On: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohamma...

[pyoung]

"for political reasons"

I would say this is more of a security issue. If the protests had been peaceful, and had there been no deaths, I doubt this request would have ever been made.

[pbhjpbhj → pyoung]

>If the protests had been peaceful [...] I doubt this request would have ever been made //

So USA doesn't negotiate with terrorists but does what they want as long as there's a threat of violence?

[Aloisius → pbhjpbhj]

When did violent mobs become terrorists?

[pbhjpbhj → Aloisius]

What's the approved definition of terrorist that you are using?

From Collins, via dictionary.com - "systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal". Seems to fit?

[Aloisius → pbhjpbhj]

The key word there is systematic. A mob is not methodical in its plans nor has any regularity, therefore, it does not systematically use anything.

[pbhjpbhj → Aloisius]

The mob was the specific instrument in this instance. Mobs are used regularly for similar purposes.

IMO the question at hand is whether as soon as some group threatens violence the USA kowtow. This appears to be the case here - the USA administration intervening in the free speech of a citizen in order to further the aims of a group because that group has threatened (and acted) violently.