And then quote me as if it support your twisted interpretation and follow it with another emotional appeal.Originally Posted by Apocalypse
What English teacher taught you that: 'labels like terrorists are meant to classify the "good guy" VS the "bad guy"' = "clearly refused to recognize that terrorism does exist and that actions such as the one discussed in this thread are indeed acts of terrorism"? At this point, I don't know if your problem is with logic or comprehension.
What next, you are going to claim I "refused to recognize" that "Murder" exists because I said the term is used by the pro-life to attack the pro-choice?
It's not surprising that you quote me out of context either. I clearly referred to how the family of those killed by Americans might feel:
Answer the question: to those people, how is the fact that the people who killed their family members are military changes the reality of losing their loved ones? Have not American planes ever drop bombs that they know will kill innocent people? Why are these people less entitled to view American pilots as "terrorist" than the family of the 911 victims? Is their loss less significant? But are American pilots "terrorist"? God no. That's why the term is a subjective emotional appeal in most cases.Originally Posted by nonpareil
And to cap it off you put another spin on what I say:
No where did I say that "as long as a person, an individual, is not caught and judged in a court of law and is found guilty for acts of terrorism or conspiring to commit acts of terrorism an action cannot be considered terrorism", "basically" or not. I don't even know where that come from, and I can't respond to such illogical reasoning because I can't follow such gaps in logic.Originally Posted by Apocalypse
I can stand for what I say, but I hate wasting my time with people who prefer to spin and is dishonest.