*************************************************************

   How can we explain why Hoorta irrationally bashes Pres Trump on every thread, but will NOT complain about biden? or obaMao commie?

   Not once. but he says WE are biased?

More likely, Hoorta "says" he's given up trying to control the narrative on this forum. I won't miss the bitching. But he'll probably come back - demanding to be controlling the narrative is a manifestation of extreme ego - that doesn't change easily.

@mld-woody said:

No, we're clearly talking about different levels of violence here. Different motivations. Different end goals. 

But it's all "unlawful acts / violence" for "political aims". 

I'm honestly glad to hear you make the distinction. I find it troubling that the talking heads in MSM aren't doing the same. 

@hoorta said:

Aw, hate to disappoint you- bash Biden to your hearts content. It's SOP around here- and I'm not wasting my time anymore...  

Buh  bye

Damn right is, as it should be the SOP. Biden is the president now.

You're wise not to waste your time because you suck at defending Biden who can't be defended.

@gorka said:

It was unfair for feeble minded Bush to call them terrorists. 

What we refer to as "terrorists" are those belonging to organized groups or individuals who's sole aim in life is to use unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims...or ideological or religious.

Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist.  

Those people were not that.

Call them insurgents ok, not terrorists.

Of course if we are to accept that weak-ass definition we must admit that blm is no doubt a terrorist organization. And to the best of my knowledge no Republican candidate ever had members of Al Queda, Hamas or Islamic Jihad on stage during the primary.

WSS

What we refer to as "terrorists" are those belonging to organized groups or individuals who's sole aim in life is to use unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims...or ideological or religious.

Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist.  

Those people were not that.

Call them insurgents ok, not terrorists.

the subscription arm of the TDS elite - orange man bad...

@vaportrail said:

The word "terrorist" became pretty meaningless when GWB started using it. He took that word and changed its meaning to not just include al-Qaeda, not just jihadists, but "evil." And then when he used this good vs evil dichotomy to justify assassination, indefinite detention, mass surveillance. So, in his speech he talked about "our continuing duty to confront them." That sounds a lot like a rally cry for a domestic war on terror. 

So again, I'll ask. Do you think that the people who invaded the Capitol, or hell, even the antifa kid who threw a firework at the Portland courthouse should be subject to the rules that we applied to the people we accused of being associated with the 9/11 attack? 

I find it incredulous that I even have to ask this question. 

No, we're clearly talking about different levels of violence here. Different motivations. Different end goals. 

But it's all "unlawful acts / violence" for "political aims". 

@westside-steve said:

No. Probably not in either case. 

WSS

"a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

@mld-woody said:

Bush's statement seems to cover left wing  rioters and MAGA insurrectionists. Both would fit the definition of terrorism, no?

The word "terrorist" became pretty meaningless when GWB started using it. He took that word and changed its meaning to not just include al-Qaeda, not just jihadists, but "evil." And then when he used this good vs evil dichotomy to justify assassination, indefinite detention, mass surveillance. So, in his speech he talked about "our continuing duty to confront them." That sounds a lot like a rally cry for a domestic war on terror. 

So again, I'll ask. Do you think that the people who invaded the Capitol, or hell, even the antifa kid who threw a firework at the Portland courthouse should be subject to the rules that we applied to the people we accused of being associated with the 9/11 attack? 

I find it incredulous that I even have to ask this question. 

@mld-woody said:

Bush's statement seems to cover left wing  rioters and MAGA insurrectionists. Both would fit the definition of terrorism, no?

No. Probably not in either case. 

WSS

@hoorta said:

Aw, hate to disappoint you- bash Biden to your hearts content. It's SOP around here- and I'm not wasting my time anymore...  

Biden deserves as much bashing as any president in history more than many. The Trump haters would be apoplectic if he did the same things as your guy. But as for the underlined section I think you repeat that at least every other day. ?

?

WSS

@gorka said:

Here comes Hoorta

5 4 3 2 1.....

Aw, hate to disappoint you- bash Biden to your hearts content. It's SOP around here- and I'm not wasting my time anymore...  

Is this the peace and unity we are mining for

5 4 3 2 1.....

WSS

WSS