Insulting me won’t make the purpose of assassinations to be about fear.
But sure, let’s go with the second sentence. There were only two sentences in the definition:
Terrorism is intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.
That is also not what assassinations are usually about. They are usually not about coercion or intimidation. They are about retribution or seizing power.
So the same definition of terrorism, i.e. specific actions done to further political goals. You’re mad for no reason here
That is not the definition of terrorism… if you believe it is, please show me this definition.
Also, please quote what in specific I said that makes you think I am angry about this.
https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803103209420
Terrrorism is the use of violence to cause political change. Not whatever nonsense you were taught in whatever terrible education system produced you.
You’re not going with your own definition. Did you even read it or did you just think I wouldn’t? It starts with this:
The purpose of most assassinations is not about fear.
Read more than the first line, try again, and maybe enroll in a literacy program instead of continuing to exist online.
Insulting me won’t make the purpose of assassinations to be about fear.
But sure, let’s go with the second sentence. There were only two sentences in the definition:
That is also not what assassinations are usually about. They are usually not about coercion or intimidation. They are about retribution or seizing power.
Feel free to insult me on that front too.