|
|
Post by steveinthecity on Jan 31, 2021 9:22:44 GMT -8
Anyone who tried to or actually did strike/gas a police offer in some fashion at the Capitol is a domestic terrorist. I don't know if they are terrorists or just criminals (I think terrorist is extreme) for striking a police officer.
Why are BLM rioters not terrorists? They are destroying property, hurting people and lawless.
Nobody can seem to answer that question.
I’ll try. As we use the word “terrorist” it usually means a person who using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes. I understand “politics” can be used in many contexts, but here I’m referring to established government people or institutions. |
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 9:23:18 GMT -8
Anyone who tried to or actually did strike/gas a police offer in some fashion at the Capitol is a domestic terrorist. I don't know if they are terrorists or just criminals (I think terrorist is extreme) for striking a police officer. Why are BLM rioters not terrorists? They are destroying property, hurting people and lawless. Nobody can seem to answer that question.
I am not going to make it three weeks  You're starting to sound racist too  |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:24:36 GMT -8
Jebus, not Tucker Carlson again icon_facepalm Any position you espouse using him as your evidence just enforces the idea that you are a whackjob conspiracy loon. So Tucker quotes people talking about domestic terrorist and you won't comment on the content and just the messenger again? Noted. |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:27:49 GMT -8
I don't know if they are terrorists or just criminals (I think terrorist is extreme) for striking a police officer.
Why are BLM rioters not terrorists? They are destroying property, hurting people and lawless.
Nobody can seem to answer that question.
I’ll try. As we use the word “terrorist” it usually means a person who using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes. I understand “politics” can be used in many contexts, but here I’m referring to established government people or institutions. Wouldn't the BLM movement violence fall under the definition of "using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes"?
It's a 'human rights' movement but it's not a stretch at all to say that it's also a political movement, isn't it? 
It just happens to be that it's been given a free pass, more or less.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 9:28:53 GMT -8
Jebus, not Tucker Carlson again icon_facepalm Any position you espouse using him as your evidence just enforces the idea that you are a whackjob conspiracy loon. So Tucker quotes people talking about domestic terrorist and you won't comment on the content and just the messenger again? Noted. I will not listen to one second of that piece of garbage's broadcasts  |
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 9:32:53 GMT -8
I’ll try. As we use the word “terrorist” it usually means a person who using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes. I understand “politics” can be used in many contexts, but here I’m referring to established government people or institutions. Wouldn't the BLM movement violence fall under the definition of "using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes"? It's a 'human rights' movement but it's not a stretch at all to say that it's also a political movement, isn't it? It just happens to be that it's been given a free pass, more or less.
So then when Trump tear gassed the protesters so he could walk to a church for a photo op he committed a terrorist act right? |
|
|
|
Post by steveinthecity on Jan 31, 2021 9:34:47 GMT -8
I’ll try. As we use the word “terrorist” it usually means a person who using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes. I understand “politics” can be used in many contexts, but here I’m referring to established government people or institutions. Wouldn't the BLM movement violence fall under the definition of "using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes"?
It's a 'human rights' movement but it's not a stretch at all to say that it's also a political movement, isn't it?
It just happens to be that it's been given a free pass, more or less.
Everything’s potentially political, but not everything is government was what I was trying to say. |
|
|
|
Post by barry on Jan 31, 2021 9:52:12 GMT -8
What is happening in the news is that Dems are now starting to label Repub followers as 'domestic terrorists' and many prominent members of the guv are getting on board. AOC, Brennan (ex CIA) and others are starting to divide the country by stating that these 'domestic terrorists' are a threat within the US and labelling them as dangerous as Obama Bin Laden.
Brennan was quoted as saying that finding Obama was like a 'needle in a haystack' but that the domestic terrorists are like finding 'many needles in many haystacks'
This is pretty scary stuff that is not going to end well. Force never fixes anything.
Yes and further evidence that Trump did not incite a riot on the Capitol as I mentioned before. The riot was planned in advance by extremists. There's a difference between them and the 74 million people who voted for him in the last election.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:53:37 GMT -8
Wouldn't the BLM movement violence fall under the definition of "using violence against non-military personnel for political purposes"?
It's a 'human rights' movement but it's not a stretch at all to say that it's also a political movement, isn't it?
It just happens to be that it's been given a free pass, more or less.
Everything’s potentially political, but not everything is government was what I was trying to say.
Google defines it for me as this:
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
Wiki defines it as this:
in the broadest sense, the use of intentional violence for political or religious purposes.[1] It is used in this regard primarily to refer to violence during peacetime or in the context of war against non-combatants (mostly civilians and neutral military personnel).[2]
the FBI defines it as this:
International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored).
Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.
To me, ALL of these definitions place BLM riots under the term terrorists and by the FBI's definition of domestic terrorism, most accurately.
Can anyone disagree with this?
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:58:44 GMT -8
What is happening in the news is that Dems are now starting to label Repub followers as 'domestic terrorists' and many prominent members of the guv are getting on board. AOC, Brennan (ex CIA) and others are starting to divide the country by stating that these 'domestic terrorists' are a threat within the US and labelling them as dangerous as Obama Bin Laden.
Brennan was quoted as saying that finding Obama was like a 'needle in a haystack' but that the domestic terrorists are like finding 'many needles in many haystacks'
This is pretty scary stuff that is not going to end well. Force never fixes anything.
Yes and further evidence that Trump did not incite a riot on the Capitol as I mentioned before. The riot was planned in advance by extremists. There's a difference between them and the 74 million people who voted for him in the last election.
I remember you saying that.
I also make a distinction between rioters AND voters, just as I did for the BLM protestors last year on another forum.
What I don't understand is why the BLM protestors are not labelled domestic terrorists by the new administration but the Capitol protestors are.
We've already seen this double standard in the way Covid protests are handled. If you're protesting Covid restrictions you're not allowed and the fear is you're spreading Covid. If you're protesting with BLM little to no mention of Covid worries and it's given a pass by the people I interact with because it's 'their constitutional right' to protest.
The pretzel logic is not only non-nonsensical and hypocritical it borders on criminal.
|
|
|
|
Post by barry on Jan 31, 2021 10:17:11 GMT -8
Yes and further evidence that Trump did not incite a riot on the Capitol as I mentioned before. The riot was planned in advance by extremists. There's a difference between them and the 74 million people who voted for him in the last election.
I remember you saying that.
I also make a distinction between rioters AND voters, just as I did for the BLM protestors last year on another forum.
What I don't understand is why the BLM protestors are not labelled domestic terrorists by the new administration but the Capitol protestors are. We've already seen this double standard in the way Covid protests are handled. If you're protesting Covid restrictions you're not allowed and the fear is you're spreading Covid. If you're protesting with BLM little to no mention of Covid worries and it's given a pass by the people I interact with because it's 'their constitutional right' to protest.
The pretzel logic is not only non-nonsensical and hypocritical it borders on criminal.
It's entirely political. BLM is a Marxist organization. Radical Democrats protect the movement no matter how violent. I think moderate Democrats are afraid to speak against it. |
|
|
|
Post by steveinthecity on Jan 31, 2021 10:20:55 GMT -8
I remember you saying that.
I also make a distinction between rioters AND voters, just as I did for the BLM protestors last year on another forum.
What I don't understand is why the BLM protestors are not labelled domestic terrorists by the new administration but the Capitol protestors are. We've already seen this double standard in the way Covid protests are handled. If you're protesting Covid restrictions you're not allowed and the fear is you're spreading Covid. If you're protesting with BLM little to no mention of Covid worries and it's given a pass by the people I interact with because it's 'their constitutional right' to protest.
The pretzel logic is not only non-nonsensical and hypocritical it borders on criminal.
It's entirely political. BLM is a Marxist organization. Radical Democrats protect the movement no matter how violent. I think moderate Democrats are afraid to speak against it. Couldn’t the same be said of “stop the steal” in so far as it’s supported by “radical” Republicans but moderate republicans are afraid to speak out? What kind of organization is “stop the steal”, or how it it being labeled? |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 10:28:28 GMT -8
I remember you saying that.
I also make a distinction between rioters AND voters, just as I did for the BLM protestors last year on another forum.
What I don't understand is why the BLM protestors are not labelled domestic terrorists by the new administration but the Capitol protestors are. We've already seen this double standard in the way Covid protests are handled. If you're protesting Covid restrictions you're not allowed and the fear is you're spreading Covid. If you're protesting with BLM little to no mention of Covid worries and it's given a pass by the people I interact with because it's 'their constitutional right' to protest.
The pretzel logic is not only non-nonsensical and hypocritical it borders on criminal.
It's entirely political. BLM is a Marxist organization. Radical Democrats protect the movement no matter how violent. I think moderate Democrats are afraid to speak against it. I don't think they are afraid to speak out against. In fact, they encouraged the protests (or at the very least didn't discourage them just as many on the CGC chat forum where many of us hang out also didn't discourage them, and to me that is almost the same thing as encouraging them)
Anyway, not trying to go off on a segue on debating BLM protests (although I'm happy to if you guys want to) I'm just trying to somehow figure out the double standard and why BLM protests are not considered domestic terrorism when they fall under the definition of it clearly.
The answer is obvious, the branding of domestic terrorist is now being used to only brand enemies of the current administration and like the 'Russian collusion' smear it's being done to create division and to discredit the opposition.
That is the only honest way I can see how the hypocrisy is allowed.
I think they support it because it supports their own agenda.
|
|
|
|
Post by barry on Jan 31, 2021 10:42:00 GMT -8
It's entirely political. BLM is a Marxist organization. Radical Democrats protect the movement no matter how violent. I think moderate Democrats are afraid to speak against it. Couldn’t the same be said of “stop the steal” in so far as it’s supported by “radical” Republicans but moderate republicans are afraid to speak out? What kind of organization is “stop the steal”, or how it it being labeled? I think there are Republicans who don't speak out because it's to their advantage. But I don't think there is a fear of retribution like there is with the Democratic Party right now. AOC and others will "primary" anyone who speaks out. |
|
parker1865
TCBF Member
Joined: September 2018
Posts: 1,325
|
Post by parker1865 on Jan 31, 2021 10:45:51 GMT -8
It's entirely political. BLM is a Marxist organization. Radical Democrats protect the movement no matter how violent. I think moderate Democrats are afraid to speak against it. Couldn’t the same be said of “stop the steal” in so far as it’s supported by “radical” Republicans but moderate republicans are afraid to speak out? What kind of organization is “stop the steal”, or how it it being labeled? in the context that has been discussed here, that would be within the context definition. it should be more inclusive, though, by not using the word democrat or republican. extremists do not have a strict ideology. blm has a very strict ideology. kkk has a very strict ideology. antifa has a very srict ideology, to just name a few, and not for signaling out. the fbi maintains a task force that actively investigates all 3. the fbi dos not have an active task force investigating stop the steal. it does have an active task force hunting down criminal extremists elements of this weak non-organized on a national basis with stated manifestos. any group of any ideology will have criminal extremists, and to identify all members as radical is a mistake. stop the steal is not an ideology, with a mission statement and a history of action, whether criminal or not. the recent bombings mentioned above....there was almost an immediate link by media to the stop the steal/republican/trump supporters as the perpetrators. no. why no? the attempted bombings targeted both the dnc and the rnc. |
|
You're starting to sound racist too 
