A person, group, or organization that uses violent action, or the threat of violent action, to further political goals; frequently in an attempt to coerce either a more powerful opponent, (such as a citizen or group targeting a government), or conversely, a weaker opponent, (such as a government, or even an internal citizen or group, being targeted by a larger government).
I already quoted the literal definition of the word. I’ve made no reference to how I personally use the word. I’ve never actually had pccasion to call anyone a terrorist.
You seem to be getting a little worked up about this. Perhaps it’s best to agree to disagree here.
I already quoted the literal definition of the word. I’ve made no reference to how I personally use the word. I’ve never actually had pccasion to call anyone a terrorist.
You seem to be getting a little worked up about this. Perhaps it’s best to agree to disagree here.
You quoted a definition, but a definition that has nothing to do with how it is used legally, historically, or socially i.e. useless
Words are defined by their use, not by dictionaries. That’s why the meaning of words tends to change over time.
Accusing me of getting “worked up” is a good way to discredit everything I have to say, though. Cute.
I’m sorry but this statement is flat out wrong. Perhaps reading about terrorism will clear this up.
I’d also recommend the US legal definition within federal law.
Yes they do, which is why I posted the modern definition and not the original from the French Revolution:
My intention was not to discredit you, it was based on your defensive language. You seem to take the disagreement personally.
I’m going to disengage now. As-salamu alaykum.
Firing off a parting shot and then declaring that you are “disengaging” is horseshit. I’m sorry I ever talked to you. Blocked.