Animal Planets show "Whale Wars" isnt vary controversal in the US but usually make snews in Australia and Japan, the Sea Shepards follow annoy and throw items onto Japanese Whaling ships everyone has there opinion to this but what do you think?
Until they actually kill or bomb someone with the hope that it will change the politics around Japanese whaling ships, then no. Nothing wrong with some pranks.
Well one could say that they were terrorising the whalers, but I wouldn't say just causing terror made some one a terrorist. Honestly thought, defining 'terrorist' in a conventional sense is kinda difficult.
I'm not entirely sure. I haven't really given the organisation enough thought to rule on whether or not they are a terrorist group. However, I do have a Sea Shepard jumper, which is really warm. So I am going to say no, if only because they've stopped me freezing in cold weather.
Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Isn't the definition of "terrorism" "inducing violence, fear and repression to accomplish ones goals"? That wouldn't make a hyperactive greenpeace-like organization terrorists, no.
Zombie_Fish: Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Passive action? So if I protest, I'm a terrorist? Ha.
Zombie_Fish: Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Passive action? So if I protest, I'm a terrorist? Ha.
You think I'm kidding? According to this act, Jesus, Ghandi, The Suffragettes, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are all terrorists.
Zombie_Fish: Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Passive action? So if I protest, I'm a terrorist? Ha.
You think I'm kidding? According to this act, Jesus, Ghandi, The Suffragettes, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are all terrorists.
This is all obviously in preparation for the upcoming totalitarian rule of Illuminati.
Zombie_Fish: Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Passive action? So if I protest, I'm a terrorist? Ha.
You think I'm kidding? According to this act, Jesus, Ghandi, The Suffragettes, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are all terrorists.
This is all obviously in preparation for the upcoming totalitarian rule of Illuminati.
Meh, probably. The definition was edited to that in 2007 (I think) during Tony Blair's rule as prime minister.
Zombie_Fish: Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Passive action? So if I protest, I'm a terrorist? Ha.
You think I'm kidding? According to this act, Jesus, Ghandi, The Suffragettes, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are all terrorists.
This is all obviously in preparation for the upcoming totalitarian rule of Illuminati.
Meh, probably. The definition was edited to that in 2007 (I think) during Tony Blair's rule as prime minister.
Oh, in the U.K. Then it's just setting the scene for V For Vendetta. Canada is still cool then, right?
Sounds like they're "annoyists" not "terrorists." By definition terrorists use fear as a weapon, sounds like these guys are just being jerks. Until they threaten or cause property damage, injury, or death, they aren't terrorists.
Zombie_Fish: Well, the definition of terrorism, as defined by the War On Terror act is something along the lines of either "A person who uses passive or active action to change a government opinion or the public's opinion" or "Someone who favours and glorifies a terrorist", so based on that, I would have to say yes.
If this thread is still around tomorrow I'll find the actual definition of it then, as I actually do have it somewhere.
Passive action? So if I protest, I'm a terrorist? Ha.
You think I'm kidding? According to this act, Jesus, Ghandi, The Suffragettes, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are all terrorists.
This is all obviously in preparation for the upcoming totalitarian rule of Illuminati.
Meh, probably. The definition was edited to that in 2007 (I think) during Tony Blair's rule as prime minister.
Oh, in the U.K. Then it's just setting the scene for V For Vendetta. Canada is still cool then, right?
Probably. As far as I know this definition only lies in UK and USA. Canada should be okay then.
Extra Punctuation
Experienced Points
MovieBob: Intermission
First Person
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Loading Time
Hexproof
Ask Dr Mark
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
The Darkness II Review
Reckoning Review
Exodus Review
Final Fantasy XIII-2 Review
Scarygirl Review
Amy Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
Animal Planets show "Whale Wars" isnt vary controversal in the US but usually make snews in Australia and Japan, the Sea Shepards follow annoy and throw items onto Japanese Whaling ships everyone has there opinion to this but what do you think?