3 votes

On Negotiating With Terrorists...

Lately we've heard a lot of talk about so-called 'compromise.'

Just wondering...

What is the difference between compromising with terrorists and negotiating with terrorists?

As far as I can tell, the current 'powers that be' are terrorizing the public with all their false flags...

so,

should we be negotiating with these terrorists?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Correct me if my wee little

Correct me if my wee little brain cant wrap my head around this, but does'nt DIPLOMACY, like, INVOLVE negotiating?

Im having a growing suspicion, seing the actions of our governments, that "we dont negotiate with terrorists" was a tactic used to muffle the voice that was telling us of the wrong doings our respective governments was doing unto them

It would look pretty bad, in a diplomatic negotiation if a nation was negotiating their soverignity back, and the US government was offering WAR, SPYING and "AGENTS" as a CONCESSION

Good thing we dont negotiate with "terrorists"

'Syria' update:

The congress will buckle, they'll 'negotiate' a limited invasion. The troops will stand down. We will then see a coup d'etat or coup de force...

9-11 was a panda job.

at the very least their

at the very least their "demands" should be heard by all, their meaning clear and true, as in, no funny stuff with translations, in other words verified

the thought of being tricked into a war with a people who may believe in the nature of liberty, is something i am most afraid off, and something that is unforgivable once lives have been lost

Are you threatening me?


http://youtu.be/YoPVC4YxDlI
.....

9-11 was a panda job.

Here's someone else who was no longer willing to negotiate...

with terrorists...


http://youtu.be/RDzwtl5Z2cA
...

9-11 was a panda job.

Anyone who uses fear as a weapon is...

a TerrorisT.
..
...

9-11 was a panda job.