Free Speech

Author: Wagyu

Posts

Total: 86
#61
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@fauxlaw
Like I said, she me a gov't that follows its own rules unerringly. Go ahead and complain. I'm sure they'll listen. I've stopped.
Attempting to label all Trump supporters as "terrorists" is a dangerous precedent.
#62
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm not claiming anyone is a terrorist
#63
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
The problem isn't the word, its a category, the problem is the connotation and criminal system.
#64
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@fauxlaw
I'm not claiming anyone is a terrorist
Are you suggesting that all humans should have the right to a fair trial?
#65
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
The problem isn't the word, its a category, the problem is the connotation and criminal system.
The problem is that the word itself suggests that some people don't deserve the same type of fair trial you would expect for yourself.
#66
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Mm, well then change that. In the 20th century the word "woman" was used derogatorily, now it's (in most cases) just a descriptor, not used like that anymore. The thing is, Terrorist actually does mean a specific thing, so it is actually a useful adjective, because there is a distinction between terrorist's and regular criminals. But overall a terrorist is still a criminal. My point is - the word is what we make of it, the actual connotations aren't core to the word, and can be dismissed.
#67
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Terrorist actually does mean a specific thing
What does the word mean to you?
#68
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@FLRW
Yes, I am 100% in favor of making ALL LYING ILLEGAL. But there has to a stipulation that the facts are verifiable.
FACTS must be empirically demonstrable and or logically-necessary.

ALL OPINION MUST BE CLEARLY STATED AS OPINION.

ALL SPECULATION AND CONJECTURE MUST BE CLEARLY STATED AS OPINION.

ALL AD HOMINEM ATTACKS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED AS OPINION.

ALL FICTION MUST BE CLEARLY LABELED AS FICTION.

CONFIDENTLY STATING OPINION AS IF IT WERE FACT SHOULD BE A CRIME (PERJURY).

#69
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Specifically? 

I think the Lexico definition hits it pretty spot on: "A person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims" 


#70
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
"A person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims"
So, like a mobster running for city council?
#71
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
If that mobster employed violent means to get his votes, lets say sent a whole bunch of goons to stop people from voting his opponent, to get voted in, sure. Though it isn't the first example that comes to mind
#72
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Your definition includes intimidation.

So, if someone told voters that if they vote for the wrong candidate, they'll lose their jobs, would that qualify as intimidation for political ends?
#73
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
No. Because it says, "unlawful violence and intimidation" therefore solely intimidation is not enough
#74
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
What do you think were the "political aims" of the 911 "terror" attacks?
#75
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Generally or specifically? Because for once, Wiki provides, with very sourced and findable reasons:

In Osama bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[3][4] he explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia,[4][5][6] US support of Israel,[7][8] and sanctions against Iraq.[9]

Here's a link to his letter


It's really not that hard to find... did you not think there were any?
#76
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
It's really not that hard to find... did you not think there were any?
These all sound like military aims.

Do you believe all military aims also political aims?
#77
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
"The activities associated with the governance of a country or area, especially the debate between parties having power." I'd say that military and political aims are very intertwined.

#78
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
"The activities associated with the governance of a country or area, especially the debate between parties having power." I'd say that military and political aims are very intertwined.
Ok, so would you agree that fire-bombing a civilian population in order to "settle a debate" about who should control the Pacific Ocean qualifies as an "Act of Terrorism"?
#79
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Yeah, I would agree
#80
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
The hypocrisy that often comes up from doing military acts on other nations is that "it only counts if someone does it to us" or "it was justified, what they did wasn't" or other things like that. 
#81
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Jasmine
Is Trump's twitter ever coming back? I miss him 
He'll have an account on Parler when it's back up.
#82
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
The hypocrisy that often comes up from doing military acts on other nations is that "it only counts if someone does it to us" or "it was justified, what they did wasn't" or other things like that. 
This perspective bias often infects our interpersonal moral intuition as well.

Are you familiar with "the fundamental attribution error"?
#83
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@dustryder
#84
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Not specifically, but I could guess from associated fallacies
#85
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
Who will stop Trump from creating his own online network, along with his own service provider? The lefter coast? Congress? Biden? You pissants have no idea what you've created. Congratulations.
#86
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@fauxlaw
Who will stop Trump from creating his own online network, along with his own service provider?
I'm ordering pop-corn.