What is a terrorist?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by 1952Sniper, Mar 6, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 1952Sniper

    1952Sniper New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    5,133
    Location:
    Texas
    505799
    Member
    Posts: 26
    (1/4/03 5:22:42 pm)
    Reply What is a terrorist?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Legally, what is a terrorist?

    Presumably it is a person that commits an act of terrorism.

    Under the criminal provisions of Federal law, specifically 18 USC sec. 3077, the term act of terrorism means an activity that--

    (A) Involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life that is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; and

    (B) Appears to be intended--

    (i) To intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

    (ii) To influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

    (iii) To affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping.

    Would an individual who orders a group a highly trained, well armed, highly dedicated people to enter another country either by stealth or force of arms, with the expressed intent of forcing the recognized government of that country from power, be committing an act of terrorism?

    Based on this part of the laws of the United States, it sure sounds that way.


    JBT1
    Member
    Posts: 19
    (1/4/03 5:31:23 pm)
    Reply Nope!
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (A) Involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life that is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; and

    Would an individual who orders a group a highly trained, well armed, highly dedicated people to enter another country either by stealth or force of arms, with the expressed intent of forcing the recognized government of that country from power, be committing an act of terrorism?

    I assume you are referring to the upcoming ousting of Mr. Hussein.....It wouldn't be a crime since the action did not take place in the US.

    You seem to be rather fond of Mr. Saddam


    NeoDebo
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 709
    (1/4/03 6:36:01 pm)
    Reply Re:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Terrorism" and "terrorist" are defined under the laws of the USA. These words are ALSO defined in the laws of other countries, various dictionaries, encyclopedia, etc.

    It could be that when expressing definitions that are "legal fictions" (defined under SOME "law) that a person(s) might be defined as a "terrorist" under the laws of one nation and also be defined as a "national hero" under the laws of another.

    No. I ain't on Saddam's side. I am on the side of morality and right.

    Russia has had nukes nearly as long as we have. Russia has invaded other countries, visited oppression on vast populations, raped, tortured, imprisoned and murdered huge numbers both its own citizens and some of our own. (Gulags, etc.) You do not see us over there sticking our nose into their business, dead set on "overthrowing" their government, now do you?

    I won't even get into nations such as China who were, and still are (arguably) worse still.

    Folks, life is like a big wheel. What goes around, etc. It will be our turn to wipe the pi$$ out of our own eyes one day before too long. WE CANNOT KEEP ON DICTATING TO THE REST OF THE WORLD. THIS HAS GOT TO STOP. We can (sometimes) "force" others to do as we wish as long as we hold a gun on them, but there ain't no way we can do that forever.

    This deal with Iraq is two-sided : 1. somebody on "our side" wants control of Iraq's oil fields; and 2. this whole "terrorism" deal and the manufactured "WMD problem" gives those who covet more power and control a grand excuse to take it.

    The conflict ain't never going to stop so long as we keep inflicting ourselves on others.

    Like Rome, we too will pass from the world scene. 'Cept it ain't gonna take us as long to get gone as it did Rome...


    505799
    Member
    Posts: 27
    (1/4/03 6:38:27 pm)
    Reply Your reply, JBT1
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bugger off.

    I have never, repeat never, said or inferred that I am in anyway shape or form a supporter of that tyrant. I'd be quite happy to blow that bliksem's head off myself.

    And you are wrong. The second part of the clause you cited was included so we could go after terrorists where the act of terrorism was committed outside the US.


    Shizamus
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 40
    (1/5/03 4:32:53 am)
    Reply Re: Your reply, JBT1
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First of all, what does the word "bliksem " mean ?

    A terrorist is someone who terrorises someone else.
    Of course we are being conditioned that we have to go
    and get the terrorists in some distant land. But the
    terrorists that we do not talk about are in the white house
    and in the Capitol and are terrorising the American people
    on a daily basis, also known as domestic terrorists.

    DO MORE LAWS GIVE US MORE FREEDOM ?

    www.infowars.com


    JayL
    Member
    Posts: 39
    (1/5/03 9:32:54 am)
    Reply
    Re: What is a terrorist?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (A) Involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life that is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; and
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There's the out, right there. Both clauses of the above refer to violations of law. Much of what governments do would be vioilations of law except that it is the government doing them. Were this not so, there would be no death penalty, no prisons anywhere, and all participants in any war, at any time, for any cause, would be guilty of war crimes.

    I do not entirely disagree with the point you are trying to make with all this, but the illustration you have given does not forward that point.
    Jay L

    "Move, Shoot, Communicate!"


    Xracer
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 3435
    (1/5/03 4:12:51 pm)
    Reply Re: What is a terrorist?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "(A) Involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life that is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; and....."

    So, is bullfighting terrorism? Papa Hemingway would be appalled
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.