What If.... ?

[Vit Caçeir]

vitooliver said:

I just reference her in my final paper for my history class. I was writing about the differences between revolutionaries and terrorist.

Terrorists use fear as a weapon, and some even sacrifice their lives for the sole purpose of striking fear into the enemy. Hence the name.

Revolutionaries (called "rebels" and sometimes accused of terrorism if they lose the conflict) rebel against a system they view as corrupted or failed.

[Deleted]

edwardwadas said:

vitooliver said:

I just reference her in my final paper for my history class. I was writing about the differences between revolutionaries and terrorist.

Terrorists use fear as a weapon, and some even sacrifice their lives for the sole purpose of striking fear into the enemy. Hence the name.

Revolutionaries (called "rebels" and sometimes accused of terrorism if they lose the conflict) rebel against a system they view as corrupted or failed.

The thesis of my paper was the terms are interchangeable based on how we see the group, ally or foe. Both revolutionaries and terrorist use terror to achieve their goals (look at the rebels in Columbia, technically revolutionaries, if they were muslum, we'd be quick to label them terrorist). Anyway, the professor loved it and I got an A.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

vitooliver said:

The thesis of my paper was the terms are interchangeable based on how we see the group, ally or foe. Both revolutionaries and terrorist use terror to achieve their goals (look at the rebels in Columbia, technically revolutionaries, if they were muslum, we'd be quick to label them terrorist). Anyway, the professor loved it and I got an A.

One distinction we usually try to make is whether the force in question follows the laws of warfare and restricts its attacks to legitimate targets, or whether it attempts to terrorise the civilian population. Another distinction is whether the government they're fighting against is democratic or totalitarian. Obviously, though, there is some degree of overlap, and we tend to be more forgiving of lapses on the part of those with whose cause we agree. But I do see the rebels in Colombia commonly referred to as terrorists.

[Róibeard Laira]

edwardwadas said:

vitooliver said:

I just reference her in my final paper for my history class. I was writing about the differences between revolutionaries and terrorist.

Terrorists use fear as a weapon, and some even sacrifice their lives for the sole purpose of striking fear into the enemy. Hence the name.

Revolutionaries (called "rebels" and sometimes accused of terrorism if they lose the conflict) rebel against a system they view as corrupted or failed.

I like those definitions, and you may notice that they are really orthogonal. You could have a terrorist government that uses fear against its own people to preserve an existing system, or you could have a non-terrorist revolutionary group such as solidarity in Poland back in the day.

But yes, they are often used interchangably to mean whatever suits the speaker.

[Deleted]

rsteinke said:

edwardwadas said:

Terrorists use fear as a weapon, and some even sacrifice their lives for the sole purpose of striking fear into the enemy. Hence the name.

Revolutionaries (called "rebels" and sometimes accused of terrorism if they lose the conflict) rebel against a system they view as corrupted or failed.

I like those definitions, and you may notice that they are really orthogonal. You could have a terrorist government that uses fear against its own people to preserve an existing system, or you could have a non-terrorist revolutionary group such as solidarity in Poland back in the day.

But yes, they are often used interchangably to mean whatever suits the speaker.

Bob, you've validated what he was saying. The use of certain tactics against a totalitarian government would be terrorism. Any attempt to put fear in others, regardless of whom they are, is terrorism. For example, the French peasents in the French revolution would be a case of terrorism form where I sit. Some of the actions the founding fathers used (albeit, no one died, but to disrupt commerce and put fear in the British merchants) was terrorism. And how quickly we apply the labels to our enemies, the government in Iran, which the people put there, we have now labeled Terrorist. The case you bring up, Poland, would by the standards being perpetuated by certain people in the American government today, would be a terrorist movement.

Occasionally, insurgency and terrorism do overlap heavily. The example I believe exemplified this was Hitler's rise to power, the Munich Putsch being an example at insurgency, the burning of the Reichstag a case of terrorism. Also, there is home grown terrorism, right wing Christians bombing abortion clinics are terrorist.

A lot of it is all relative. :-D

[Owen Edwards]

Xhorxh, you must understand why this thread looks like a direct attack, at least in part, on the LRT and its members. If that is what the intention was, the thread is frankly childish.

Of course, I am sure that it was not, and seek another assurance it was not.

[Deleted]

owenfsf said:

Xhorxh, you must understand why this thread looks like a direct attack, at least in part, on the LRT and its members. If that is what the intention was, the thread is frankly childish.

Of course, I am sure that it was not, and seek another assurance it was not.

I have addressed and noted the lack of reply by the LRT for their public accusation against the CCCP.

[Dréu Gavárþic'h]

Sorry, I'll field this one, I thought Brenéir was going to:

I quote S:reu Vürinalt:

"Please know that I was contacted by the RUMP, CCCP, and LRT before I became a citizen. I decided LRT because of their ideology, S:reu Caçeir and my conversations, and the fact that the LRT was primarily made up of fairily new faces like myself."

That is what we base our case on. It was not an accusation, just a "don't call the kettle black."

But...now that you say it, you and your party publically condemn this activity, and yet, it appears that you do it!? Could this me the first strand in a web of corruption? You told me very frankly that as a TA I was not allowed to spread my political party, and I honored my promise to you. But did you tell me this only because I was not part of the RUMP? I wonder...

(Not to be commented on until further investigated)

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

alexandreu said:

Sorry, I'll field this one, I thought Brenéir was going to:

I quote S:reu Vürinalt:

"Please know that I was contacted by the RUMP, CCCP, and LRT before I became a citizen. I decided LRT because of their ideology, S:reu Caçeir and my conversations, and the fact that the LRT was primarily made up of fairily new faces like myself."

That is what we base our case on. It was not an accusation, just a "don't call the kettle black."

But...now that you say it, you and your party publically condemn this activity, and yet, it appears that you do it!? Could this me the first strand in a web of corruption? You told me very frankly that as a TA I was not allowed to spread my political party, and I honored my promise to you. But did you tell me this only because I was not part of the RUMP? I wonder...

(Not to be commented on until further investigated)

Hahaha... your method of not commenting is an intriguing one, inasmuch as it involves not just commenting, but accusing the Minister of Immigration of blatant corruption, and extending it to the whole party in the process.

As for me, I will actually withhold comment until we know more, since currently all that is known is that S:reu Vürinalt has said all parties "contacted" him.

Alexander Davis
Strand in the Web of Corruption

[Dréu Gavárþic'h]

agbdavis said:

alexandreu said:

Sorry, I'll field this one, I thought Brenéir was going to:

I quote S:reu Vürinalt:

"Please know that I was contacted by the RUMP, CCCP, and LRT before I became a citizen. I decided LRT because of their ideology, S:reu Caçeir and my conversations, and the fact that the LRT was primarily made up of fairily new faces like myself."

That is what we base our case on. It was not an accusation, just a "don't call the kettle black."

But...now that you say it, you and your party publically condemn this activity, and yet, it appears that you do it!? Could this me the first strand in a web of corruption? You told me very frankly that as a TA I was not allowed to spread my political party, and I honored my promise to you. But did you tell me this only because I was not part of the RUMP? I wonder...

(Not to be commented on until further investigated)

Hahaha... your method of not commenting is an intriguing one, inasmuch as it involves not just commenting, but accusing the Minister of Immigration of blatant corruption, and extending it to the whole party in the process.

As for me, I will actually withhold comment until we know more, since currently all that is known is that S:reu Vürinalt has said all parties "contacted" him.

Alexander Davis
Strand in the Web of Corruption

Everyone is free to comment...I just took back that comment until I got confimation from S:reu Vürinalt that people actually contacted him, and who those people were. I am waiting for that fyi email now.

[Deleted]

alexandreu said:

Sorry, I'll field this one, I thought Brenéir was going to:

I quote S:reu Vürinalt:

"Please know that I was contacted by the RUMP, CCCP, and LRT before I became a citizen. I decided LRT because of their ideology, S:reu Caçeir and my conversations, and the fact that the LRT was primarily made up of fairily new faces like myself."

That is what we base our case on. It was not an accusation, just a "don't call the kettle black."

But...now that you say it, you and your party publically condemn this activity, and yet, it appears that you do it!? Could this me the first strand in a web of corruption? You told me very frankly that as a TA I was not allowed to spread my political party, and I honored my promise to you. But did you tell me this only because I was not part of the RUMP? I wonder...

(Not to be commented on until further investigated)

It seems because the LRT is actually guilty of this practice, and has continuously express disrespect towards the Ministry of Immigration, they are merely trying to drag the names of other parties through the mud. I've done spot checks with applicants and the only party to have been listed was the LRT. I did contact you about it. I would appreciate the accusations you're making be kept to a minimum and for the LRT, both Breneir and yourself included, to stick to your word and not engage in dirty politics.

Finally, to join a party based on a fact that it is made up of new faces to me is asinine. One should look at the policies, and not join a party because it is a group of new comers looking to shake the system on its head. As stated, the LRT has continuously shown contempt to the Ministers and the authority entrusted to them. And before you even ask me to prove it, your very platform, which is an attack on myself, demonstrates this. If the LRT wishes to stand by its word of engaging in clean politics, I suggest it starts doing it something before the election is over. If the LRT wishes to continue engaging in this, then they better start turning up evidence. The Immigration Minister eagerly awaits all emails from whomever is claiming that they were contacted.

[Dréu Gavárþic'h]

I never said that the LRT did not engage in these practices, I only said that other parties shouldn't be calling us out for it when they seem to have done it also. It's like turning to the bank robber next to you and saying "alright, give me all the money you've got too"

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

And yet again, we collectively roll our eyes...

[Hooligan]

As the leader of the RUMP, I ask S:reu Vürinalt to contact me letting me know who in my party was in contact with him concerning what his political party allegiance would be, and encouraging him to join the RUMP or speaking any other partisan words, before he became a citizen. Such a thing is extremely frowned upon by this party and all members on our mailing list are very educated about this, and the particulars of such an occurrence are something I am extremely interested in.

I repeat that once a person is a citizen, he is able to act as slowly or quickly as he wishes to educate himself about the positions and merits of all Talossan parties, but before then, any encouragement or partisan recruiting is to be avoided. The politics of a person should not matter as regards his or her eligibility to become a Talossan -- only their Talossanity is to be measured by the nation during the evaluation period leading up to a petition. Anything else that enters the equation can very easily be construed (wrongly, surely) by an immigrant as requiring a certain response in order to gain that which he or she seeks -- citizenship in our great nation. For longer than most of us have been here (and than many of our citizens have been alive), politics have been segregated from the immigration process by the common sense of our populace, for the protection of our future citizens and of the good image of our nation and its openness to persons of all beliefs, and they should of course remain so.

I sternly reprimand anyone and everyone in the RUMP who may have been recruiting persons who are not yet citizens, and this report troubles me deeply.

Hooligan

[Dréu Gavárþic'h]

Capt. Sir Mick Preston

Hello? Hello? Is this thing on? I'm sorry for saying that I wanted to look into this more...I'm also sorry for saying that I wasn't accusing anyone...wow...do you even like read things before you criticize me?