On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
> James A. Donald:
> > > McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target
> > > innocents.
>
> Roy M. Silvernail
> > I'm confused. Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil
> > his target sufficiently to know that there was a day care
> > center in the damage pattern?
>
> Bin Laden's intent was to make anyone in America afraid - thus
> the use of airliners, rather than truck bombs. McViegh's
> intent was to make BATF afraid.
This is idiotic. You're claiming that the definition of "terrorist" is
dependent not on the act, but on why the act was committed. So if I was
to go out tomorrow and spread 2000 curies of Ci into the local subway
system "As payback for Ruby Ridge", this would not be an act of terrorism?
You're a fucking moron.
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
0xBD4A95BF
"An ill wind is stalking
while evil stars whir
and all the gold apples
go bad to the core"
S. Plath, Temper of Time
