(01-08-2021, 12:02 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(01-08-2021, 11:40 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: Yes or no, are they terrorizing?

---

ter·ror·ism

/ˈterəˌrizəm/

noun

the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

"the fight against terrorism"

Definitions from Oxford Languages

We've seen plenty of examples of domestic terrorism in the past year from right and left oriented groups and individuals alike. 

Most sane folks condemn those who cross the line of protesting over to rioting and even terrorism regardless of those rioters political affiliation. 

The Capitol riots involved elements that one could easily encompass to identify the act as terrorism, but why all the semantics?  Call it whatever you want. 
Storming a session that serves to certify an election result and killing/hospitalizing police in the process is a despicable act that should never have been encouraged or protected against so casually. 

Comparing this act to others seems pretty pointless to me right now.

People love hyperbole, bro. It's human nature. I try to discount it as much as possible except when it starts to offend my sensibility. However, comparing this act to others is entirely relevant, if only to show that the left doesn't have any standards. Either protests can be rowdy and violent or they can't. Which is it? I say they can't. That's consistent. What do you say? What does the MSM say? What do other politicians say? Show me the people who are consistent with their record on these positions, and we will be able to differentiate those with values from those who put power and ideology over anything else.

---