Joe Biden a terrorist?? No it makes him what he always is, a gaffe machine.
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?
the motivation is to control other people
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.
Seems to me- she did not imply abortion is unacceptable, she implied bombing abortion clinics IS acceptable.
Back on pitbull :
Sarah Palin Gives Up on Muslim Attacks
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/1...uslim_attacks/
Ahhh....touché, good sir/madam (idk).
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
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.
Yes, IMO, that parent would be a terrorist.
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
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 murderer. The school bully thing was obviously a joke.
The 9/11 terrorist were motivated by religion which directly influenced their politics.
Exactly.
Exactly.
Ok, I thought you may have skipped over those parts of the thread
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:
But somehow he comes to this conclusion about abortion clinic bombers: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.
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 sameA 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.
Another example of TheMadHatter being amazingly dumb. I don't even know why I'm wasting this keystrokes . . .
Obviously. That's why I said abortion clinic bombers can definitely be terrorists.
In other words, not all abortion clinic bombers are terrorists.
You want proof? Read the damn words you just just quoted.
So, again, TheMadHatter owns himself within his own post.
What a dumb mufuka.
"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.
Nm
Last edited by romad_20; 10-24-2008 at 06:45 PM.
Are you stepping back from your proposal that terrorism can only be defined as being politically motivated?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
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.
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.
Sarcasm.
Then you better take it up with dictionaries around the world:
You can disagree with me all you want, but some of us put limits on what cons utes 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".
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.
No kidding. Who said differently?
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?
No...I'll do it now
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
