Current Events > Capitol terrorist Jenny Cudd facing new felony charges

(+) Yeah! (+)

TommyG663513 posted...

Imagine hearing for years how the term terrorism can be problematic and then once there are white people you can refer the term to people act like there is nothing problematic about the term whatsoever

All I'm doing here is pointing out a weird inconsistency and people accuse me of being a MAGA type

For the record, anyone who stepped foot in the capitol building should be seeing a lengthy prison sentence.

So you are literally just upset that white people are being called terrorists.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

Imagine hearing for years how the term terrorism can be problematic and then once there are white people you can refer the term to people act like there is nothing problematic about the term whatsoever

All I'm doing here is pointing out a weird inconsistency and people accuse me of being a MAGA type

For the record, anyone who stepped foot in the capitol building should be seeing a lengthy prison sentence.

No one here is saying the term terrorism can't be problematic. I've repeatedly stated why the term "terrorist" can be problematic (applying it to a large group based on the actions of a few). You're the one trying to act like people ITT are labeling the capitol terrorists as such just because they're white, but you also accept the fact that their actions fit the definition of terrorism.

You're the only one who is confused ITT.

---

CableZL posted...

Regardless, you're still trying to ignore the nuance that I've explained repeatedly.

Not acceptable: Using the word terrorist as if it applies to all Muslims based on the actions of a few people.
Acceptable: Applying the word terrorist to people who commit terroristic acts.

It's really that simple.

Is there a difference between these two people commenting on the 9/11 hijackers?

A history professor who thoughtfully recounts the events and labels the hijackers as terrorists

An angry white redneck type who frequently calls them terrorists and talks about what he'd like to do to one of them if he was alone in a room with them

The point is that there is a difference between accurately labeling something and using that pejorative as a way to fuel your own anger and ego.

Some of these people I went to school with who were extremely hesitant to use the term terrorism in any context whatsoever now post on their FB feeds about the danger of terrorism committed by white nationalists. These are the people I am talking about. Can you explain how weird of a shift in behavior regarding the usage of that term is?


---

TommyG663513 posted...

Is there a difference between these two people commenting on the 9/11 hijackers?

There is no difference if they only refer to the 9/11 hijackers as such.

However, if one goes on to apply that term to someone who appears to be Muslim just because of the actions of the 9/11 hijackers, then that's where the difference comes in.

And again, your anecdotal example of people who struggle to have mature conversations with people about the subject of terrorism doesn't really mean anything.

---

Tmaster148 posted...

So you are literally just upset that white people are being called terrorists.

No I'm annoyed by the inconsistency of it. Those same people who were hesitant to label any terrorist actions by any Muslim group anywhere are now eager to label anything involving white nationalism as terrorism.

It is terrorism in both instances.

---

Wow, dude is literally implying that all muslims are terrorists with that post.

---

CableZL posted...

There is no difference if they only refer to the 9/11 hijackers as such.

However, if one goes on to apply that term to someone who appears to be Muslim just because of the actions of the 9/11 hijackers, then that's where the difference comes in.

And again, your anecdotal example of people who struggle to have mature conversations with people about the subject of terrorism doesn't really mean anything.

You literally just said that there is no difference between the way a history professor would use the term terrorism and the way a white angry redneck type would use the term terrorism when applied to the same exact group (9/11 hijackers).

Keep in mind, one of these people is matter of factly recounting events and the other is giving an emotional laden testimony with threats of violence and excessive use of the word terrorism.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

No I'm annoyed by the inconsistency of it. Those same people who were hesitant to label any terrorist actions by any Muslim group anywhere are now eager to label anything involving white nationalism as terrorism.

It is terrorism in both instances.

You're conflating two different things. A terroristic act done by a person or group is terrorism.

White nationalism isn't necessarily terrorism. It becomes terrorism when it fits the definition of terrorism, which involves an act. White nationalism would be more accurately described as inherently racist and xenophobic, but it becomes terrorism when it's a motivation for an unlawful use of force or violence.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

You literally just said that there is no difference between the way a history professor would use the term terrorism and the way a white angry redneck type would use the term terrorism when applied to the same exact group (9/11 hijackers).

Keep in mind, one of these people is matter of factly recounting events and the other is giving an emotional laden testimony with threats of violence and excessive use of the word terrorism.

I said this:

CableZL posted...

There is no difference if they only refer to the 9/11 hijackers as such.

However, if one goes on to apply that term to someone who appears to be Muslim just because of the actions of the 9/11 hijackers, then that's where the difference comes in.

And you're adding stuff to your example in attempt to help your argument. Lots of people of all races emotionally responded to the events of 9/11 and called the people responsible terrorists, and that's understandable. People lost family members. People realized the country was under attack.

The problem comes when people use that event as justification to label anyone who they even think is a Muslim as a terrorist.

---

Am I thinking of someone else or did this guy used to be a mod?

---

TheLiarParadox posted...

Am I thinking of someone else or did this guy used to be a mod?

If I'm "this guy," then you're thinking of CyricZ

If you're referring to TommyG663513, I'm not sure

---

CableZL posted...

You're conflating two different things. A terroristic act done by a person or group is terrorism.

White nationalism isn't necessarily terrorism. It becomes terrorism when it fits the definition of terrorism, which involves an act. White nationalism would be more accurately described as inherently racist and xenophobic, but it becomes terrorism when it's a motivation for an unlawful use of force or violence.

You are so intentionally engaging in bad faith and misinterpreting what I am saying

I am pointing out arguments that I see and you keep acting like I'm arguing with you and that the arguments I see are irrelevant.

Many people (not all) became very hesitant to use the word terrorism in any context in response to how it morphed into a racist dog whistle term post 9/11.

You seem to deny this or think those people are so stupid that it's irrelevant.

I point out that some of these same people that I still see on my FB feed are now throwing around the word terrorism/ist to refer to white nationalist groups who operate under threats of terrorism and/or have attempted to commit terroristic acts successfully or unsuccessfully.

You seem to deny this or think those people are so stupid that it's irrelevant.

Regardless of how you value those people, they exist and it seems like their thought patterns are quite pervasive and believed by a significant amount of people.

I think it's weird how many people who were so hesitant about using the term terrorist are now eager to use it and the difference is that the previous group was Muslims and the new group is white nationalists.

I agree with you that they're both terrorists and should both be treated accordingly. This last sentence is the only real opinionated statement I've said as I've pretty much just reported on arguments that I've seen.


---

CableZL posted...

I said this:

And you're adding stuff to your example in attempt to help your argument. Lots of people of all races emotionally responded to the events of 9/11 and called the people responsible terrorists, and that's understandable. People lost family members. People realized the country was under attack.

The problem comes when people use that event as justification to label anyone who they even think is a Muslim as a terrorist.

So you do recognize that the term terrorist carries with it a different connotation when it is used matter of factly versus when there is a lot of emotion and threats of violence behind it?

---

TommyG663513 posted...

You are so intentionally engaging in bad faith and misinterpreting what I am saying

I am pointing out arguments that I see and you keep acting like I'm arguing with you and that the arguments I see are irrelevant.

Many people (not all) became very hesitant to use the word terrorism in any context in response to how it morphed into a racist dog whistle term post 9/11.

You seem to deny this or think those people are so stupid that it's irrelevant.

I point out that some of these same people that I still see on my FB feed are now throwing around the word terrorism/ist to refer to white nationalist groups who operate under threats of terrorism and/or have attempted to commit terroristic acts successfully or unsuccessfully.

You seem to deny this or think those people are so stupid that it's irrelevant.

Regardless of how you value those people, they exist and it seems like their thought patterns are quite pervasive and believed by a significant amount of people.

I think it's weird how many people who were so hesitant about using the term terrorist are now eager to use it and the difference is that the previous group was Muslims and the new group is white nationalists.

I agree with you that they're both terrorists and should both be treated accordingly. This last sentence is the only real opinionated statement I've said as I've pretty much just reported on arguments that I've seen.

No, I understand the fact that there are people who are like that. My point is that you're trying to use your anecdotal examples of people who struggle to have intelligent and mature conversations around the subject of terrorism as some kind of proof is ridiculous. It doesn't mean they're dumb or stupid. It just means they either find the subject uncomfortable to talk about or just can't have a rational conversation on the subject for some reason. People like that shouldn't be used as some sort of absolute proof of general consensus.

And it's strange that you disregard anecdotal examples of terrorists of other races involved in the capitol riot just because most of the capitol rioters are white, but you're fine with repeatedly bring up your anecdotal examples of people you went to college with who can't seem to have a rational discussion on the matter, people on your Facebook feed, QAnon believers, etc.

You're basing your idea of general consensus on people who are irrational when it comes to this subject. I'm basing my idea of general consensus on rationality and logic.

My "eagerness" to call Jenny Cudd a terrorist has nothing to do with her race. It has to do with the fact that she committed a terroristic act and is proud of what she did.

---

Is the argument that since "terrorist" was a conservative buzzword to justify racial and cultural profiling post-9/11, it's unusual to see it being used in such a fervour by liberal-types only 20 years after 9/11? Is there an attempt to "gotcha" liberals over the use of the word "terrorist"?

Because A) 9/11 was 20 years ago now, and people have put work into separating the term "terrorist" from the term "Muslim" since then, and B) the riot at Capitol Hill was an instance of domestic terrorism, making the people who perpetuated that violence terrorists.

Further question: is the consternation over the current use of "terrorist" rooted in the fear that people who fit the profile of the Capitol Hill insurrectionists will be targeted the same way Muslims were post-9/11?

---

TommyG663513 posted...

So you do recognize that the term terrorist carries with it a different connotation when it is used matter of factly versus when there is a lot of emotion and threats of violence behind it?

I'm not sure if you're having trouble reading, but I've said this repeatedly in this topic. The term carries a different connotation based on how it is used. There is nuance that you either can't understand or you're refusing to understand.

Situation 1: Person calls the 9/11 hijackers terrorists.

• This is fine. They committed terroristic acts.
• People of all races responded to this event emotionally and wished harm on anyone who was responsible. People of all races and creeds lost family members. Fathers, brothers, mothers, sisters, daughters, etc. in his event. An emotional response that calls for violence is pretty much expected.

Situation 2: Person uses the events of 9/11 to label anyone who they believe is a Muslim as a terrorist.

• This is frowned upon.
• It is not at all fair for people who have lived peaceful lives to be labeled as criminals or terrorists just because people who happen to look like them participated in the events of 9/11.

I'm not sure how many times I'm going to need to repeat this ITT for you to understand, but I'm not going to continue repeating it through the whole topic just because you don't get it.

---

CableZL posted...

I'm not sure if you're having trouble reading, but I've said this repeatedly in this topic. The term carries a different connotation based on how it is used. There is nuance that you either can't understand or you're refusing to understand.

Situation 1: Person calls the 9/11 hijackers terrorists.
* This is fine. They committed terroristic acts.
* People of all races responded to this event emotionally and wished harm on anyone who was responsible. People of all races and creeds lost family members. Fathers, brothers, mothers, sisters, daughters, etc. in his event. An emotional response that calls for violence is pretty much expected.

Situation 2: Person uses the events of 9/11 to label anyone who they believe is a Muslim as a terrorist.
* This is frowned upon.
* It is not at all fair for people who have lived peaceful lives to be labeled as criminals or terrorists just because people who happen to look like them participated in the events of 9/11.

I'm not sure how many times I'm going to need to repeat this ITT for you to understand, but I'm not going to continue repeating it through the whole topic just because you don't get it.

Those are very different from the examples that I gave and you keep trying to pigeonhole them into those two categories.

There is a big difference between a history professor who refers to the 9/11 hijackers as terrorists

AND

A white redneck type who keeps repeating the word terrorist with a lot of anger and implies he would do something violent if left alone in a room with one of these terrorists

It is a very different way of using the word terrorist.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

Those are very different from the examples that I gave and you keep trying to pigeonhole them into those two categories.

There is a big difference between a history professor who refers to the 9/11 hijackers as terrorists

AND

A white redneck type who keeps repeating the word terrorist with a lot of anger and implies he would do something violent if left alone in a room with one of these terrorists

It is a very different way of using the word terrorist.

So you're agreeing with Cable?

---

TommyG663513 posted...

Those are very different from the examples that I gave and you keep trying to pigeonhole them into those two categories.

There is a big difference between a history professor who refers to the 9/11 hijackers as terrorists

AND

A white redneck type who keeps repeating the word terrorist with a lot of anger and implies he would do something violent if left alone in a room with one of these terrorists

It is a very different way of using the word terrorist.

Regardless of the level of emotion, there's a difference between a white redneck who uses the word terrorist to apply to all Muslims and a white redneck who uses the word terrorist to apply specifically to the people who participated in 9/11 and other people who commit terroristic acts.

---

CableZL posted...

No, I understand the fact that there are people who are like that. My point is that you're trying to use your anecdotal examples of people who struggle to have intelligent and mature conversations around the subject of terrorism as some kind of proof is ridiculous. It doesn't mean they're dumb or stupid. It just means they either find the subject uncomfortable to talk about or just can't have a rational conversation on the subject for some reason. People like that shouldn't be used as some sort of absolute proof of general consensus.

And it's strange that you disregard anecdotal examples of terrorists of other races involved in the capitol riot just because most of the capitol rioters are white, but you're fine with repeatedly bring up your anecdotal examples of people you went to college with who can't seem to have a rational discussion on the matter, people on your Facebook feed, QAnon believers, etc.

You're basing your idea of general consensus on people who are irrational when it comes to this subject. I'm basing my idea of general consensus on rationality and logic.

My "eagerness" to call Jenny Cudd a terrorist has nothing to do with her race. It has to do with the fact that she committed a terroristic act and is proud of what she did.

Yeah two minorities doesn't keep the capitol riots from being largely a thing that white people did.

Roughly 10% of black voters voted for Trump, but voting for Trump is still pretty much a thing that white people did. Especially considering that mobilizing black voters in the Atlanta and Philadelphia areas were absolutely key in defeating Trump.

I wouldn't really call my example just an anecdote on equal footing of your "two minorities" stormed the capitol example.

There are people ITT who accused me of being a MAGA type. That's just wtf.

I see TONS of different weird ultra liberal positions EVERYWHERE and especially on this board.

There was a topic recently on here where many people equated being liberal with being a good person.

The general sentiment that I'm going with here is that although liberal people are "better" with "good" intentions compared to your average conservative, they can still fall into these weird problematic inconsistencies.


---

TommyG663513 posted...

Yeah two minorities doesn't keep the capitol riots from being largely a thing that white people did.

I don't give a shit if it was mostly white people. They're terrorists if they committed terroristic acts. I'm really not sure why you're bringing up race in this topic at all.

---

CableZL posted...

I don't give a shit if it was mostly white people. They're terrorists if they committed terroristic acts. I'm really not sure why you're bringing up race in this topic at all.

Because it was clearly a thing white people did.

I don't see how anybody can deny this. Trump being in power was mostly due to rural white people and an electoral college system that gives them greater voting power than those living in urban centers.

I say this as a white person.

Not all Trump supporters are racist, but a pretty significant portion of his base is filled with those fueled by racist rhetoric.

Quite frankly, I don't know how you talk about the capitol riots and Trumpisim in general without race being an incredibly significant factor.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

Because it was clearly a thing white people did.

I don't see how anybody can deny this. Trump being in power was mostly due to rural white people and an electoral college system that gives them greater voting power than those living in urban centers.

I say this as a white person.

Not all Trump supporters are racist, but a pretty significant portion of his base is filled with those fueled by racist rhetoric.

Quite frankly, I don't know how you talk about the capitol riots and Trumpisim in general without race being an incredibly significant factor.

Please look through this topic and show me an example of someone denying the fact that the capitol rioters were mostly white people.

Again, I'm really not sure why you're bringing this up.

---

CableZL posted...

Please look through this topic and show me an example of someone denying the fact that the capitol rioters were mostly white people.

Again, I'm really not sure why you're bringing this up.

......

---

Is Tommy a MAGA board refuge

---

CM_Ponch posted...

Is Tommy a MAGA board refuge

This is a brand new and thoughtful take. Thank you for sharing.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

So thats a yes

Nope. Haven't you invited me to CE LGBT stuff before?

I know I've interacted with you on this board quite a bit in the past.

Can you explain what is so MAGA about what I've stated ITT?

---

shockthemonkey posted...

No, Im not going to engage in your sealion shitposting

You came into this topic to add nothing of value. Take a look in the mirror on your way out.

---

imagine defending terrorists

---

shockthemonkey posted...

I look in mirrors all the time, Im fucking gorgeous. That wont make your shitty sealioning any less transparent.

Can you explain to me exactly how you're engaging me in good faith and totally not just trolling?

---

E32005 posted...

is she a cow?

Only if its a duck bear topic

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Wow what a thoughtful thing to say. Surely you came in here to have a discussion and not to insult me.

---

This topic just keeps making me dumber and dumber as I read it
---

Getting back on track: an example has to be set, which should be levelled against her and that neo-pagan horn boy at the very least, and at best let's hope this ruling provides a template of what happens to the rest of these white nationalist fucks.

---