Some labels are useful, sure. However in this case, there is already loads of preconcieved notions and emotions attached to those words. Anti-government extremists are people who... have killed and attacked government? If that is the case, there arent many of those and certianly arent a huge threat. Now they are probably lumping anyone who strongly opposes government as extremists. If government wasnt so extremely fucked up then there wouldnt be as many people extremely opposed to them. So the difference between muslim extremist as you defined, and a run of the mill muslim is quite clear, the distinction between government dissenters and extremists is not.
Agreed and that line is being blurred intentionally and, in my opinion, unforgivably, by dishonest people with dishonest agendas.
I disagree. He is a homicidal maniac but he's not a terrorist. All terrorists might be homicidal maniacs but not all homicidal maniacs are terrorists. He wasn't trying coerce by spreading fear of random violence. He was just a sick little racist bastard that thought the nation was ripe for a race war by murdering blacks in a church. After all the rioting we've seen lately, I can understand why he thought it might work but the bottom line is that he's not a terrorist. He's just a sick and twisted bigoted racist punk about on par with Charlie Manson, who also tried to start a race war. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
If a Muslim had blown up that church, he would have been called a terrorist. Yes, Dylann Roof is a racist, and a lunatic, but trying to start a race war sounds to me like terrorism. Charles Manson was mostly a career criminal, he never acknowledged that he was responsible for the killings that his followers carried out at his behest. Even though Manson was not present for the crimes, he was a murderer. During his last previous stretch in prison, when called to the parole hearing, he told the board that he was not fit to be released into society, but they didn't listen and let him out. He then built up a communal group of followers who followed him like a cult leader. If the parole board had not turned him loose, the murders would never have happened.
If a Muslim would have blown it up, it would have been terrorism because the purpose is to try to intimidate non-believers. Killing by evil design isn't terrorism unless the evil design is to terrorize a population. This psycho punk wasn't trying to terrorize anyone. He was trying to incite a race war and inflame hatred. It's not the same thing at all. There were no threats of more slayings or promises of random violence. There was no terrorist organization plotting a campaign of fear. There was just one twisted little punk carrying out a psychotic fantasy.
NorseMythology, Do you think the current anti government climate is in anyway due to our twisted societal views? Sent from my HTC Desire 512 using Tapatalk
Of course. Do you feel that people's minds are reaching not necessarily a breaking point, but a point at which they feel things cannot change without extreme negative action due directly to a feeling of wrongness in society that they are aware of? They are wrong in a way for sure and it is indeed a godless shame. But is it due to internal turmoil for these few, which in turn could come from an evil perception on the knowledge that society is askew? Sent from my HTC Desire 512 using Tapatalk
Thanks, but i meant more than it being forced upon us. The lies, world policing, destabalizing other countries, trade agreements to send jobs overseas, etc
I think it is because more and more people are realizing the fact that the government is by the government, for the government and couldn't give the slightest of fucks about the will of the people. It is a rude awakening to come to the realization that you have been made a fool of for your entire life, especially in our self important culture. The government exists solely to gain power and extract wealth at the expense of the people. There is no other purpose for it at this point and people are pissed off that they have been bamboozled into accepting this as the facts when in fact they are just a pawn made to think they are the Queen.
Hypothetically thats entirely possible but i dont know of any extremist anti-government since maybe Tim McVeigh. Possibly the anthrax deal, but there was some shenanigans with that case, im not sure we found out who actually did that. Then we have people like Snowden, who take the non-violent path. Im sure many people are near this breaking point, but most people arent that ready to perpetrate such violence, in fact i think if they only had an avenue to channel their frustration they would. Lets just hope its not violent and destructive. Im not sure if anything less will change things, unless the populace comes out in mass or do what Iceland did. Im still not entirely sure if i understood what you were asking/getting at so if i went in the wrong direction i apologize.
No. That was good. Thank you for your unbiased opinion. I didn't mean just people attacking there home governing body though. All people that seam to snap and shed somewhat innocent blood seam to do so somewhat because as you said they can think of no better way to open the same omount of eyes. To be clear. I in no way condone violence toward anything that does not directly threaten your life. Sent from my HTC Desire 512 using Tapatalk
Are you saying there are no terrorists or extremists? What values does Dylann Roof hold that leads you to believe he is right wing? Does he have conservative values?
If by terrorist we agree it means actions to involk fear, yes there are terrorists. Where is the line between terrorist and informant? If by extremist we agree it means actions considered substantiallu outside the stats quo, i would also say yes. Both are relative terms, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.
Instead of just answering your question perhaps i should explain what I mean (i thought i did somewhere). Those words have a lot of baggage attached to them, like terrorist, they used that word constantly following 9-11-01 attaching the horror we saw, with the word. Now whenever that word is brought up, if only subconsciously, there is a psychological link. Hitler, Nazi, gun violence, racist, drugs, communist, conspiracy theory, alien, UFO, redneck etc. It seems to me any of these terms can be used to automatically incite some conditioned psychological response.
Coercing people to accept your religion as you thrust it upon them through a murderous campaign of atrocities against innocent civilians isn't something any reasonable person would call a freedom fighting. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Is it that much different than launching missles from drones and accidently killing innocent people? Also, are you sure that is their intent or are you simply accepting the oft repeated view of the West? I dont have all the answers, many more questions than anything, but i try to avoid any biases in my assessments.