Oh, breaking and entering isn't force now? Do Occupy protesters get to cap cops who come to arrest them?

Breaking and entering? Gmafb. Sit ins are the new terrorism!

And no of course it's not ok to shoot cops. Again, so you are saying that these guys are terrorists?

What would the right call OWS/BLM if they were fully armed and threatening to protect themselves by using the weapons if provoked by the police?

I don't ****ing care. Seriously, so what if the right says something preposterously stupid? Does that mean you can be the same level of stupid?

Gotta first get in to sit in afaik.

"The U.S.*Code of Federal Regulations*defines terrorism 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)."

"The*U.S. Department of Defense*recently changed its definition of terrorism. Per Joint Pub 3-07.2,*Antiterrorism,*(24 November 2010), the Department of Defense defines it as "the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence to instill fear and coerce governments or societies. Terrorism is often motivated by religious, political, or other ideological beliefs and committed in the pursuit of goals that are usually political."

Or FEMA's definition: "Terrorism is the use of force or violence against persons or property in violation of the criminal laws of the United States for purposes of intimidation, coercion, or ransom. Terrorists often use threats to:

Create fear among the public.

Try to convince citizens that their government is powerless to prevent terrorism.

Get immediate publicity for their causes."

Yeah ikes, I think they check off the boxes by explicitly threatening violence in order to achieve political goals. It is preposterous to call them peaceful protesters.

Agree. These guys are literally out in the middle of nowhere in Oregon. Law enforcement is just wondering what the hell they want at this point. I have a strong feeling this is going to end very badly though. Like the FBI will show up or something and try out their new weaponry.

Yes, they are terrorists. Yes, it is the fact that they have weapons which they are threatening violence with that is a key part to making them terrorists. Can we get off the stupid who's gonna call who terrorists first discussion now?

Fabulous, using those same definitions I'll just declare those bastard rioters in baltimore and ferguson terrorists. God malcom x was such a terrible terrorist how did we get by? Gotta do what you gotta do though man.

(remember when liberals fought against expansive definitions of terrorism? i miss those days)

Oh look, you made your ****ty point. Was it as satisfying as you dreamed it would be?

Why does it matter what you call them?

It's super ****ing important for our civil liberties that we don't define terrorism largely based on political persuasion. It's something that the right tends to do, and it hasn't worked out well for the country. Add the left to that, and it's a path to a complete cluster****. Don't be so short-sighted to start allowing terrorism to become basically anything.

Are you guys really gonna get Semantikes'd like this?

It's not ****ing semantics. Terrorism is one of, if not the, political issue of our time. It's important that we don't allow it to consume us. Bastardizing the definition to fit your political opponents is a road you do not want to go down.

You started by calling it a peaceful protest lol

What about not caring about definitions?

OK, what is the definition everyone should be using?

brown guys screaming allahu akbar

I sort of like it when liberals mush words meaningless.

It just makes "Radical Islamic Terrorism" sound so much better when declared by the Unstumped Trump.

Cant help but lol at terrorism in oregon

Sounds like a portlandia skit

Terrorism was defined in Team America (nsfw)

the shortsightedness in defining terrorism as basically anything, may rival actual terrorism as the 'political issue of our time.'

lol ikes

It's just weird to me when you and KC talk about "the general twitter vibe" like it's a gotcha. I see the same **** and it looks to me like it's a lazy point about urban police violence, not an actual gleeful bloodlust.

Either way, it's just us arguing about our feels. And it seems so out of place on 2p2. Even if you have a concrete example of bloodlust, seeing it as this widespread problem to me seems as dumb as spending time reading fatlogic or something. Just seeing a prevelance that isn't there because you chose to spend time around mouthbreathers being mouthbreathers.

Islamic terrorism is hardly the issue of our time. It's actually a really ****ing small issue if we would stop wasting trillions of dollars on it.

Chadly Goat