This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ViciDraco · 41-45, M
No one was hurt. The damage was aesthetic, not functional. So I don't really have sympathy.
Calling it terrorism is a bit far. It's only property damage. Property damage isn't violence. It is a crime and I don't advocate for this. But I'm not clutching any pearls over it either.
Calling it terrorism is a bit far. It's only property damage. Property damage isn't violence. It is a crime and I don't advocate for this. But I'm not clutching any pearls over it either.
TheOneyouwerewarnedabout · 46-50, MVIP
@ViciDraco when one business and one person is being targeted.. its 100% terrorism..
maybe they should go fire bomb a ford dealership if you want to just call it general vandalism...
maybe they should go fire bomb a ford dealership if you want to just call it general vandalism...
TheOneyouwerewarnedabout · 46-50, MVIP
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout also.. when its has the purpose of bringing that one person to heel.. thats 200% terrorism..
the exact definition of terrorism
the exact definition of terrorism