I guess so.
Just figured I had missed something about him or made a mistake in identifying someone as terrorist.
Can someone explain to me how V is not a terrorist?
- Thread starter Exejpgwmv
- Start date
Just figured I had missed something about him or made a mistake in identifying someone as terrorist.
What I'm trying to say is that if there is a war, then both sides are terrorists by definition. People are getting confused by what the public is branding them with the actual definition. Both sides shoot each other, both sides bomb each other, and people view their respective side as heroes and defenders. So technically both sides are heroes and terrorists.
Very true, you just earned yourself a like for how well you articulated that. :thumbsup:
The title of the thread is "can someone explain to me how V is not a terrorist." By posting the definition of terrorism, you basically backed this thread into a corner. No one can argue that, by definition, V is not a terrorist. What I simply tried to do is explain why he isn't perceived was one. Because like I said, there is no way to deny that he is. However, you also pointed out that a lot of people get offended when V is called a terrorist. I tried to explain why.
Basically what I'm saying is this thread doesn't seem to have a point since by your own logic you can't argue what the dictionary defines something as.
Yeeeaah
I just kinda went on the assumption that I was somehow wrong, and people had a legitimate reason to defend him from being called a terrorist.
Terrorist is the modern word for those the powers want you to hate. Before they would be communists or anarchists, traitors, savages, and a whole other assortment of names.
The key is in the word, Terrorism, to instate terror to the masses. V didn't bomb to cause terror, he did it to demonstrate rebellion.
The key is in the word, Terrorism, to instate terror to the masses. V didn't bomb to cause terror, he did it to demonstrate rebellion.
Your first point just says that most governments want people to hate terrorists.
Which I can't really blame them for, and it doesn't make someone like V not a terrorist.
And as for your second topic:
No, terrorism does not strictly mean to insight terror or fear in the masses.
Although it does play a large part in terrorism. It means to intimidate and threaten, destroy. It's one step away from tyranny, only terrorism lacks the official claim of authority.
Basically, they are the wrong type of people who obtain power via the three channels I mentioned.
And unless you're a deluded innocent who lives under a rock and are brainwashed to think violence is okay (under any terms whatsoever), it's clear to see that V is very obviously a terrorist.
Dark Drakan
Well-known Member
I haven't really heard of Hannity before, but based on this video he seems to be the unreasonable type.