Hacker News Reader

Comment by ghthor | Hacker News Reader

Using the term, insurrection, to describe what happened yesterday is belligerently misrepresenting what happened. If the protests over the last year were mostly peaceful, then Jan 6 really was the most peaceful of them all. I was there, we had more then enough people to mount a serious insurrection. From what I could see, the members of the protest were used by some anarchist group to commit a BNE. Most, IE, 99.9% of the protestors were not involved in the BNE, and a significant portion of the protestors were fighting back against the anarchists.

The media is not telling the truth about what happened.

View on HN

No, insurrection is pretty accurate. They attempted sedition, and these people breaking in are domestic terrorists. Clear as day.

Just saying it over and over again doesnt make it any more real.

They delayed and tried to overturn a constitutionally necessary process of democracy with their violent intimidation. What is that of you have a better word for it than terrorism and insurrection.

What happened meets the dictionary definition of an insurrection completely. It did not appear to be an armed insurrection or an attempted coup, would be difficult to file under terrorism, and sedition will be very challenging to prove, but "insurrection" is definitely the correct term to describe what happened.

> would be difficult to file under terrorism

"Terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

I dunno man, the attackers had flashbangs, zip ties, molotovs... If the building had to be evacuated, then I'd say it counts as intimidation. It was certainly in pursuit of political aims.

I think this counts.

I wasn't there, but the images I've seen don't seem to demonstrate much violence and very little intimidation on the part of the insurrectionists. I see a lot images of people wandering around inside the building taking selfies and acting like tourists (albiet often poorly-behaved ones going places they shouldn't). In hindsight the evacuation was probably overkill but I acknowledge it was probably the best reaction to a clear and present danger.

Like I say, it would be difficult to file under terrorism. You're welcome to try.

Not siding which way on the terrorism debate, but have to comment on the:

> the images I've seen don't seem to demonstrate much violence and very little intimidation on the part of the insurrectionists

And say you must not have watched any of the videos then.

Here's one example: https://apple.news/AZER7Cgj_RceFCKp74T_oDw

I think it's an interesting discussion topic.

The people showed up with molotovs, flashbangs, and zipties. That's intent to intimidate, even if the residents managed to get evacuated before we could prove that they weren't just comfort props from people who were merely cosplaying as terrorists.

Here's a copy/paste legal definition where I removed a lot of extraneous examples:

> Under federal law, the activity or attempted actions which could fall under terrorism charges include:

> government official kidnapping;

> arson or bombing property;

> use of explosives;

> attacking a federal facility;

> conspiracy to murder, kidnap, or maim;

> take a hostage;

> bombing public places;

I mean, they brought molotovs and bombs. And zipties. I'd say an attempt was made.

Then of course there's the fact that one of them murdered a cop by bashing his head with a fire extinguisher.

They were armed with spears, guns, pipe bombs, and zip ties (for kidnapping/disabling people)

Trump supporters think that was a protest in the same way they think Donald Trump is a successful business man.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com