I am hearing many voices who oppose President Trump for naming these rioters as terrorists. I wonder, how many of these voices realize that, by opposing the President on this issue, they are walking the razor’s edge of lawlessness, themselves?
It is becoming a tired mantra, but it is still true:
Words mean things!
So, what does ‘terrorism’ mean?
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
OK, so, what does ‘terror’ mean?
1 : a state of intense or overwhelming fear overcome by terror people fleeing the scene in terror He lived in terror of being caught.
2 : violence or the threat of violence used as a weapon of intimidation or coercion a regime that rules by terror especially : violent or destructive acts (such as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands an act of terror the war on terror —sometimes used before another noun a terror attack
[NOTE: definition abbreviated for sake of this post.]
OK, now, apply this definition to these rioters. Are they using violence as a weapon, or destroying things in order to scare people? The answer is yes!
But let’s not stop there. ‘Terrorism’ is connected to the act of coercion, so let’s see what that means:
: the act, process, or power of coercing
OK, what does ‘coercing’ mean?
1 : to compel to an act or choice
2 : to achieve by force or threat
3 : to restrain or dominate by force
Once again, does this apply to these rioters? Again, the answer is yes!
So, let us apply these definitions to the rioters. Are the rioters using fear and destruction in an attempt to force the government and/or American people to do what they want them to do? The answer is yes! This means these rioters are terrorists, and that then means the President has a Constitutional duty to declare them terrorists and act accordingly. This is because the President — as commander in chief — has a duty to protect and defend the Nation and the Constitution — both of which are the actual object being attacked by these terrorist rioters.
There are two more points I want to make before we leave this post.
1 — I just proved that the rioters are terrorists. I made my proof entirely by definition and actual observation of objective reality (i.e. the actions of the rioters). According to the rules of logic, this is the strongest possible argument that can be made. Thus, it can be assumed as a matter of fact that these rioters are terrorists.
2 — No one who joins with, facilitates, supports or excuses these terrorists can claim to be disciples of Yeshua. If you are a believer, keep that in mind. There are people claiming that Christ overturning the tables in the Temple is an example of Yeshua using terrorism to achieve His purposes. The problem is, that is a false comparison. Yeshua was enforcing the Law of Moses when He did what He did. In other words, Yeshua was acting as a proper enforcer of the Law. This does not meet the definition of ‘terrorist.’ Therefore, Yeshua was not acting lawlessly or as a terrorist. On the other hand, these terrorists are acting lawlessly, and they do meet the definition of terrorist.