4 ms·

If they didn’t say this, this could be construed as an attack on America and label them as enemies of the state or even terrorists.

viraptor 5y ago
I'm not sure declaring yourself apolitical would save you. The results are the same. Otherwise all terrorists would say "we're apolitical, we just wanted to get money off stock trades based on this news".
- gruez 5y ago
  The definition of terrorism: >1. The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create public fear through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda. >2. The use of unlawful violence against people or property to achieve political objectives. >3. A form of psychological manipulation through warfare to the purpose of political or religious gains, by means of deliberately creating a climate of fear amongst the inhabitants of a specific geographical region If you don't have an agenda behind it, it's not terrorism.
  - viraptor 5y ago
    You can have an agenda, create fear to further your goals and say you didn't have an agenda - pretend the results were accidental. It can't be that easy - if some government is going to charge you, they'll do it based on what you achieved, not what you say.
    - gruez 5y ago
      > You can have an agenda, create fear to further your goals and say you didn't have an agenda - pretend the results were accidental. But that's not what's happening? It's not like we have IRA setting off bombs and then saying "it's us but it's accidental wink wink". Terrorists are interested in creating fear, hence why they take attributions in the first place. >It can't be that easy - if some government is going to charge you, they'll do it based on what you achieved, not what you say. You do realize something can be a crime and still not be terrorism, right?
      - anthonygd 5y ago
        You do realize criminals don't get to pick which crimes they're charged with, right?
        divs1210 5y ago
        There's something called "motive" that highly influences the course and outcome of a legal case.
        true_religion 5y ago
        Could they still end up treated like terrorists? Totally. Some drug lords are still called terrorists even though their only goal is monopoly control of the cocaine market by any means necessary. But their loudly and public disclaiming all intent to harm puts them a huge step away from being terrorists in the public’s eyes. Even if the government designates them so, they still have to make a case as to why money should be spent in going after them instead of criminals the population actually cares about.
        gruez 5y ago
        >Some drug lords are still called terrorists even though their only goal is monopoly control of the cocaine market by any means necessary. 1. who's calling them terrorists? Some shmuck off the street? Some writer for a tabloid? People on wallstreetbets think that hedge funds are "financial terrorists", doesn't mean they are. 2. drug lords can absolutely engage in actual terrorist activities, eg. "we will attack innocent civilians unless you stop arresting us".
        true_religion 5y ago
        You know. I looked it up, and it seems that there was a plan by Trump to list the Mexican cartels as terrorist orgs, but it never went through. Now Biden is being asked to do the same. So seems my example was wrong. Whoops.
      - 5y ago
dboreham 5y ago
Proof that someone can type and change underwear at the same time.
Ashanmaril 5y ago
It's in line with the modern rule where your actions don't actually matter, you just have to state that your values are in line with popular opinions and you're automatically absolved of being a huge scumbag.

viraptor 5y ago

I'm not sure declaring yourself apolitical would save you. The results are the same. Otherwise all terrorists would say "we're apolitical, we just wanted to get money off stock trades based on this news".

gruez 5y ago
The definition of terrorism: >1. The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create public fear through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda. >2. The use of unlawful violence against people or property to achieve political objectives. >3. A form of psychological manipulation through warfare to the purpose of political or religious gains, by means of deliberately creating a climate of fear amongst the inhabitants of a specific geographical region If you don't have an agenda behind it, it's not terrorism.
- viraptor 5y ago
  You can have an agenda, create fear to further your goals and say you didn't have an agenda - pretend the results were accidental. It can't be that easy - if some government is going to charge you, they'll do it based on what you achieved, not what you say.
  - gruez 5y ago
    > You can have an agenda, create fear to further your goals and say you didn't have an agenda - pretend the results were accidental. But that's not what's happening? It's not like we have IRA setting off bombs and then saying "it's us but it's accidental wink wink". Terrorists are interested in creating fear, hence why they take attributions in the first place. >It can't be that easy - if some government is going to charge you, they'll do it based on what you achieved, not what you say. You do realize something can be a crime and still not be terrorism, right?
    - anthonygd 5y ago
      You do realize criminals don't get to pick which crimes they're charged with, right?
      - divs1210 5y ago
        There's something called "motive" that highly influences the course and outcome of a legal case.
        true_religion 5y ago
        Could they still end up treated like terrorists? Totally. Some drug lords are still called terrorists even though their only goal is monopoly control of the cocaine market by any means necessary. But their loudly and public disclaiming all intent to harm puts them a huge step away from being terrorists in the public’s eyes. Even if the government designates them so, they still have to make a case as to why money should be spent in going after them instead of criminals the population actually cares about.
        gruez 5y ago
        >Some drug lords are still called terrorists even though their only goal is monopoly control of the cocaine market by any means necessary. 1. who's calling them terrorists? Some shmuck off the street? Some writer for a tabloid? People on wallstreetbets think that hedge funds are "financial terrorists", doesn't mean they are. 2. drug lords can absolutely engage in actual terrorist activities, eg. "we will attack innocent civilians unless you stop arresting us".
        true_religion 5y ago
        You know. I looked it up, and it seems that there was a plan by Trump to list the Mexican cartels as terrorist orgs, but it never went through. Now Biden is being asked to do the same. So seems my example was wrong. Whoops.
    - 5y ago

dboreham 5y ago

Proof that someone can type and change underwear at the same time.

Ashanmaril 5y ago

It's in line with the modern rule where your actions don't actually matter, you just have to state that your values are in line with popular opinions and you're automatically absolved of being a huge scumbag.