On 2/20/2010 12:10 AM, frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:52 PM, John Sessoms<[email protected]> wrote:
I just think it's inconsistent to call one group of people who fly planes
into buildings on purpose as a political statement terrorists and then turn
around and say another person who does the same thing is not a terrorist
just because he couldn't kill as many innocent bystanders or because he's
only doing it because he's mad at the IRS.
If it's terrorism when a group of people murder innocent people to make a
political statement, it's terrorism when one person tries to murder innocent
people to make a political statement.
Especially when the labeling as terrorist, or not, appears to be for the
purpose of manipulating levels of public hysteria, both then and now.
The word "terrorism" is now meaningless. It is so emotionally and
politically charged, and it's been used to describe so many different
types of acts that we can't know what the term describes any longer.
Look. A guy flew an airplane into a building.
He's dead. There's a big hole in the building.
What do we gain by describing it is a terrorist act? What do we gain
by labeling him a terrorist? What's the use in debating this?
cheers,
frank
Only political points. I for one could care less if he was a terrorist
or not. He'll never be prosecuted and his screed is almost unfathomable.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
