ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
A franchise with no franchise fees.
Amazing the person who either wrote or allowed 'anarchist terror network" and ' anarchist cell' to go under his name accuses people who think this is shit of ...wait for it...moralism. Instead of the pure neutral objective stuff that presents 'anarchist terror network" and ' anarchist cell' .
or to give the impression it is operating in a cell or maybe it's just where they want the anarchists to end upif its a cell surely it has to operate under that cell structure of 4-6 man groups with only one in each knowing one in other, cos otherwise you are just saying 'cell' cos it sounds clancy
DotCommunist said:if its a cell surely it has to operate under that cell structure of 4-6 man groups with only one in each knowing one in other, cos otherwise you are just saying 'cell' cos it sounds clancy
cell structures work in lots of organisations.Cell structures work in hierarchical organisations.
Anarchism lol.
Pickman's model said:cell structures work in lots of organisations.
Do they? I thought they were all controlled centrally. Anarchism = decentralisation. Happy to admit I'm wrong if that's not the case.
Do they? I thought they were all controlled centrally. Anarchism = decentralisation. Happy to admit I'm wrong if that's not the case.
????
a cell structure does not imply or dictate a hierarchical structure. you can have a horizontal cell structure
You get how things can be next to each other rather than on top of each other right?
How do the cells communicate with each other?
By direct order from above. This is one of the oddest conversations i've ever had on here.
Well it's obviously a misunderstanding on my part. I thought the whole point of cells is that they're not necessarily aware of each other. But i guess it could just be activists splitting into smaller groups.
They may not be aware of each other but that doesn't make it hierarchical.
if its a cell surely it has to operate under that cell structure of 4-6 man groups with only one in each knowing one in other, cos otherwise you are just saying 'cell' cos it sounds clancy
Does terrorism ever work though? Bombing people into submission doesn't. Never worked on London. Certainly its effects were dubious
on Germany and Japan during ww2. North Vietnam gave in true ,but, then went and invaded the south as soon as the US left so hardly a conclusive win.
Serbia ? again other reasons can be given for them giving in other than bombing.
If you want to kill people you don't like fair enough ,but, getting your way by bombing people till they do what you want does not seem to work.
TBH though I doubt there's a network here so much as some people in Bristol borrowing a name some people in Italy use sometimes.
Bombing the financial district of London certainly worked for the IRA.
You know how it is. You're down the Old England one evening. You've had about three gallons of Natch. You've all agreed that Jamie Oliver is a right "cunt". You've burbled on a bit about foxes and reminisced about hunt-sabbing. You've talked tearfully but bravely about freedom and you've whispered about how you think MI5 have bugged your stash. You passionately agree on how much you like badgers. You've shouted that the badger cull is, like, totally fascist. Someone says you should burn down some new police place out at Portishead. It's a fucking brilliant idea! You all cheer and drink more Natch.
The next evening you wake up with a stonking great hangover and hear that some bugger's actually gone and done it and sent some press release! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Old Bill's going to be, like, really angry and stuff.
"Tell ye what lads lets bomb the financial district in london...that'll get us what we want..."Is their a united Ireland then? As I'm pretty sure that's what they wanted?