Could you and the guy posting that comment be conflating freedom fighters with terrorists? The former takes up arms against what they see as an illegitimate governance and its representatives, be they in the form of troops or persons empowered by the state, while the later takes up arms against civilians who most likely have no affiliation with said illegitimate governance.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." It's a fair position for you to take. I'm not sure I'd be willing to go on a demo to demand freedom for that @&%# though.
Has Harlequin been arrested for what he said? No, he hasn't. What does that tell you about your reasoning? But ya know, Orwell... evil governments... oppression... etc *wibble* Edit: Is this thread going to turn into yet another civil libs/evil government wibble-fest like so many others, including the Westminster attack thread? That would be a shame.
It's about time we censored those civil libs/evil government wibble-fest types of people. It's ridiculous that so many people keep commenting on such things when there's no problem here guv, honest.
I used the term Freedom Fighter, because I was representing his perspective, not my own - Like I said, I'm on the loyalist, protestant side of the conflict. If you want to use that definition for terrorist, that's fine, but understand that definition can be applied just as readily to the British Armed Forces as well - Are you sure you want to go there? It tells me that advocating the use of nuclear weapons on a part of the UK is a lot less emotive right now than not universally expressing sympathy for the victims of the Manchester attack...Something that that guy was definitely arrested for, just on a platform much more visible than bit-tech. If you don't think that being arrested for not having sympathy for citizens of another country which annexed and historically terrorised yours isn't Orwellian then I'm not sure you understand Orwell.
Taking away the liberties of everyone for a measure that feels good to authoritarian people but actually achieves nothing is not the solution. People have already suggested other solutions pages ago like for example don't obliterate police budgets.
I find it difficult to accept you were representing his perspective as i doubt you know him, and even if you did it would still be difficult to know what his perspective was unless you had that conversation with him. Either way it's not about how you or i want to define a terrorist as undoubtedly we'd have different thresholds for when someone crosses over from being a freedom fighter to a terrorist, would they be a terrorists if civilians made up 5-10-30-50% or more of the casualties, yes I'm aware that definition can be applied to the British armed forces however AFAIK it wasn't policy to deliberately target civilians and IIRC the IRA also followed similar practices so an argument could be made that they were not terrorists, however the same can't be said of Islamist inspired attacks AFAIK as they appear to be deliberately, purposefully, knowingly targeting civilians.
Normal communication, or local lingo has nothing to do with your claim that you know what a strangers perspective is. There not at all subjective, it's not defined by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions, being a terrorist or a freedom fighter is based on objective facts, the only subjective part is where someone personally draws the line.
So tell me how am I misrepresenting him when I say that Up the RA means "I support Irish freedom fighters"? Do you think he's more likely to support terrorists than freedom fighters? What? You're making absolutely no sense. They're. So it's objective until anyone says it's not? That just means it's entirely subjective. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing.
You know what would be really nice? To have a set of freedom of speech laws which appropriately reflected the realities and technologies of the 21st century rather than crudely extrapolating 30 year old laws to modern contexts.
We don't need a set but just a single one: The first ammendment to the US constitution adopted in 1791 A.D, 45 words long, covers 6 separate freedoms and still works today.
You're misrepresenting him because you have no idea what he meant, i mean you don't even know if what he said was in jest or serious, you don't even know who this person is so it beggars belief that somehow you know what his perspective is. You're also misrepresenting him because you yourself said up the RA has one meaning after you'd already stated that he was showing support for freedom fighters and not terrorists even though you've admitted where that line is drawn is subjective and you're not the subject. No they are not, just like measuring a piece of string is objective but whether it's a long or short piece of string is subjective, the measuring of civilian casualties is objective but where someone draws the line, like I've previous said is subjective. Lastly I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing, I'm attempting to have a serious discussion with someone who appears to be struggling when it comes to understanding the philosophical nature of the subject at hand.
Whatever, go ahead and keep telling yourself that you are more accustomed with the ethno and geopolitical nuances of Belfast than someone who's spent 35 years of their life here. I'm not going to argue with a troll who calls "but philosophy!" when they don't realise they've already lost the argument.
Chill guys as far as I can tell all of you but Yadda are agreed on what seems the most important issue:freedom of expression in relation to this.
I guess that goes to show how far this has gone over your head, in case you haven't noticed this isn't a discussion about Belfast it's a discussion about terrorists that judging by the antagonistic nature of your post in not only this thread but also the EU thread you're subverting in an attempt to start an argument with someone, anyone. Perhaps you should take a chill pill. EDIT: And BTW having a discussion isn't about winning or losing, it's about the exchange of ideas and opinions, maybe if you approach future discussions in a such a manner you may actual learn something along the way.
