Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
14,697
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 111:
Line 111: + + Line 131:
Line 133: − + Line 168:
Line 170: − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Undo revision 1193882 by FilthySocialist (talk) Profanity, trolling
* [[Contra]]<ref>National Security Archive, [http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/irancontra/irancon.html ''The Iran-Contra Affair: The Making of a Scandal, 1983-1988''] 1990.</ref>
* [[Contra]]<ref>National Security Archive, [http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/irancontra/irancon.html ''The Iran-Contra Affair: The Making of a Scandal, 1983-1988''] 1990.</ref>
I agree the Contras are not a terrorist group. It was a group that fought a Communist dictatorship.--[[User:JoeyJ|JoeyJ]] 13:24, 2 March 2014 (EST)
===SAVAK===
===SAVAK===
A picture of something that does not connote the terrorists' values. So, no images of them with Nick Berg, that sort of thing. Honestly, the best approach might be something like the picture of the guy on the balcony in Munich, 1972. Gives the image, without the current debate. That would be a good example. The other is simply too much, too soon. I appreciate your consideration on this. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 14:00, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
A picture of something that does not connote the terrorists' values. So, no images of them with Nick Berg, that sort of thing. Honestly, the best approach might be something like the picture of the guy on the balcony in Munich, 1972. Gives the image, without the current debate. That would be a good example. The other is simply too much, too soon. I appreciate your consideration on this. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 14:00, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
::[[Image:Terrormunich.jpg]] This the image you're referring to? [[User:GodlessLiberal|GodlessLiberal]] 14:16, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
:: [link] This the image you're referring to? [[User:GodlessLiberal|GodlessLiberal]] 14:16, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
::Yeah, I think it gives the impression of the what the page will discuss without the rhetorical issue I mentioned before. Thanks. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 14:20, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
::Yeah, I think it gives the impression of the what the page will discuss without the rhetorical issue I mentioned before. Thanks. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 14:20, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
AL QAIDA is not leftist.
AL QAIDA is not leftist.
Anyone care to explain exacly how al Quaida qualifies as a LEFTIST terrorist group?
Anyone care to explain exacly how al Qaida qualifies as a LEFTIST terrorist group?
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 16:11, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 16:11, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:Good observation PF, and we are discussing it. The idea here is to eliminate the ideological groupings, and fund some other system of classification. Perhaps reviewing some of the source websites would be helpful. Care to assist? [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:13, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
::Why do you consider imposing a system of classification so important? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 16:02, 30 June 2007 (EDT)
:::::Terrorism, as of the last decade or so, has undergone a radical shift in how it operates. We're starting to see a breakdown of the old system that RobS was pointing out. For example, it is getter hard to classify terrorists within a political spectrum, as the world is no longer really divided between communism and capitalism anymore. Also, terrorist are changing their goals and strategies. Where once, a terrorist would choose a target that would be symbolic and surgical, now terrorist are concerned with indiscriminate destruction. Also, now rather than operating in clandestine groups, they choose to operate in this small cell network. Like I said, I was planning on retooling it, but at the moment, I was more concerned with getting the most information in as possible.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 16:29, 30 June 2007 (EDT)
Here's some ideas, we could use these classifications:
*Communist/Socialist
*Environmental
*Nationalist/Separatist
*Racist
*Religious
[[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:38, 30 June 2007 (EDT)
And in the meantime, you've still got Al Qaeda incorrectly listed as a "leftist" terrorist group. Why is that grossly inaccurate "information" allowed to remain? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 11:00, 1 July 2007 (EDT)
*I think you have fallen victim, Fox, to a world view, globalist mentality! If Al Qaeda isn't leftist aligned, what in the world is it aligned with? Rightist governments? All of the governments I see supporting it are socialist and communistic, not right-wing. And we have already dealt with the silly idea, and Big Lie that Facists are right-wing. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 13:14, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
==PKK==
Should the [[PKK]] be added to the list of terrorist groups in this article? Its recognized as one by the [[United States]] and [[EU]], and it has had significant impact on Turkey and the U.S. mission in Iraq.--[[User:Tash|Tash]] 12:49, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
*I agree it possibly should, and defer to RobS on this. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 15:12, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
== Al Qaeda, leftist terrorist organization? ==
Never heard of anyone referring to Al Qaeda as a Left wing terrorist organization and I don't understand why it's being labeled as one. First of all they fought against Communists, which are rather much to the left. Second, Al Qaeda is a religious terrorist organization with a ideological belief that pretty much contradicts Left wing ideologies. Suggest that the classifications as proposed by RobS should be used --[[User:Sachaztan|Sachaztan]] 18:54, 31 July 2007 (EDT)
I think it would be better to create a separate section referring to Islamic terrorist groups and move Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood to that section, while adding in Jemaah Islamia and Abu Sayaaf to the list, as well as the Palestinian groups (maybe the palestinian groups "deserve" their own sub-heading or should be included with nationalist / independence groups
[[User:Luojie|Luojie]] 10:12, 29 September 2007 (EDT)
== EFF, ACLU, etc ==
I know conservatives don't like them, but I don't see any evidence that they give money contributions to terrorism. I looked on the articles about each organization as well and could not find it there either.
I think perhaps what you are getting at is that these organizations oppose certain "terrorist-fighting laws" (such as the Patriot Act), but there's a long difference between "opposing the Patriot Act" and "supporting terrorism". If this is what is meant by the new section, it should be stated more explicitly. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 15:30, 31 December 2007 (EST)
== Interesting ==
Andy, if the common definition doesn't fit your narrative, you change the definition? Does this work for you in court? --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:38, 14 May 2015 (EDT)