Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-04-2012, 05:10 PM
Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
This pisses me off....


http://www.salon.com/2012/04/20/is_this_...rorist/?=5

Terrorism is terrorism. And burning down an abortion clinic is done purely for one purpose- to create terror. Angry
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kineo's post
20-04-2012, 05:32 PM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
once upon a time, warriors of freedom were called as terrorists too and maybe still nothing's changed. terrorism is not always terrorism that government defines.
but that guy is a real idiot and not enough intelligent to be a terrorist
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-04-2012, 07:16 PM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
(20-04-2012 05:32 PM)Nupaggadi Wrote:  once upon a time, warriors of freedom were called as terrorists too and maybe still nothing's changed. terrorism is not always terrorism that government defines.
but that guy is a real idiot and not enough intelligent to be a terrorist

I didn't realize intelligence was a requirement to produce terror...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kineo's post
20-04-2012, 07:32 PM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
(20-04-2012 07:16 PM)kineo Wrote:  
(20-04-2012 05:32 PM)Nupaggadi Wrote:  once upon a time, warriors of freedom were called as terrorists too and maybe still nothing's changed. terrorism is not always terrorism that government defines.
but that guy is a real idiot and not enough intelligent to be a terrorist

I didn't realize intelligence was a requirement to produce terror...
Yeah, this. Depending on how you define a terrorist (was Osama Bin Laden a terrorist as a leader of a terrorist organization or were the suicidal zealots his organization trained terrorists or is it both?) you don't really need intelligence. Just a social/cultural/political/religious (though I daresay "religious" can fall under "cultural") cause and some bad intentions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SaviourSelf's post
21-04-2012, 03:07 AM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
i agree with "bad intention" but +intelligence i didn't mean it like a terrorist must have an intelligence, intelligence is cool so terrorism is good. no. i don't interpret it like good or bad. but to plan some attacks, there must be a real intelligence. using this intelligence for bad or for good is an other question. whoever can not just come and perform some terrorism. it's not a simple job like that stupid guy was thinking
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-04-2012, 09:47 AM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
I don't see where this is terrorism. I agree to the point that he doesn't seem intelligent enough in his motivations.

He doesn't seem like he is trying to incite terror for going to abortion clinics or having others exist.

His reasoning seems to literally be, plain and simple: "They kill babies there; I'm going to burn it down so they can't kill babies there any longer."

Where is the terrorism?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
21-04-2012, 11:23 AM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
It looked to me like it was politically motivated and was a act of Terrorism. Also he was stupid too. I find it funny how men get involved in women's issues. This whole issue should be a closed book. We had this done in the 60's. Only the fanatics and crazy people want to turn back the clock. Most of that is being done by men. I fear for this country. We are becoming the laughing stock of the world. We can only thank the mindless Tea Party voters. They stick their nose in where it don't belong.

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a
free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their
political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their
own purpose. ~ Thomas Jefferson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-04-2012, 07:23 PM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
ter·ror·ism / ˈtɛrəˌrɪzəm / [ter-uh-riz-uhm]

noun

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.


Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition. Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians). Some definitions now include acts of unlawful violence and war. The use of similar tactics by criminal organizations for protection rackets or to enforce a code of silence is usually not labeled terrorism though these same actions may be labeled terrorism when done by a politically motivated group.

The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged, and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”. The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents, and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

Terrorism has been practiced by a broad array of political organizations for furthering their objectives. It has been practiced by both right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic groups, religious groups, revolutionaries, and ruling governments.[8] An abiding characteristic is the indiscriminate use of violence against noncombatants for the purpose of gaining publicity for a group, cause, or individual. The symbolism of terrorism can leverage human fear to help achieve these goals.

In early 1975, the Law Enforcement Assistant Administration in the United States formed the National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. One of the five volumes that the committee wrote was entitled Disorders and Terrorism, produced by the Task Force on Disorders and Terrorism under the direction of H.H.A. Cooper, Director of the Task Force staff. The Task Force classified terrorism into six categories.

* Civil disorder – A form of collective violence interfering with the peace, security, and normal functioning of the community.
* Political terrorism – Violent criminal behaviour designed primarily to generate fear in the community, or substantial segment of it, for political purposes.
* Non-Political terrorism – Terrorism that is not aimed at political purposes but which exhibits “conscious design to create and maintain a high degree of fear for coercive purposes, but the end is individual or collective gain rather than the achievement of a political objective.”
* Quasi-terrorism – The activities incidental to the commission of crimes of violence that are similar in form and method to genuine terrorism but which nevertheless lack its essential ingredient. It is not the main purpose of the quasi-terrorists to induce terror in the immediate victim as in the case of genuine terrorism, but the quasi-terrorist uses the modalities and techniques of the genuine terrorist and produces similar consequences and reaction. For example, the fleeing felon who takes hostages is a quasi-terrorist, whose methods are similar to those of the genuine terrorist but whose purposes are quite different.
* Limited political terrorism – Genuine political terrorism is characterized by a revolutionary approach; limited political terrorism refers to “acts of terrorism which are committed for ideological or political motives but which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture control of the state.
* Official or state terrorism –"referring to nations whose rule is based upon fear and oppression that reach similar to terrorism or such proportions.” It may also be referred to as Structural Terrorism defined broadly as terrorist acts carried out by governments in pursuit of political objectives, often as part of their foreign policy.

Several sources have further defined the typology of terrorism:
  • Political terrorism
  • Sub-state terrorism
  • Social revolutionary terrorism
  • Nationalist-separatist terrorism
  • Religious extremist terrorism
  • Religious fundamentalist Terrorism
  • New religions terrorism
  • Right-wing terrorism
  • Left-wing terrorism
  • Single-issue terrorism
  • State-sponsored terrorism
  • Regime or state terrorism
  • Criminal terrorism
  • Pathological terrorism

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

[Image: 0832984001338019225.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 03:53 PM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
(21-04-2012 09:47 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I don't see where this is terrorism. I agree to the point that he doesn't seem intelligent enough in his motivations.

He doesn't seem like he is trying to incite terror for going to abortion clinics or having others exist.

His reasoning seems to literally be, plain and simple: "They kill babies there; I'm going to burn it down so they can't kill babies there any longer."

Where is the terrorism?

Abortion is so politicized that I can't see how it isn't either politically or religiously motivated- or both. Because of this it is difficult for me to believe that his reasons are limited strictly to "they kill babies there, so I'll burn it down and then they have to stop". Also, the man was drunk (or got drunk shortly after). Maybe that's why it wasn't considered terrorism...

Anyway, FTFA:
According to U.S. code, domestic terrorism occurs when the act is “dangerous to human life” and is “a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State” and “appear[s] to be intended … to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.”

It seems more likely to me that the guy was charged up by either religious or political rhetoric or both, probably with a side of misinformation too (hold the science please, it gives me gas). Usually this type of crime is committed to send a message to doctors who perform abortions and scare them into stopping. Or to scare people away from going there. There's no way he's going to have any sort of significant impact on the number of abortions being performed simply by burning down a building. How is he not trying to intimidate others from performing abortions or visiting a clinic that performs abortions?

Also, the guys is wearing a neck brace (apparently taking it off and looking around the court) to fake a broken neck. I'm not eager to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's telling the truth about his motives.

Also, the point of the article really isn't that I think this guy is some terrorist mastermind. Personally, I think it's possible that the guy is just an idiot that is seriously and dangerously misguided, but I think it's likely that he had broader motives for his actions. If you read the entire article it discusses how the terrorism charge is not consistently and fairly applied. That is even more angering than this single case.

But, maybe I'm overreacting. /shrug
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 04:15 PM
RE: Prosecuting Terrorism in the US...
Sounds like arson to me. Why does it matter what they call it? This guy will get a long time in prison for arson, destruction of private property, and attempted murder.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: