The five great lies of the
We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.
Fact 2: many INNOCENT, adult, already born human beings will be be murdered possible including, doctors, patients, nurse, maintenance workers, IT workers, delivery people, passer-byers on the street and children
this is again more proof that you have a bat**** insane, illogical, evil, deranged, inane, mentally void view of this issue
woner how you'd feel if your brother, mother, father, sister, wife etc just happened to be near the facility and they were also murdered, in the terrorist attack? see why this is mentally deranged broken logic.
I still do not understand what is confusing about this point and am interested to hear what you have to say that contradicts this - but so far all I've got from you is that you believe my argument is illogical - I'd love to hear your side - or more specifically, what's illogical about not considering an act of hate, without the intent to coerce or threaten, as an act of terrorism? Where is the contradiction in premises or the conclusion that follows with one of those premises?
And to be clear, I'm not suggesting that it can't be terrorism - in fact, I'd think most of the time it IS terrorism by definition. Just that it doesn't always have to be terrorism.
by definition it is still terrorism, the persons opinion doesn't change anything, nothing as changed
was 9/11 terrorism? yes, even if the people THOUGHT they were stopping evil LMAO
you argument is 100% illogical because you cant prove that it wasnt to coercer, force, intimidate for a goal.
the goal was to stop abortion, they tried to achieve that by violence and force and intimidation and coercion
Terrorism: The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property in order to coerce or intimidate a government or the civilian population in furtherance of political or social objectives.
if it was to stop abortion it was terrorism
the only way it wouldnt be is this.
If tommy bomb an office to kill doug because doug cut him off in traffic and doug just happened to work at an abortion clinic a i wouldnt call that terrorism.
but anybody bombing an abortion clinic to stop the abortions that goes on there is in fact committing terrorism by definition the problem with your failed scenario is that that ARE using violence and force and intimidation and coercion .
id love for you to show other wise, show me how "feelings" matter.
LMAO the hell with it lets start with scratch.
Forget everything i just said and ill show you the light.
Give me your original example that you think isnt terrorism.
Person bombs abortion clinic to stop abortions because that person thinks they are evil, is this right? is this your example?
"There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).
FBI — Terrorism 2002/2005
The act of bombing with the intent to stop an action occuring at that place (which is exactly what you wrote: "if it was to stop abortion it was terrorism") is not the same as the act of bombing with the intent to intimidate or coerce other people. The intent to intimidate or coerce is a necessary part of the definition of terrorism. If the act was simply 'to stop abortion', it's not terrorism as it does not include any intent of coercion or intimidation.
Like I said, this likely is not the case. it's likely that coercion and intimidation are part of the intent of the bomb. But if it's not necessarily the case, if the case is strictly "if it was to stop abortion", then it is not terrorism. Which means the absolute statement: "Bombing an abortion clinic is an act of terrorism." is false as an absolute statement.