Poupou Escobar
Post Whore
- Messages
- 92,354
So it's only if they use a car to attack people? I don't remember your definition being that narrow. I believe it just said violence, regardless of the weapon or the severity of the effect. In fact it implied intimidation for political ends was enough, which certainly applies to large groups of people turning up with masks and weapons.
And to be honest I don't believe some random Muslim going on a rampage with a knife or a van is necessarily terrorism either. Unhinged merkins capable of wigging out and massacring people exist in all creeds, though when he's shouting Allahu Akbar it starts to look like he's sending a political message.
You wanted to make this about racism in America and the vehicle attack in Charlotte. You pulled out your trusty definition that very broadly states violence or intimidation for political ends is terrorism but then refuse to concede that plenty of Americans commit violence at heated political rallies. Why your fixation on the bloke with the car? Because he used a car? Or because he killed somebody? Neither are required to fit the definition of terrorism that YOU introduced to the discussion.
