

Cool story. But, I’m not going to get into a senseless slap fight with someone that is irrelevant to the topic, so you’re going to have to just go find the argument you’re so clearly desperate for- somewhere else.
Cool story. But, I’m not going to get into a senseless slap fight with someone that is irrelevant to the topic, so you’re going to have to just go find the argument you’re so clearly desperate for- somewhere else.
Welcome to the new normal- where criminality runs deep within the very system that was designed to crush it.
Those that make the rules, now defy them right in our faces while we pretend it’s always been this way.
Well, when a clown pops in to argue against a comment that calls out AMERICANS that refused to vote in protest, one would assume said clown is American.
Forgive me, clown. The fault is my own.
Here’s a thought exercise for you:
Try it for a fucking change.
Well, at least your inability to do the bare minimum to keep a tyrant king from being elected resulted in you being able to find a bright side to all the suffering he has caused.
So happy for you
And your point here besides pointlessly insulting everyone serving in the armed forces?
Sure glad we dodged that Harris bullet though, right guys! I super wish I hadn’t voted like all the other cool kids though.
Fair point.
The books are infinitely better.
I’m not changing the definition. I’m simply explaining my interpretation of it. Threats of murder are a form of terrorism.
If a person that plays guitar is called a guitarist, then a person that terrorizes others is a terrorist.
It’s pretty simple.
As a rule, a man who has never worked a day in his life- should have no authority over those who do.
If their victim died in terror, yes. They are.
Ya don’t say……
Meanwhile, Death Stranding 2 is just days from launch.
“Ideological” pretty much covers everything else. A threat to kill is an act of terrorism.
I think what’s happening here, is that murder has become so normalized that we have reached a point where the word “terrorism” has to have some special definition that excludes it from the regular run-of-the-mill terror one would experience when they’re life is threatened for whatever reason.
I mean, would you feel terror if someone threatened your life in a way that you truly believed you were in danger?
Oh, and she sung a song in Spanish, and was threatened with death for not singing in American English. That screams political to me…
“Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims.”
So… no, I think I got it right. I mean, its root is from the Latin word- “terror”. A threat of death is sure to cause such a feeling in most people. So- in this form, the threat illustrates the act of one person terrorizing another. Therefore- one who terrorizes is a terrorist by definition.
This is not a stretch to arrive at this conclusion. That it sounds foreign might be a result of the normalization of violence.
The Supreme Court in-and-of-itself, is a setback to transgender rights.
If you threaten to kill someone, you are using terror to manipulate them into being fearful.
A death threat because you don’t like someone is still an intention to instill fear in someone. So yes. You’d be a terrorist.
By definition: terrorism is the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to instill fear, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological goals. Killing someone out of hate is an ideological goal.
Can someone please impeach him… based on vibes?