition or else almost everyone can be considered a terrorist.

In your original definition, which is apparently the definition used by a group of posters in this thread, a five-year-old who picks on his three-year-old little brother is a terrorist.

[Shastafarian]

So you agree with me that your first definition is too broad? That was my original point in this thread. You have to put some sort of restraint on the definition or else almost everyone can be considered a terrorist.

In your original definition, which is apparently the definition used by a group of posters in this thread, a five-year-old who picks on his three-year-old little brother is a terrorist.

Sure it's too broad. But trying to say that all terrorism and all terrorist acts are politically motivated is too restrictive. I think it's reprehensible she wouldn't say bombing abortion clinics was terrorism. It's politically motivated unless you have one of those very real possibilities someone bombs a person who happens to be there/works there.

[Oh, Gee!!]

bombing abortion clinics is politically motivated

[TheMadHatter]

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[1] There is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[2][3] Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war.

Terrorism is also a form of unconventional warfare and psychological warfare. The word is politically and emotionally charged,[4] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. One 1988 study by the US Army found that over 100 definitions of the word "terrorism" have been used.[5] A person who practices terrorism is a terrorist. The concept of terrorism is itself controversial because it is often used by states to delegitimize political opponents, and thus legitimize the state's own use of terror against those opponents.

[timvp]

unless you have one of those very real possibilities someone bombs a person who happens to be there/works there.Which was my point.

[InRareForm]

LOL @ this semantics fight

[timvp]

bombing abortion clinics is politically motivated


If a parent is pissed that an abortion clinic gave an abortion to their daughter and decides to bomb the abortion clinic in an attempt to injure the doctor, is that parent a terrorist?

[timvp]

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[1] There is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[2][3] Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war.

Terrorism is also a form of unconventional warfare and psychological warfare. The word is politically and emotionally charged,[4] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. One 1988 study by the US Army found that over 100 definitions of the word "terrorism" have been used.[5] A person who practices terrorism is a terrorist. The concept of terrorism is itself controversial because it is often used by states to delegitimize political opponents, and thus legitimize the state's own use of terror against those opponents.Were you trying to own yourself again?

[Shastafarian]

Which was my point.

Huh? I was being sarcastic. Why the fuck would anyone bomb an abortion clinic to kill one person inside? If an abortion clinic gets BOMBED, I would say with 99.9% certainty it was politically motivated.

[only1wwff]

oh for the love...bombing shit is BAD....OKAY

[timvp]

Huh? I was being sarcastic. Why the fuck would anyone bomb an abortion clinic to kill one person inside? If an abortion clinic gets BOMBED, I would say with 99.9% certainty it was politically motivated.Sounds like you need to answer that question upthread as well.

[TheMadHatter]

Arguing over the definition of terrorism wasn't the point of this thread.

The point was to point out the absurdity in Palin's claim that Ayer's bombing campaign constituted terrorism whilst abortion clinic bombings were NOT terrorism.

[Shastafarian]

Sounds like you need to answer that question upthread as well.

You think someone would BOMB and abortion clinic to kill one doctor inside? For real?

[Oh, Gee!!]

If a parent is pissed that an abortion clinic gave an abortion to their daughter and decides to bomb the abortion clinic in an attempt to injure the doctor, is that parent a terrorist?

:lol:lol:lol that happens all the time :lol:lol:lol that's the most common reason given by abortion bombers when asked why they bombed an abortion clinic:lol:lol:lol

:lol:lol:lol

[timvp]

Arguing over the definition of terrorism wasn't the point of this thread.We aren't talking about the point of the thread.

[timvp]

:lol:lol:lol that happens all the time :lol:lol:lol that's the most common reason given by abortion bombers when asked why they bombed an abortion clinic:lol:lol:lol

:lol:lol:lol
Link to where I said that was the most common reason? Or even a common reason?

[timvp]

You think someone would BOMB and abortion clinic to kill one doctor inside? For real?It has happened before.

[Shastafarian]

Link to where I said that was the most common reason? Or even a common reason?

He's not claiming it is. He's using that device to point out the most common reason given is that abortion kills babies and whatnot.

[Shastafarian]

It has happened before.

Link?

[timvp]

He's not claiming it is. He's using that device to point out the most common reason given is that abortion kills babies and whatnot.I have already noted that. Repeatedly.

[Shastafarian]

I have already noted that. Repeatedly.

Congratulations.

[Oh, Gee!!]

It has happened before.

the doctor had a gambling debt and the mob did it:lol:lol:lol

[Oh, Gee!!]

no, the doctor cut off a guy in traffic and got bombed in his office cause of road rage :lol :lol
:lol

palin rules

[only1wwff]

nope....student loans came due and doc couldn't come up with the coin

[TheMadHatter]

WTF is timvp even driving at here? His hypotheticals make absolutely no sense, including that asinine thread he made about switching VP's.

[SnakeBoy]

I thought her answer was perfectly fine since she's a newbie. When Palin gets more experience she'll be able to come up with articulate answers just like the Messiah.



Brian Williams: Is an abortion clinic bomber a terrorist under this definition?

Sarah Palin: Uhh, Err, Uhhh, Errr That's uh above my pay grade Uhhh.

[Duff McCartney]

I said there were multiple definitions of "terrorist". That liberal definition you offered would consider a school bully a terrorist. Do you think school bullies are terrorists?

Since I love this quote so much and I'm sure it's been debunked already...

Here's two definitions.

Department of State...

"The term 'terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."

Department of Defense...

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

I've never heard of any abortion clinic bombing/murders/arsons that wouldn't fall under any of these categories.

Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, John Salvi...all these nuts committed the violence to accomplish goals that were religious and ideological.

[TheMadHatter]

Since I love this quote so much and I'm sure it's been debunked already...

Here's two definitions.

Department of State...

"The term 'terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."

Department of Defense...

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

I've never heard of any abortion clinic bombing/murders/arsons that wouldn't fall under any of these categories.

Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, John Salvi...all these nuts committed the violence to accomplish goals that were religious and ideological.

Exactly.

It's pointless to discuss the hypothetical of an abortion bombing that wasn't politically motivated in some way since we have no real life examples. Simply pointless.