What is a Terrorist?
- Thread starter mrmom2
- Start date
Terrorist are those who would blow up little kids and old men and women in the town market or street, to further their own ends. In the trouble spots of the world, those who blow up enemy military instalations, and engage the occupation forces are not terrorists they are rebels or freedom fighters or whatever. Those who bomb, shoot, murder civillians in a country to impose their will are indeed terrrorists. However if they take prisoner, and punish would be contractors who are paid to conduct business for the enemy or the occupation forces they are not terrorists. Outside contractors employed by occupation forces get what they deserve.
I like the description provided by damngrumpy.
Perhaps it takes a Tyrant to label them as such. It's easier to legitimize horrendous action if you can demonize those who resist.
Perhaps it takes a Tyrant to label them as such. It's easier to legitimize horrendous action if you can demonize those who resist.
According to the Department of Homeland Defense crime can be considered terrorism 
Don't get caught with a joint because you will be labelled a terrorist :lol:
http://infowars.com/articles/us/drug_czar_drug_war_like_terror_war.htm
Don't get caught with a joint because you will be labelled a terrorist :lol:http://infowars.com/articles/us/drug_czar_drug_war_like_terror_war.htm
Wow, that's harsh, and a little twisted. Some people are there with the real intention of helping.
The people that are there to help are aid workers, Said. The ones who showed up to sub-contract to the US government are valid enemy targets. They fit into the same category as those unlawful combatants you have in cages down in Guantanamo.
Re: RE: What is a Terrorist?
The intentions of all who are there is not written stone, or known. Saying they deserve what they get is sick and twisted. Period. Aid workers there on the US gov dollar would fall into the same category as contractors, since they are employed by the ememy too, and it doesn't look like insurgents are picky either.
Oh, and I don't have anyone in cages anywhere, unless you count me rabbit.
Reverend Blair said:
The intentions of all who are there is not written stone, or known. Saying they deserve what they get is sick and twisted. Period. Aid workers there on the US gov dollar would fall into the same category as contractors, since they are employed by the ememy too, and it doesn't look like insurgents are picky either.
Oh, and I don't have anyone in cages anywhere, unless you count me rabbit.
Aid workers should not be working wih the US government, but with a specific NGO or the UN. Aid workers that get cozy with military forces endanger the lives of other aid workers. The US government has been roundly criticized by the aid community for it's involvement with aid workers and propensity for using them as cover for covert operations.
The US army largely privatized itself under the careful guidance of Dick Cheney when Dicky was running Halliburton. The private employees who have replaced military positions, combat or not, are still supporting US government soldiers.
Several "security firms" are operating in Iraq. Some are connected to the CIA, others provide services to contractors. They are mercenaries in a war zone...nothing more, nothing less. They are there because of personal greed.
The US army largely privatized itself under the careful guidance of Dick Cheney when Dicky was running Halliburton. The private employees who have replaced military positions, combat or not, are still supporting US government soldiers.
Several "security firms" are operating in Iraq. Some are connected to the CIA, others provide services to contractors. They are mercenaries in a war zone...nothing more, nothing less. They are there because of personal greed.
Re: RE: What is a Terrorist?
How do they endanger the lives of other aid workers? Security is essential, aid workers need protection, perhaps the UN could provide it, but I think it makes little difference at this point. US military protection bad. Got it.
Of course they are in support of the US government. I think I'm catching on, anyone who suppports the US gov deserves to have their head cut off, burnt, then dragged through the streets. Gottcha. Terrorists good.
You know this how?
Personal greed? This how you justify their beheadings? Like I said, I think any westerner is fair game at this point. Since they are paid to be there, NGO's must be greedy too, eh?
Reverend Blair said:
How do they endanger the lives of other aid workers? Security is essential, aid workers need protection, perhaps the UN could provide it, but I think it makes little difference at this point. US military protection bad. Got it.
Of course they are in support of the US government. I think I'm catching on, anyone who suppports the US gov deserves to have their head cut off, burnt, then dragged through the streets. Gottcha. Terrorists good.
You know this how?
Personal greed? This how you justify their beheadings? Like I said, I think any westerner is fair game at this point. Since they are paid to be there, NGO's must be greedy too, eh?
One of those guys was a Canadian Said a private merc. He made his choice and paid the price for it.If the US invaded Canada You would get the same treatment from me thats for sure :wink:
That was in response to this. "Aid workers that get cozy with military forces endanger the lives of other aid workers. The US government has been roundly criticized by the aid community for it's involvement with aid workers and propensity for using them as cover for covert operations." You forgot to C&P the most pertinent part of the post. No wonder you seemed confused.
They are providing material support to an occupying force. That makes them fair game for resistance.
By watching and reading the news. You should try it sometime. :wink:
[quote="Reverend BlairThat was in response to this. "Aid workers that get cozy with military forces endanger the lives of other aid workers. The US government has been roundly criticized by the aid community for it's involvement with aid workers and propensity for using them as cover for covert operations." You forgot to C&P the most pertinent part of the post. No wonder you seemed confused.[/quote]
Nice, resorting to personal attacks, I'm impressed with your maturity. I didn't see a link with the most pertinent part of your opinion either, that's what I would have done. Saves time.
According to you. Besides, no one should be re-building Iraq, with the exception of Iraqis. Still, I don't agree with your position though.
Nice, again insults. How about links or something. No matter, I'm pretty busy too. :wink:
Nice, resorting to personal attacks, I'm impressed with your maturity. I didn't see a link with the most pertinent part of your opinion either, that's what I would have done. Saves time.
According to you. Besides, no one should be re-building Iraq, with the exception of Iraqis. Still, I don't agree with your position though.
Nice, again insults. How about links or something. No matter, I'm pretty busy too. :wink:
Heres your goverment's take on what a terrorist is :lol:
http://infowars.com/articles/ps/secret_fbi_report_highlights_domestic_terror.htm
http://infowars.com/articles/ps/secret_fbi_report_highlights_domestic_terror.htm
mrmom2 said:
My government? Aren't you a Canadian too? I'm coming to you live, from Ottawa, baby!
You tried to misquote me in the post right after mine, what did you think I was going to do? I'm not really interested in what you would have done. If you really need links, I can supply plenty...ask around. It's been my experience that people who take your position rarely take the time to read any documentation though. If they were prone to doing such research, or even watching the news, they would understand where what you consider to be my opinion comes from.
No, according to miltary analysts and people who study foreign policies all over the globe. It's the same thing as blowing up a supply line or taking out a factory.
I never said that. It is reprehensible that Iraqis who want to work are left unemployed while Halliburton subsiduaries import workers though.
Gee, that's too bad. :roll:
Try Google, avoid anything from Fox or Can-West Global.
Give Stevie Harper a big, sloppy kiss for me. Get your tongue right down his throat. 8O
[quote="Reverend Blair]Give Stevie Harper a big, sloppy kiss for me. Get your tongue right down his throat. 8O[/quote]
Nice, that's real "cool". Is this what passes for debate around here? Ooops, seems like I mis-quote you again.
Seriously, that's pretty out of line, if I do say so myself.
Nice, that's real "cool". Is this what passes for debate around here? Ooops, seems like I mis-quote you again.
Seriously, that's pretty out of line, if I do say so myself.
mrmom2 said:Sorry Said1 I did not know you were a Canadian
No biggy, hating needless death and torture might make me seem American, but that includes death and suffering on all sides. Don't and won't agree with it ever. Sorry.
What, aren't you attracted to him? I think it's the hair that does it. :wink:
Seriously, the man looks like he could use some action. I used to think that whine was just his natural voice, but then I was watching this psychology class on CLT and the prof was talking about a lack of release of sexual tension having physical manifestations and it all made sense to me.
Since you're there and I'm not, it seemed to me that you could sacrifice yourself for all of us who watch Question Period.
Oh, speaking of debate, you never responded to the rest of my last post.