Why is the whole country...this board included so full of hate when it comes to terrorists.
Didn't the US terrorise the tories? beat them..kill them...take their stuff.Or pass out infected blankets to the Indians.
Didn't the isrealis blow up the King David hotel to get the British out.
The Viet Cong were terrorists
I don't mean to imply that blowing up things is okay..But damn.
If you feel you're being pushed what else are you going to do to an overwhelming force...
Most of y'all are armed for a reason..ar15.com is not really a hunting site..The second amendment itself is intended to facilitate terrorism...to allow for an armed overthrow of an overbearing gov't.

Listen Jackass,

I hate terrorists, and their supporters because they recently killed over 3,000 of MY (innocent) people!

Should that not be enough?

No its not enough
Its a great reason to hate the people that did it...
But my point is why do you blanket all antis with a terrorist label?
Do you think Ireland should be unified OR should we bomb the southern area because it helps the north...or for that matter bomb Boston and NY for the same reason.
Are people in "breakaway republics" terrorists..or revolutionaries

Forget it.  You'll be called antisemetic and pro terrorists.
You will be attempting to get through a point of view and your opponents will illogically argue from pre prepared points of view.

This board can at times be really illuminating as there are many bright folks around here.
On this topic ..... forget it.
(No ruckus flame intended.)

Anti what???  These days, the difference between a revolutionary and a terrorist is "point of view".  That wasn't always the case as our founding father experienced.  They fought and almost lost using traditional methods (well except methods used by "The Patriot" movie militia types [:D]).

I hate those who did it (Sept 11th) and those who supported it because I choose to.  I'm a realist.  Everyone has been blowing the shit out of everyone else since the beginning of time.  At this point in time I happen to agree with those who say "there was no true justification for killing thousands of ignorants (innocents).  Not sure which word to put there as they are interchangable.

We are not the great Satan.  We are people, as are all.  If someone chooses to hate me, because I exist, then I choose to hate them.  And I choose to cheer when they are destroyed.  And although it is hypocritical, I choose to refer to them as the great Satan, and wish them dead.

My government may call me a "terrorist" one day because I don't believe they follow the same rules (Constitution) as I believe they should.  Those who choose to destroy me, are those who choose their own enslavement.

Okay, a little over the top... but damned, not by as much as you think.

If they want to terrorize thier own shit eating country have at it. Terrorize mine and fuck you , here we come you ass is mine.  

All your terror are belong to us!

[beer]

Anti WHAT?



That's exactly how this country was born. People seeking a new way formed their own country. Did anyone label the founding fathers terrorists? I doubt it.
I'd say that in current times that most 'breakaway republics' are formed with the hope that it will be better than what they 'broke away' from. It seems only logical to improve on ones situation.

I guess there are a couple of reasons I'm posting this.
Usually we are a watchful group as a whole when it comes to gov't oversteps...(waco, etc)
And i'm watching people jump on this terrorist bandwagon...losing civil liberties...watching laws hit the books that should never even come close..all in this assinine fervor..
Its  like we're losing our country and no one cares as long as we kick ass.
We have troops in EVERY airport..Troops overflying within our borders..Am I the only one that sees this crap?
Hating the people that shoot at me is one thing..but terrorism is a valid tool of overthrow..And if we as a country continue to villify this , and we as a people swallow the stories lock stock and barrel..We are gonna be one bunch of hated mfers.
And I see it here .. and to me it needs to cease.

I dont hate terrorists per se.

For example, I dont hate the IRA or Sendero Luminoso or narco terrorists, however awful they and their causes are.

But I DESPISE muslim extremists because they are irrational and pure unmitigated evil who hate us and our system for merely existing.

To equate us with these barbarians shows a level of ignorance or naivite that is endemic to leftists.

I believe that the ends justify the means, but the ends of the terrorists arrayed against us are so abominable that they can in no way be apologized for.

Anti whatever the Gov't tells us..
anti Isreal...terrorist
Anti peru
Anti russian...Chechan terrorists
Anti Brits in N ireland...terrorists
we can't swallow this crap

My biggest regret these days, is that I understand and agree with everything you just said.

We are in the process of losing a great deal of rights and liberties in the name of "homeland security".  McCarthy would be pretty fucking proud.

Quoted:


HA!!!!

Piss on the Govt!

I believe what I want to believe! NOT what some group of rich old (mostly white) men that bought their way into office 'WANT' me to think! I have yet to be de-programed!

I love my COUNTRY! and that does not neccesarily include my Govt! There IS a difference.

Oh, I was about to just lay into you until I read this.

Ok.  The difference of which you spoke is a very cool thing.
syntax reorganization basically.  Gotta get some rest, soooooo goodnight.!!!!!...

'Cus they taste just like chicken!

[chainsawkill]

The way I see it, terrorists attack civilians with the intent to invoke terror. Revolutionaries or patriots target the actual enemy. In short, terrorists have no balls and need to die.

Why? You planning on blowing something up and don't want to be misunderstood?

On the truck windshield:

[img]kurts-kustom-firearms.cityslide.com/i/1/11/113/1137/11373/113734/1137348/TerrPermit4.JPG[/img]

Kurt/KKF
[b]KLICK, KLICK, BOOM! (Saliva)[/b]

Post from Stealth -

I don't get it, why would Senator McCarthy be proud?

What did he do that threatened Americans with loss of freedom?

'Freedom' to be a Soviet mole in the State Department?

'Freedom' to be a Communist in government employ?

'Splain this, please.

Eric The(Don'tLetLiberalsSpoonfeedYouHistory-TheyStillThinkAlgerHissWasInnocent!)Hun[>]:)]

[red][size=6]Bingo![/size=6][/red]

The American revolution was fought against British soldiers, not civilians.  The Isrealis blew up the hotel the British army was using as headquarters with a half-hour's advance notice, no casualties.  "Palastinians" blow up pizza parlors, bustops, etc. and shoot at visiting school children.

See a difference?  Or is every cause equal, every struggle morally equivalent, no person better or worse (more or less moral) than any other?

I don't need to hate them to want to kill them.  

The steps our government are taking to trade our liberties for supposed securities are unrelated to hating terrorists.  Just ineffective attempts to prevent their actions.

When they asked the British military commander why the King David Hotel had not been evacuated after the bomb warning, his response - 'We're not in the habit of taking orders from Jews!'

He was later relieved, quitely.

Eric The([s]Hysterical[/s]Historical)Hun[>]:)]

Hun,
did we help the Israelites fight the British ?

Nope. At least to [u]my[/u] knowledge.

But remember, this was a time when FDR could get away with saying that 'some of my best friends are [u]communists[/u]' but could never have gotten away with saying 'some of my best friends are [u]Jews[/u]'!

And later, when the Jews (Israel), France and Britain had joined together to wrest control of the Suez CAnal from the Egyptians, it was the United States that insisted that those nations withdraw from the Suez.

Hey, we weren't much of an ally back in '56, now, were we?

Eric The([s]Hysterical[/s] Historical)Hun[>]:)]

The end does not justify the means.  That's the kind of relative morality that would make Bill Klinton proud.

Anyone who thinks the Continental Army was a terrorist organization knows nothing about history.
Terrorists by definition attack civilians to cause terror and unrest and force the ruling government to crack down further, which causes dissatisfaction with it among the people and causes the ranks of the opposition to grow.
The Continental Army attacked military targets in conventional battles.
Only an unmitigated dumbass would compare the American Army during the War for Independence with Al Quaida.

Why I hate terrorists:
First your comparison of our founding fathers and those "guys" is way off base. As far as history tells us when we revolted against England we attacted only legimate military targets. We didn't take out British villages, we took their military head on. Those "guys" crashed civilian planes into civilian targets, except of course the pentagon, that is why they are terrorists and not revolutionaries, or patroits. They should not even be in the same paragraph as patriots.

A terrorist is one who wants to die for his cause. A Patriot is one who is willing to die, but would much rather live.

Norm_G, you just DON'T GET IT!!!!!!  "Ineffective attempts ?????

Our government is moving laterally at a dizzying pace to protect us from terrorist.
Already our Gov has instituted three hour security check lines for your protection.  Previously unknown deadly items such as nail clippers and shaving cream have been identified and are being confiscated.

With the addition of three hour lines the Gov is turning the two day business trip into a three day business trip.

Norm_G,
I'll admit the previously stated are exceedingly subtle moves you just might not have noticed.  Another thing you just "don't get" is the outcome of these governmental moves - many uncaring flyers and most business travelers whose two day trips turn into three will simply stop flying.

It should be obvious with fewer total flyers there are fewer passengers and therefore fewer terrorists.  Further the ever diligent bag examiners will be able to spend the same three hours with fewer passengers and terrorists to deal with.  While I don't believe we'll soon reach the technical level to prevent hand grenades from being issued boarding passes I believe there will soon be enough time to examine all containers of tooth paste - therefore furthering your saftey.

My last item you just should have gotten.  The Gov has National Guard troops providing that final barrier between you and the terrorists.  These brave men and women, in the name of "your" saftey," are carrying weapons with empty mags, no mags at all or sometimes no weapons.  Plainly the "assault(rifle, knife, pistol, nail-clipper, shaving can, rock) weilding terrorists will first attack the clearly marked (by uniform) permanently expendable National Guard troops giving paying passengers the opportunity to escape.
Now that's going the last National Guard body for your saftey !

I know with the measures described above we'll all be safe in the terminal and boarding area.
But what about outside where the plane is service and baggage loaded ????

Again your Gov is planning far ahead.  Admittedly rumor but solid rumor has it that by 12/02 the government will pass a new law requiring all terrorists out on the tarmac to drive vehicles prominently displaying a new "terrorists vehicle stamp."  The Gov believes in addition to obviously furthering security the revenue will also be of importance as it allows the hiring of more incompetent bag checkers and might move the wait to very near the Gov's goal of four hours delay/passenger.

There is not universal agreement on what quantity of Semtex requires terrorists to purchase the proposed "Terrorists Vehicle Stamp."
Many believe those terrorists classified as "small business terrorists" (Carrying less than 500 pounds of Semtex should be "stamp" exempt.)

Ineffective attempts - obviously NOT !!

Although this does not break any of the rules concerning our forums, IMO it is pretty obvious that this post was tossed out by a troll.  Here at AR15.com, we [b]love[/b] our country and would die to protect it!


[marines] [USA]  [marines]

[size=6]NEED I SAY MORE?[/size=6]

Tyler

Terrorists kill innocents that are in no way a part of the politics the terrorists are "fighting" against.  The founding fathers fought British troops.  They did not murder thousands of British sypathizers.

And amen to what Tyler said.

Can you say [:K]?

McFly:

Kind of comes with the territory doesn’t it?  Why do people hate child molesters and rapist you nitwit.  Why do people hate Nazi's?  

Now go back to under your bridge McFly.

Hmmm, why do I "hate" terrorits?  Well, maybe because they are evil and murderous.  Perhaps it is because they attack, wound, and kill indescriminantly.  On the other hand, maybe it is becuase they butcher innocent women and children.  I don't know, perhaps it is because they kill people for NO REASON AT ALL.  Innocent people who are just going to work and trying to feed their families.  Need I say more?

The truth is that the United States is NOT in the business of oppressing the likes of Osama and his pitiful band of Alqueda terrorists.  In fact, if he didn't use death and destruction to attain his goals (whatever they may be), the United States wouldn't care a damn bit about the guy.

How has attacking the WTC or the Pentagon made Osama's life better?  How has it advanced his "cause"?  It hasn't.  All it has done is aroused our anger and brought the TRUE overwhelming force of the United States to bear on him and his allies...worldwide.  Another interesting fact is that aside from the terrible loss of life, America is not permanently damaged.  If the Sept. 11 attacks are all he's got, then it is clear that he's out of his league here.

Another interesting fact is that the latest terrorist attacks are only going to make the American government do MORE of what Osama doesn't like, not less.  And, it is clear that our force is so strong that it can not be realistically opposed.  All Sept. 11 did is bring our power to bear against the forces of terrorism.

There is a world of difference between "terrorism" and "revolution".  Osama is not in the revolution business.  Killing American civilians isn't helping him achieve any kind of political independence.  He's a stupid and short-sighted man.  He gravely miscalculated his actions this time.

You dumbass!  Can you even read?  

Edited to say:
Oh never mind.  This one must have been in "Imbroglio mode."

Sometimes the sarcasm evades me.

To paraphrase one of the biggest terrorists of the last century, "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'terrorist' is"

This is a stupid, semantical argument. I hate people who attack my country, my rights, my freedom and my liberty. I love people who defend these things. Some of the people who attack these things are called terrorists. Some of the people who defend these things are also called terrorists. Depends an awful lot on who's doing the name calling.

The Southern Poverty Law Center thinks most of the people on this board are terrorists, and you know what? As far as I'm concerned, I don't have a problem with that. I am committed to defending what I believe for by any means available. I think terrorists like SPLC should keep that in mind when they talk about taking away our guns and stiffling free speech. Every single American is a potential terrorist, and there are some things worth fighting for. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

And for anybody who thinks this is a defense of pieces of pig dung like Bin Laden and his ilk, get a !@#$ing clue :) It's ALL about ideology and beliefs.

If the ends don't justify the means, then what does?

 Terrorism as a defined word has become so vague its not even funny. The US government has aided and abetted "good" terrorists in the past and still does. Ever hear of "School of the Americas" - it ain't a f#####g summer camp gentlemen. For years our country has funded terrorism. I personally define terrorism as any act of war where civilians may be prime targets. Do I support the Taliban or Al Queda - HELL NO. Its ironic though that the Taliban received millions of dollars from the US when it promised to cease all opium production. Just like us funding Iraq to fight Iran so Iraq could fight us with our money. (I hate politicians BTW.)

 BTW, when I was in Kosovo I saw American funded and trained Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army (outlawed UCK) and Albanian TMK ( NATO-legal) paramilitaries threaten Serb civilians. The opposite happened as well. Is someone a terrorist if they slaughter Serbian children with an AK-47?  Oh thats right - the US supplied the AK-47. Call me a crackhead but the CIA was supplying boo-coo weapons to "ethnic Albanians" in Kosovo.

Look at any third world country and chances are that the US has dirtied its hands there. The US government and military is here to support and defend OUR country. Terrorism wasn't a problem until we went to other countries and made it a point to s##t where we sleep. Thank 8 years of Klinton for most of the problems we have no.

One year from now I will leave the active military behind forever. I am sick of being GI Peacekeeper. I'm tired of going to every country with oil interest. 11 months from now - I won't be the b#tch boy for the New World Order. But I'll gladly tell the whole world everything I know about today's FUBAR military.  

Also, anyone who trusts CNN or any other "mainstream" new network for the "truth" is naive, brainwashed, or stupid......there are two sides to every story.....Bin Laden was wanted by the State Department since at least 1998 - and they knew he was in Somalia at the time. Why did all this crazy s##t have to happen?  

 

A stupid question deserves an equally stupid and insulting response.
Q: "Why do you hate terrorists?"

A: "Cus' they don't kill enough troll's [:K].

A: "Cus' they taste just like chicken"

A: "Cus' this question is posted by anti-gunner commie's who want to distract us from talking about how we can better use our AR15's to shoot troll's... uh, I mean terrorists... uh, I mean targets, yeah, targets".

[chainsawkill]

No, man, I think you got it about right........

Interesting.  I recently stated (and pissed off a bunch of ppl here at home and work) that there is a fine line between a patriot and a traitor.  It all depends on which side wins.  Terrorist, on the other hand, it seems to me has become a universal word for anyone going against the government.  Our founding fathers were NOT terrorists.  As has been said earlier, terrorists, by definition, use terror as their tactics.  Our founding fathers were the inventors of guerrilla warfare.  In other words they used small groups, with lesser equipment than their enemy, and engaged them in a shoot and move type warfare.  However it seems to me that the liberal media tends to demonize anyone who is a part of a group of people that does not bow to the government by calling them a terrorist.  If an American uprising ever occurs, does anyone doubt what the forces opposing the goverment will be called by the mainstream media?  I dont.  Patriot, traitor, revolutionary....all these can be used to describe the same person....just depends on where you are standing.  Terrorists however, at least to me have an entirely different agenda and do not rate to be classed with these other terms.

Difference between a "terrorist" and "patriot"...

Terrorist - targets innocent or unrelated civilians in an attempt to steer government policy through an outpouring of emotion related to heinous atrocities (redundant, I know...)  A terrorist is, by nature, equal parts coward and bully.  They will not attack military targets unless THOROLY ASSURED of combat superiority, and will generally prefer to target civilians as they are unarmed and pose little to no threat.  While terrorists may be willing to die for their cause, they will only do so (willingly) when it can be done in such a manner to gain maximum press coverage and to elicit maximum panic and fear.  Terrorists are not known for attacking military targets, except where the Rules of Engagement followed BY THE TARGET will favour the terrorist forces.  Witness the Lebanese Embassy attack, where the Marines guarding the Embassy were not allowed to carry their rifles and sidearms with a round chambered...  Witness the USS Cole attack, where it was known that the ship was in harm's way but the guards were not allowed to chamber a round unless directly ordered by the CO...

A patriot will notice the disruption of obstructionism of a government or occupying force, and will make is far too expensive for such a force to operate in the AO.  A patriot will recognise that the military forces of the occupying agents are the enemy, and will attack them.  While a patriot will use the advantage of surprise as much as a terrorist, the patriot will attack soldiers who take a soldier's chance.  The patriot will not consider the civilian populace as a viable target, as the patriot depends upon their supprot for the success of his campaign...

The VC, for instance, were terrorists in that they preyed upon the civilian populace, and "won hearts and minds" through terror tactics, torture, and wholesale slaughter of villagers.  Is this the way to win the REAL support of the people you are trying to free?

Think about it.  Terrorists are dehumanising, and are barely human themselves...

FFZ

Someone(forgot who it was) said it best when he said. Whether or not someone is considered a terrorist or a freedom fighter is totally dependant on which side of the barrel that person is.

With that in mind, you have to get into the mindset of an organisation to fight it. But attacks like the world has seen on september 11th is nothing more than wasting life for just that.....wasting valuable human life. No military objectives, nothing to gain...no statements to be made except to prove ALL are vulnerable to these attacks. Like random murder..

Hate of terrorists? No, hate for the people who put 300+ of my fellow Firefighters/EMS in a concrete grave....not mentioning the thousands of other people in the WTC...

Well said!  
        Gib

Bullshit.  They fought armies.  The closest thing we came to "terrorism" was the Boston Tea Party.  You're just trying to use this event to proffer a rediculous "neo-revolutionary" point of view that is based on fantasy.

 

Oh yea, that's relevant.



Does that make you feel better about your point of view?  Degrading those who were murdered by intimating they were ignorant sheeple?  What a bunch of bullshit.

To me it's real simple.  Killing innocent people to achieve a particular political/religeous/Pick-a-cause point of view is pussy.  Those who try to twist reason to even slightly justify it, are pussies.



Let's be specific, you will be a terrorist if you murder for the sake of your own subjective interpretation of the Constitution.

Otherwise, you will be a citizen voicing his views pursuant to the first amendment, nothing more and nothing less.  If you choose to seek Constitutional redress to Constitutional violative actions, you will be a productive citizen.  If you kill innocents 'cause you don't like a particular gun law, you will be a murderer.