Plane mishap

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 06:54:10 -0500, Charles
wrote:

In article , Jack Hamilton
wrote:

Because he's not part of an organized group. And because he didn't have
a political or religious goal that would outlast him.

A terrorist does not have to be part of an organized group. And
apparently you missed that he put out a 3000 word manifesto, a rant
against the federal government. He flew a plane into a government
building, and it was premeditated. He fits the definition of terrorist.
A terrorist does not have to be a foreigner or a member of Al Qaeda,

We disagree on the definition, obviously. One person, acting alone, now
dead, cannot create a climate of fear, which for me is the essential
element.

Was Jack The Ripper a terrorist? I would say no; he created fear in
London, but he didn't have a political agenda. Was Ted Kaczynski a
terrorist? Yes; he carried out his actions over a long period of time,
long enough for people to worry if they might be the next victims, and
he had a (somewhat incoherent) political philosophy behind his attacks.

It can be difficult to distinguish between people who kill because they
think it will further their political goals, and people who kill because
they've discovered they enjoy it.

In article , Jack Hamilton
wrote:

We disagree on the definition, obviously. One person, acting alone, now
dead, cannot create a climate of fear, which for me is the essential
element.

Was Jack The Ripper a terrorist? I would say no; he created fear in
London, but he didn't have a political agenda. Was Ted Kaczynski a
terrorist? Yes; he carried out his actions over a long period of time,
long enough for people to worry if they might be the next victims, and
he had a (somewhat incoherent) political philosophy behind his attacks.

It can be difficult to distinguish between people who kill because they
think it will further their political goals, and people who kill because
they've discovered they enjoy it.

But Kaczynski acted alone and you say yes. Joe Stack did have a
political philosophy. Read his manifesto. He hit a government building
because of his anti government philosophy. On the other hand Amy Bishop
(also of Texas...hmm) seems clearly a psychopath.

--
Charles

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 23:42:32 -0500, Charles
wrote:

In article , Jack Hamilton
wrote:

We disagree on the definition, obviously. One person, acting alone, now
dead, cannot create a climate of fear, which for me is the essential
element.

Was Jack The Ripper a terrorist? I would say no; he created fear in
London, but he didn't have a political agenda. Was Ted Kaczynski a
terrorist? Yes; he carried out his actions over a long period of time,
long enough for people to worry if they might be the next victims, and
he had a (somewhat incoherent) political philosophy behind his attacks.

It can be difficult to distinguish between people who kill because they
think it will further their political goals, and people who kill because
they've discovered they enjoy it.

But Kaczynski acted alone and you say yes. Joe Stack did have a
political philosophy. Read his manifesto. He hit a government building
because of his anti government philosophy. On the other hand Amy Bishop
(also of Texas...hmm) seems clearly a psychopath.

Kaczynski's acts took place from 1978 to 1995. Stack did basically only
one thing (two if you count burning down his own house).

The two elements I think are key a

- Multiple occurrences of terrorist acts identified with the same person
or group, sufficient in number and visibility to make people in the
general population wonder if they will be the next targets.

- A political agenda.

Kaczynski had both. Stack had only the second. Bishop didn't have
either.

In article , Jack Hamilton
wrote:

Kaczynski's acts took place from 1978 to 1995. Stack did basically only
one thing (two if you count burning down his own house).

The two elements I think are key a

- Multiple occurrences of terrorist acts identified with the same person
or group, sufficient in number and visibility to make people in the
general population wonder if they will be the next targets.

- A political agenda.

Kaczynski had both. Stack had only the second. Bishop didn't have
either.


There is no definition of terrorism that says multiple occurrences.
That would not even make sense.

Here is an interesting article from the Washington Post.

http://bit.ly/ciW8P6

Stack's act was political. The daughter says the plane attack was
"inappropriate." But then says her father was a hero "because now
maybe people will listen." That is wrong, her father was not a hero. He
killed a government employee.

Having anti-government and anti-tax views does not make one a terrorist
just like being an Islamist does not make one a terrorist. It is the
actions one takes. It seems some want to say Stack is not a terrorist
because they agree with his views. At the same time others want to
brand people as terrorists because of their "profile". Middle Eastern,
muslim etc.

--
Charles