When is a terrorist not a terrorist?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:22 am

In America? When they're not Islamic terrorists, it seems.

Christopher Hasson, a white nationalist who planned to assassinate a whole list of Democrats, journalists, judges etc - no terrorism charges.
Cesar Sayoc, the MAGA bomber who literally sent bombs to Trump's enemies - no terrorism charges.
James Hodgkinson, the guy who shot at Republicans wounding Steve Scalise - no terrorism charges.
James Alex Fields Jr. deliberately drove his car through anti-fascist protesters, killing a woman - no terrorism charges.

Funny, eh? It's almost as if some people get treated differently to others depending on their religion or nationality or something.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:27 am

There are still crimes but described differently & will be punished accordingly to statutory law differs state to state there I believe, we just describe certain crimes here differently, I wouldn’t read to much into it.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 6:06 am

He or she isn't a terrorist if they're on your side, it's as simple as that.

Woodleyclaret · Post by **Woodleyclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:01 am

When you agree with the government's policies

NottsClaret · Post by **NottsClaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:15 am

The thing I get from that list is white folks in the US make pretty poor terrorists.

BurnleyFC · Post by **BurnleyFC** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:19 am

Fairly ironic thread coming from a staunch Corbyn supporter.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:24 am

When they're killed during the incident, in the case of Hodgkinson. But they should probably do it anyway. To keep you happy. Issue a writ of habeas corpse-us and bring him to court.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:48 am

evensteadiereddie wrote:He or she isn't a terrorist if they're on your side, it's as simple as that.

There is an old saying that though sometimes unpallatable is still very true - one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Quite where that leaves Islamic terrorists (who are generally not enslaved or persecuted) I don't know. The resistance fighters in France, Belgium, Holland etc during the war were considered terrorists by the Germans (although I don't know if the term 'terrorist' had been used at that time). We have armed and helped known 'terrorists' in the past because they have been fighting a common foe. Even the hated IRA were very much considered freedom fighters by many in Ireland (and America where, it seems, most of their funding came from).

I think that we just have to accept that killing and maiming innocents like children, women, or even anyone just going about their own business is wrong on every level but we need to be careful about casting stones, after all how many innocent people on BOTH sides died in the second war due to bombing raids, we basically razed Dresden to the ground and probably killed thousands of innocents. The Americans destroyed two whole cities with atom bombs without a second thought to civilan casualties in Japan. Maybe these actions were deemed 'necesarry' by the governments, and perhaps they were (although some have criticised the destroying of Dresden), but we must be careful of putting name tags on individuals or groups because they fight for different ideas and ideologies. Their tactics may be wrong and offensive to right thinking people but their cause is theirs. Israel say the Palestinians are terrorist but Palestinians and millions of people in the West think that Israel are the terrorists.

You pays your money as they say.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:09 am

I'm no expert on American jurisprudence but, although not universally held, a Google shows that there is an opinion (and not restricted to outlets of one political persuasion) that there are shortfalls in their statute book that make domestic terrorism charges harder to bring so they often go for non-terrorism charges that carry the same punishment.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:13 am

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:31 am

houseboy wrote:... The Americans destroyed two whole cities with atom bombs without a second thought to civilan casualties in Japan. ...

I don't think that's true. They destroyed the cities, but they thought long and hard. As far as Dresden is concerned, Churchill is recorded as speculating whether we should be doing it, quoted as saying "Are we monsters?". The decision was made to bomb these places, but it was thought about.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 am

Dresden was based on the fact that it was a major rail centre for German forces moving to face the Russian offensive on the Oder. And to be brutally honest, the RAF were running out of targets. It is using a bit of hindsight, but the civilian bombing of Germany in 1945 wasn't our finest hour, and costs thousands of lives (both allied and German).

Atomic bombs again where quite simple. The Allied estimates for casualties for Operation Olympic (the invasion of Kyushu) were about a million.

Compare that to casualties from the atomic bombs and its a no brainer (and remember that the Tokyo fire raid of March 1945 killed over 400,000 Japanese civilians)

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:47 am

One might also refer to the American carpet bombing of Hanoi during the Vietnam war. It is estimated that US bombing of Cambodia killed around 300,000 civilians. I'm reminded of Madeleine Albright's chilling words in relation to the half million children who died as a result of sanctions against Iraq: 'We think the price is worth it".

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:50 am

One man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:54 am

dsr wrote:I don't think that's true. They destroyed the cities, but they thought long and hard. As far as Dresden is concerned, Churchill is recorded as speculating whether we should be doing it, quoted as saying "Are we monsters?". The decision was made to bomb these places, but it was thought about.

Apologies for my clumsy wording, of course they would have thought long and hard, what decent society wouldn't prior to committing what was effectively genocide. I have heard before about Churchills doubts over Dresden, many thought it was done as the final 'parting shot' in the war. It just goes to show though that when we are criticising others (and rightly most of the time) we mustn't forget our own highly tainted past.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:12 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Dresden was based on the fact that it was a major rail centre for German forces moving to face the Russian offensive on the Oder. And to be brutally honest, the RAF were running out of targets. It is using a bit of hindsight, but the civilian bombing of Germany in 1945 wasn't our finest hour, and costs thousands of lives (both allied and German).

Atomic bombs again where quite simple. The Allied estimates for casualties for Operation Olympic (the invasion of Kyushu) were about a million.

Compare that to casualties from the atomic bombs and its a no brainer (and remember that the Tokyo fire raid of March 1945 killed over 400,000 Japanese civilians)

Well put Lancaster, as you say with hindsight the bombing of Dresden was done probably because there was simply nothing else to bomb. The Germans were on their knees and effectively defeated, it seems to have served no real purpose at all.

What is it with war that turns societies and individuals into hate-filled monsters? The irony being that, certainly in modern times, the ones who 'declare' the war are the ones who stay safe at home whilst the 'innocents' have to go and kill or be killed. My dad was in the second war, all over Europe and North Africa and met numerous Germans (prisoners of war etc) and he said he never met one he didn't like, he did however hate the French, our allies, because he said they were cowards.

The reason we all fall for it I think is because in the tense build up to a war situation the media (in any country) goes into overdrive about how bad the potential enemy is (propaganda) and by the time war is declared most people (maybe not all) are chomping at the bit to go and kill Johnny Foreigner. It's all a bloody game really but with very high stakes. When a government tells us we are at war and starts recruiting for the armed forces perhaps people should ask 'Why? Tell us exactly what these people have done for us to go and kill them.' And when the usual lies and deceit come out we should simply say give us proof or we are going nowhere. The first war was a criminal waste of human life for what exactly? Because an assaination spiralled out of control due to mainly pride. Madness.

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:24 am

Bit of a turn from the main point but regarding the wars, I think Imran Khan summed it up well with his speech amidst the unfolding war with India last week.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.opin ... d-war/amp/

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:33 am

BurnleyFC wrote:Fairly ironic thread coming from a staunch Corbyn supporter.

I posted the thread.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:35 am

Amazing that a country the size of America has never convicted anyone of being a terrorist who is non Islamic.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:36 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Amazing that a country the size of America has never convicted anyone of being a terrorist who is non Islamic.

Couldn't help yourself, could you? You just had to post something stupid.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:40 am

What point were you making ?

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:48 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Couldn't help yourself, could you? You just had to post something stupid.

You started the thread Turtle hoping for controversial statements so you could impose your views ....

Perhaps you should change your name to "Imposing Turtle"

Your views can be viewed as "Stupid" in some quarters so stop being a dick m8...

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:00 pm

What's the motivation for the OP? Islamic terrorists should be given a better press over here? The I.R.A. were freedom fighters?

Billy Balfour · Post by **Billy Balfour** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:06 pm

houseboy wrote:The resistance fighters in France, Belgium, Holland etc during the war were considered terrorists by the Germans (although I don't know if the term 'terrorist' had been used at that time).

Resistance fighters in France were called Der Franzosische Widerstand. In the East the term Partisaner was used. The war against them was referred to as Partisanenkrieg.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:12 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:Resistance fighters in France were called Der Franzosische Widerstand. In the East the term Partisaner was used. The war against them was referred to as Partisanenkrieg.

They were also known as "Maquis" after the scrubland bushes they used to hide in

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/maquis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:28 pm

What was the term used for Bolton fans when they used to hide in wait then ambush away fans at the railway station? I'm talking Burnden here by the way. What was the motivation in keeping AWAY fans back so the home fans could re-group further down the road? I think the police were secretly helping the home fans. Bar Steward Stationeers may be a thought. Horrible away ground was Burnden (in every sense).

BurnleyFC · Post by **BurnleyFC** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:32 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I posted the thread.

I know, and your pal Jeremy fails to differentiate between terrorists and non-terrorists as well.

ClaretSteve · Post by **ClaretSteve** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:40 pm

Does that mean that people who are terrorists should not be treated as such?

Obvious thread is obvious.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:48 pm

bfccrazy wrote:Bit of a turn from the main point but regarding the wars, I think Imran Khan summed it up well with his speech amidst the unfolding war with India last week.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.opin ... d-war/amp/

I'm not sure what point you're making but you've praised Khan and linked to an article criticising for speaking with a forked tongue. Unless you were trying to be balanced.

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:01 pm

thatdberight wrote:I'm not sure what point you're making but you've praised Khan and linked to an article criticising for speaking with a forked tongue. Unless you were trying to be balanced.

A bit of balance on the war thing -

How wars should be avoided if possible, as usually they are miscalculations and lead to something happening which wasn’t expected or could have been resolved in other ways.

Spike · Post by **Spike** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:19 pm

just call them mass murderers because that's what they are. Terrorists implies they have a logical reason when they are simply insane

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:40 pm

bfccrazy wrote:A bit of balance on the war thing -

How wars should be avoided if possible, as usually they are miscalculations and lead to something happening which wasn’t expected or could have been resolved in other ways.

It was just that the article, quite rightly in my view (and that's not to dismiss the issues with Modi's India), tore Khan and Pakistan to shreds.

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:48 pm

thatdberight wrote:It was just that the article, quite rightly in my view (and that's not to dismiss the issues with Modi's India), tore Khan and Pakistan to shreds.

Yeah, I just picked a random article tbh in a rush with that quote in - which was a bit of a dumb move.

I agree with the principle of what was said but then the actions are never the same.

SmudgetheClaret · Post by **SmudgetheClaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:18 pm

When it's not a false flag terrorist or your list..

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 6:57 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:What point were you making ?

That your point lacked intelligence.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 6:58 pm

BurnleyFC wrote:I know, and your pal Jeremy fails to differentiate between terrorists and non-terrorists as well.

Oh, right. You assumed because i'm a left-wing liberal that i was a Corbyn supporter. Oops. That was dumb.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:02 pm

Bosscat wrote:You started the thread Turtle hoping for controversial statements so you could impose your views ....

Perhaps you should change your name to "Imposing Turtle"

Your views can be viewed as "Stupid" in some quarters so stop being a dick m8...

Amazing. I'm even being blamed for other peoples "controversial" posts. His post wasn't controversial, it was stupid.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:50 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Amazing. I'm even being blamed for other peoples "controversial" posts. His post wasn't controversial, it was stupid.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:53 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:That your point lacked intelligence.

Thought as much, you make a stupid post (again) taking up your usual stance on who the victims are in the world, you have no answer to what I said so you post in your usual style. You really are owenjoneslite ... although he probably has a better chin than you.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:20 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Thought as much, you make a stupid post (again) taking up your usual stance on who the victims are in the world, you have no answer to what I said so you post in your usual style. You really are owenjoneslite ... although he probably has a better chin than you.

Owenjoneslite now thats funny

Owen Jones chin ..... just ripe for punching

surprised its still intact

Brilliant....

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:54 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Thought as much, you make a stupid post (again) taking up your usual stance on who the victims are in the world, you have no answer to what I said so you post in your usual style. You really are owenjoneslite ... although he probably has a better chin than you.

"your usual stance on who the victims are in the world"

Elaborate, if you can. (you can't)

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:27 am

When he's dead

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:49 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:"your usual stance on who the victims are in the world"

Elaborate, if you can. (you can't)

Read your opening post owen, it explains itself.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:54 am

One thing I'll never understand is why some people view the killers of Lee Rigby differently to those who killed soldiers in Northern Ireland.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:01 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Read your opening post owen, it explains itself.

What a pathetic cop out.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:03 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:What a pathetic cop out.

Unlike your 1st response to me owen ?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:06 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Unlike your 1st response to me owen ?

I asked you to elaborate on your point, because you weren't clear. That's how adults work to understand one another when one person tries to make a point but isn't clear about it.

Explain your point, or admit you can't. Or are too scared that the point you want to make, whatever it is, might receive criticism that you can't emotionally handle.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:11 am

I have already said to you, read your opening post that is your usual stance. You know like when there was the video going viral of the attack in Bradford, because the people carrying out the attack were non white, you failed to see the video for hours, despite you seeking anything online to be offended at on behalf of non whites. You are a hypocrite which I have said several times to you, but then it ends up with you quoting me with more dumb replies and to be honest I have better things to do than go back and forth with an internet troll.

Not sure what I would be scared of, anything you say is laughed at, just your hypocrisy gets pointed out, now would you like to try again and explain the whole point of your opening post seeing as you are the "adult"

Stayingup · Post by **Stayingup** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:23 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Couldn't help yourself, could you? You just had to post something stupid.

Following your example then? The most idiotic poster on these boards.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:32 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:"your usual stance on who the victims are in the world"

Elaborate, if you can. (you can't)

"Imposing Turtle" living up to IT's name.

You really are a complete and utter tool