Careful, that can also sound like January 6th.Oxford dictionary:
"the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
So?
Careful, that can also sound like January 6th.Oxford dictionary:
"the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
So?
So everyone who performs work for the government needs to be appointed or elected?As many see Elon, and unappointed person making govt policy, as a threat to democracy then it's all quite justified.
Only I didn't, did I?Answering questions with questions is an evasive tactic.
No, I said it might be legitimate.You said something illegal is ok because it doesn't upset you (and in this case because it's being done to someone you just don't like).
I'm glad you're enjoying yourself.(btw I'm having fun watching you tap dance around this and sadly, the only reason why you are is that you just don't like someone but are trying in vain to justify it for more sane reasons).
Of course.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]Take a step back from your bias for a moment...if someone you like had their business set on fire and received death threats simply because of their political leanings, you would be outraged.
Nazi salutes are absolutely "political leanings".Doing Nazi salutes is not 'political leanings'. It is entirely accepted to boycott businesses or other entities that engage in Nazi salutes.
That is why 94% of Germans will not buy a Tesla.
I agree it is silly to draw this comparison....and the inevitable whatabout argument when cornered but I'll play along seeing as you're really desperate to draw similarities.
It isn't to the US Federal government normally, either.Targeting a single person with violence and death threats is not a form of terrorism to you?
That 5 years ago, Granny?
He's using the Oxford dictionary definition.Do yourself a favor and use Google or something else to look up what the definition of terrorism is. You appear a bit lame by insisting vandalism is terrorism.
So was WW2 and 9/11...keep distracting away from your hypocrisy though...watching people tap dance is entertaining for me!I agree it is silly to draw this comparison.
The Capital storming was many orders of magnitude worse than anything that has been happening at a Tesla dealership.
Interesting.So everyone who performs work for the government needs to be appointed or elected?
What government policy did Musk create and pass exactly?
Please show your facts about who can perform work for the government and who has passed any related policies to what Musk has been working on.
I think most of Europe, at least, consider Nazi salutes beyond 'political leanings'. It is considered unacceptable provocations, and some places illegal.Nazi salutes is absolutely "political leanings".
And WWII isn't terrorism.So was WW2 and 9/11...keep distracting away from your hypocrisy though...watching people tap dance is entertaining for me!
Just because it is illegal doesn't mean it isn't political.I think most of Europe, at least, consider Nazi salutes beyond 'political leanings'. It is considered unacceptable provocations, and some places illegal.
The only one pleading ignorance here is someone who thinks terrorist acts are not being conducted against him and give it a pass because...well...they just don't like him so that somehow makes it ok.Interesting.
You're pleading ignorance of what Musk has been doing and the legal challenges to it?
These acts are mainly being committed in the US but your definition still applies to what's being done to Musk regardless.In Canada, "terrorist activity" is defined under the Criminal Code as an act committed "in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause" with the intention of intimidating the public or compelling a government to do or refrain from doing something.
Skoob won't be using legal definitions here.In Canada, "terrorist activity" is defined under the Criminal Code as an act committed "in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause" with the intention of intimidating the public or compelling a government to do or refrain from doing something.
It most definitely does not. Read again.These acts are mainly being committed in the US but your definition still applies to what's being done to Musk regardless.
When it comes to govt policy, and how Congressional funds are spent, yes!So everyone who performs work for the government needs to be appointed or elected?
What government policy did Musk create and pass exactly?
Please show your facts about who can perform work for the government and who has passed any related policies to what Musk has been working on.
An absolute joke of a post.I guess you don't really care about all the people who would lose jobs if his businesses are driven under by lunatics?