You're still not explaining how 2 teenagers throwing tomato soup on a painting protected by glass is the same as the Islamic State blowing up ancient buildings.
One group trying to raise awareness about the climate crisis, which is a threat to human civilization as we know it.
The other group uses explosives that kills people.
I didn't. Accusing me of flagging your comment is also not a way to keep a discussion.
But I still like to hear why you think those teenagers who carried out a non-violent civil disobedience protest is the same as the Islamic State destroying ancient buildings and killing people.
> Islamic State destroying ancient buildings and killing people.
You added "killing people" to the statement because...?
You are being lazy tbh or not just occasional hypocrite. If you cannot create a link between "destroying human heritage" and "for a policial cause", I don't think we have much to keep discussing here. Yes until now the "attacks" were harmless but it is escalating. They will increase the damage otherwise they dont get the attention that they want[1].
> You added "killing people" to the statement because
Because it's a fact that is relevant for this discussion. IS have not only destroyed ancient buildings, but they have also killed thousands of people. IS is a terrorist organization [0]
Please explain how mentioning that fact is hypocritical or lazy?
You are equating climate activists with a terrorist organization.
Have climate activists killed thousands of people?
And FYI - the climate activists have not destroyed the paintings. The paintings were protected by glass.
its an issue that is escalating. They won't keep doing the same terror. They will escalate it, trying to shock more and more. Terrorist attacks don't have to result in death, why you think that it is the case? The eco-terrorists in germany did already some attacks in 2021, without any death, but still a terror attack https://electrek.co/2021/05/26/tesla-factory-construction-si...
You seem to be lumping all climate activists into one group and then saying they will all act like Islamic State eventually and commit violent behavior that will kill thousands of people.
You are using 'Vulkangruppe' who is described as a saboteur group in the article you shared as an example for what the other groups might become. I couldn't find any more information about them.
All other major climate activist groups have websites, like Greenpeace, Fridays for future, Friends of the Earth, etc.
Are you really claiming that the following 2 climate activist groups for example will eventually commit murder?
> You seem to be lumping all climate activists into one group and then saying they will all act like Islamic State eventually and commit violent behavior that will kill thousands of people.
No, I'm not. You are trying to use this as argument, but I keep saying: Nope.
However, to destroy human heritage for a political agenda, yes.
And what human heritage was exactly destroyed by this protest where the protestor glued his head to the painting?
And what human heritage was destroyed by other climate activist, like the one I mentioned in the previous comment, i.e. the scientists protesting or school children protesting?
Terrorism can be generally defined as a group of people systematically instilling fear in citizens by carrying out violent acts that either destroy things or kill people.
Unfortunately I can't read that tweet.
Do you have a credible source in English ideally that states the protestors have deliberately killed a person in an act of terrorism?
> Terrorism can be generally defined as a group of people systematically instilling fear in citizens by carrying out violent acts that either destroy things or kill people.
Nope, the definition of Terrorism was given some messages before.. you can just look some messages above.. its there.
Terror as defined in the dictionary: "violence or the threat of violence used as a weapon of intimidation or coercion; especially violent or destructive acts (such as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands"
Otherwise if you make up your own definition and not stick to dictionary definitions then we are talking past each other.
So assuming you agree to the dictionary definition - do you really believe that people are in a state of TERROR when they hear about climate activists protests? They fear people who block roads or glue their hands to walls or paintings?
And in terms of the articles you shared - nowhere did it say that the protestors were responsible for the accident that caused the life threatening injuries to the cyclist. The protests happened miles away from the accident. According to the article - they are still determining whether the road block did delay the medical help or whether the cyclist was already brain dead at the time of the accident.
Just for the record - road blocks on motorways are wrong in my view. But it's a far stretch to call people who block roads - terrorists.
Otherwise you should also call the Truckers in Canada terrorists who blocked roads this year. Or would you call any other people who block roads for whatever reasons - terrorists?
And you've not provided further clarification regarding climate activists destroying human heritage. Do you have any links to media or police reports where human heritage items have been destroyed - as in "To break apart the structure of, render physically unusable, or cause to cease to exist as a distinguishable physical entity"
1) Nowhere did it say that the German government are classifying the protestors who blocked the road as RAF like terrorists. The person who made that comparison was a right wing politician who is known to be against the Green Party in Germany and he also seems to be a lobbyist for car manufacturers and is accused of not doing enough when the VW Dieselgate happened. So no wonder he's comparing these climate activists with RAF terrorists.
2) The government spokesman Mr Hebstriet even implied the word Terrorism should not be used and this case can be dealt with existing laws. What they are discussing is whether harsher laws are required to discourage road blocking protests.
3) According to the emergency doctor treating the cyclist at the scene, the fact that the car was not available had no effect on the rescue of the injured woman - so she died because of her serious injuries and not because of the people blocking the road.
I hope by your argumentation so far you are not advocating that schoolkids, doctors, scientists and other people who are protesting in the name of nature and future generations should be seen as potential terrorists or that those people who have broken traffic laws should be treated as terrorists?
> I hope by your argumentation so far you are not advocating that schoolkids, doctors, scientists and other people who are protesting in the name of nature and future generations should be seen as potential terrorists or that those people who have broken traffic laws should be treated as terrorists?
Are doctors, scientists destroying pieces of our human heritage or blocking roads? Nope
> The person who made that comparison was a right wing politician
Lol, everyone that say something against your agenda is a right-wing.. btw to be right isnt a crime or negative, if it means conservative. CSU, FDP, and etc are "right wing" just because they oppose the left (from where the term originated from), they aren't "nazis"
> Mr Hebstriet.. lol Steffen Hebestreit belongs to the "extreme-left-wing" from SPD, so for sure he would say something like that and wouldn't be able to handle a situation like: http://web.archive.org/web/20220816214317/https://www.suedde..., so you are just supporting my argument, that your commitment here is with the agenda and not with the truth.
> just because they oppose the left (from where the term originated from), they aren't "nazis"
Who was talking about Nazis? There is nothing wrong with being more on the right side of the political spectrum. I don't affiliate myself as either left or right. I support politicians who will improve things for society and protect our environment and not see politics as a career to enrich themselves or gain power.
This particular politician who said the protestors are RAF like - Mr Dobrindt - seems to be one of those politicians who are in the pockets of big car manufacturers. He called the German Green Party a bunch of "Rioters, Stone throwers and Arsonists". That's extremely unprofessional.
But it seems you're in favor of treating young protestors as terrorists rather than finding solutions to get our leaders to act to adapt and avoid the worst outcomes of the climate crisis?
Don't look up, right?
> that your commitment here is with the agenda and not with the truth.
