Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Code_Havoc
The definition of a 'terrorist' is some one that tries to strike fear (or terror) into people. You do not have to actually kill people to be a terrorist, nor do you (though most of the world may disagree cause of being narrowminded) have to be arab or islamic to be a terrorist. And yes, by the current definitions most people use the Founding Fathers could be construde as terrorists. The reason they arent? They didn't blow up any buildings with people in them. They are, by definition, rebels. They didn't like their leader and struck back, and faught to break free. It's a fine line that is probably more personal believes and opinion than anything else.
|
I C your point to an extent - But American(13 colonies) ships fired on British vessels, attempted to invade what is now Canada, .....
Isn't a rebel more like an "Insurgent"? Trying to repell invading forces?
BUSH INC. strikes sheer terror everytime they open their mouth - Terrorists?
I know this seems like semantics, but what things are labelled indicates how they are percieved.
