150 Armed Militia Members Take Over Federal Building

[*bfine32*]

(01-06-2016, 09:33 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Of coarse you didn't call them a terrorist organization.  You just said they tell people to kill LEO's and that they 'terrorized' a library.  The later you indicated you could produce, but haven't out of principle I guess.  If you want to back up your claims, please do.  

Stop scratching you head and say what you mean.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/16/black-lives-matter-protesters-berate-white-student/

Quote:Men and women were pushed and shoved by the group, the newspaper claimed.

Quote:One woman was reportedly pinned to a wall by protesters who shouted “filthy white b–-” in her face.

“The tactics, tone, and words of the Black Lives Matter protesters eerily mirrored everything they claim to stand against,” writes The Review. “The long list of their clear oversteps should spark a moment of reckoning for every honest onlooker, and especially those who have sympathized with their movement to this point.”
One video taken from the incident, published by Campus Reform, showed the contentious scene when dozens of people chanting “black lives matter” overtook an area of the library. One woman is seen raising her middle finger at the camera, while another confronts the camera-holder on whether he believes black lives matter.

They  do not fit my definition of Terrorists because they did not commit a violent act, just blew a lot of hot air. 

Not sure how I've wavered in this or holding back on saying 'what I mean'.  It is just this and other scenarios meet the criteria that the more "open-minded" on here consider terrorism, yet they demonstrate for inconsistency for some reason. 

I could probably list 5 or more reasons that this library scenario is more in line with terrorism than the Oregon case. But why?  I do not consider either an act of terror.