“Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims.”
If you call this terrorism, you can call anything terrorism, and anybody can be a terrorist. If you’re willing to do that to aid the Israel fascist state, that makes you a fascist. Yes, the entire house of commons are fascists.
And sure, that was very much illegal and they could have used any number of laws applicable to attacking a military base. Just not terrorism. But the UK military is involved in a partnership in the gaza war. They are not “non-combatants”
The thread’s about the law being akin to the law of a police state. A state is a police state if it enforces unjust laws that criminalise reasonable acts.
“Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims.”
If you call this terrorism, you can call anything terrorism, and anybody can be a terrorist. If you’re willing to do that to aid the Israel fascist state, that makes you a fascist. Yes, the entire house of commons are fascists.
And sure, that was very much illegal and they could have used any number of laws applicable to attacking a military base. Just not terrorism. But the UK military is involved in a partnership in the gaza war. They are not “non-combatants”
It’s what UK law considers terrorism.
the military does not deserve any protection from citizens and should never be an excuse to call people terrorists.
Right. Doesn’t change the fact about UK law considering their actions terroristic… You know, what this thread is about.
The thread’s about the law being akin to the law of a police state. A state is a police state if it enforces unjust laws that criminalise reasonable acts.