5 ms·

I must have missed the part where the Jan 6th insurrectionists had machine guns and bombs and took hostages. Pretty alarming, if true. Do you have sources for h

I must have missed the part where the Jan 6th insurrectionists had machine guns and bombs and took hostages. Pretty alarming, if true. Do you have sources for how these two events are at all similar beyond that both involved unlawful entry into a government building?

PenguinCoder 4y ago
Terrorism is not defined by having machine guns, bombs or taking hostages. Terrorism: > the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Seems pretty damn clear cut that Jan 6th insurrectionists are Terrorists by that understanding.
- a_techwriter_00 4y ago
  Do you think that it does justice to the victims of Jan 6th and the victims of the siege of the Colombian Palace of Justice to say that both of those events are the same crime? They're both deserving of the same punishment?
  - thephyber 4y ago
    Attempted murder is the same crime whether done my a compassionate mother with a pillow smothering, or a violent psycho with a grenade. You are making a useless argument. The fact stands that plenty of people on Jan6 threatened / executed violent action for a political means by an illegitimate authority.
- apostacy 4y ago
  What specific acts did the Jan 6th rioters commit that would count as terrorism or insurrection? Is it insurrection to damage public property and disobey government orders? How were they planning on taking hostages without guns? Were they going to beat people with flagpoles?
  - hairofadog 4y ago
    I can’t tell if you’re joking, but they did have guns, and they did beat people with flag poles.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      >>but they did have guns Nope, most reports that protesters were "armed" are "stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats and flagpoles wielded as clubs" and even that is an exaggeration by the media as the number of even those "weapons" were carried by a minority of people. To date, I believe there are have been only 3 people confirmed to be carrying a gun that was not law enforcement, none of which have been charged with discharging or using those guns in any way. when you say "they did have guns" most people think it was a armed resistance, it was not and to be most favorable to you it is simply an exaggeration to say it that way, but if I want to be uncharitable I would say you are engaging in disinformation >they did beat people with flag poles. Again here, this is an exaggeration, there was ONE incident of that, where ONE person hit another person with a flag pole, ONE.
      - hairofadog 4y ago
        Well, I regret being hooked by a troll – this is like a layered cake of bad-faith arguments – but for any passers-by who may not already know, they did have guns [0], and describing it as "one incident of beating another person with a flagpole" is so obviously disingenuous as to be laughable [1]. [0]: https://youtu.be/bC3_VFFJlSY?t=15954 https://youtu.be/bC3_VFFJlSY?t=15954 [1]: https://youtu.be/mWzYB2RmfPU?t=633 https://youtu.be/mWzYB2RmfPU?t=633
        phpisthebest 4y ago
        I am not a troll, I am not even the original commentor, I just happen to have a differing view as you, thus you have no recourse or rebuttal than to label everyone that disagrees with you a "troll" because outside of that you may be faced with someone that would challenge your world view
  - 4y ago
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  So under that definition there was a ton of Terrorism in the summer of 2020 right?
- pessimizer 4y ago
  What terrorism is now (and for most of the 20th century) is an unbelievably politicized term that for around a decade was synonymous with Muslim who attacks anyone or advocates attacking anyone, including the soldiers occupying their countries. The term originated as a positive thing for late 19c anarchists who simply defined it as a tactic of asymmetric warfare against an enemy that so outnumbers you that they would be impossible to militarily defeat, so you break their morale through random, extremely varied attacks against individuals and small groups over an extended period of time, prioritizing as targets those who would normally feel the safest. Terrorism isn't about "lawfulness." They just threw that in because violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims is what most countries do at all times. The definition wants to call war "lawful."
telchar 4y ago
There were bombs: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29/politics/washington-pipe-bombs-dnc-rnc/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29/politics/washington-pipe-bomb...
- themaninthedark 4y ago
  And it is kinda funny that with all the surveillance, arresting and prosecuting they have done, they have not been able to figure out who that was...
lazide 4y ago
Well, there were bombs placed and hostages were attempted to be taken - capital police redirected the mob and shot one of them to stop them. Otherwise it would have been a different story indeed.

PenguinCoder 4y ago

Terrorism is not defined by having machine guns, bombs or taking hostages. Terrorism: > the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Seems pretty damn clear cut that Jan 6th insurrectionists are Terrorists by that understanding.

a_techwriter_00 4y ago
Do you think that it does justice to the victims of Jan 6th and the victims of the siege of the Colombian Palace of Justice to say that both of those events are the same crime? They're both deserving of the same punishment?
- thephyber 4y ago
  Attempted murder is the same crime whether done my a compassionate mother with a pillow smothering, or a violent psycho with a grenade. You are making a useless argument. The fact stands that plenty of people on Jan6 threatened / executed violent action for a political means by an illegitimate authority.
apostacy 4y ago
What specific acts did the Jan 6th rioters commit that would count as terrorism or insurrection? Is it insurrection to damage public property and disobey government orders? How were they planning on taking hostages without guns? Were they going to beat people with flagpoles?
- hairofadog 4y ago
  I can’t tell if you’re joking, but they did have guns, and they did beat people with flag poles.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    >>but they did have guns Nope, most reports that protesters were "armed" are "stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats and flagpoles wielded as clubs" and even that is an exaggeration by the media as the number of even those "weapons" were carried by a minority of people. To date, I believe there are have been only 3 people confirmed to be carrying a gun that was not law enforcement, none of which have been charged with discharging or using those guns in any way. when you say "they did have guns" most people think it was a armed resistance, it was not and to be most favorable to you it is simply an exaggeration to say it that way, but if I want to be uncharitable I would say you are engaging in disinformation >they did beat people with flag poles. Again here, this is an exaggeration, there was ONE incident of that, where ONE person hit another person with a flag pole, ONE.
    - hairofadog 4y ago
      Well, I regret being hooked by a troll – this is like a layered cake of bad-faith arguments – but for any passers-by who may not already know, they did have guns [0], and describing it as "one incident of beating another person with a flagpole" is so obviously disingenuous as to be laughable [1]. [0]: https://youtu.be/bC3_VFFJlSY?t=15954 https://youtu.be/bC3_VFFJlSY?t=15954 [1]: https://youtu.be/mWzYB2RmfPU?t=633 https://youtu.be/mWzYB2RmfPU?t=633
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        I am not a troll, I am not even the original commentor, I just happen to have a differing view as you, thus you have no recourse or rebuttal than to label everyone that disagrees with you a "troll" because outside of that you may be faced with someone that would challenge your world view
- 4y ago
phpisthebest 4y ago
So under that definition there was a ton of Terrorism in the summer of 2020 right?
pessimizer 4y ago
What terrorism is now (and for most of the 20th century) is an unbelievably politicized term that for around a decade was synonymous with Muslim who attacks anyone or advocates attacking anyone, including the soldiers occupying their countries. The term originated as a positive thing for late 19c anarchists who simply defined it as a tactic of asymmetric warfare against an enemy that so outnumbers you that they would be impossible to militarily defeat, so you break their morale through random, extremely varied attacks against individuals and small groups over an extended period of time, prioritizing as targets those who would normally feel the safest. Terrorism isn't about "lawfulness." They just threw that in because violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims is what most countries do at all times. The definition wants to call war "lawful."

telchar 4y ago

There were bombs: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29/politics/washington-pipe-bombs-dnc-rnc/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29/politics/washington-pipe-bomb...

themaninthedark 4y ago
And it is kinda funny that with all the surveillance, arresting and prosecuting they have done, they have not been able to figure out who that was...

lazide 4y ago

Well, there were bombs placed and hostages were attempted to be taken - capital police redirected the mob and shot one of them to stop them. Otherwise it would have been a different story indeed.