> a person or an organized group against people or property
> with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies
> or governments, often for ideological or political
> reasons.
> There is some wiggle room in that definition, but i think
> its clear cut enough that you can make a legal distinction
> between terrorists and non terrorists.
I think Kevin's right, this would make most peaceful demonstrators
terrorists. I think this is possibly the worst definition such a thing
could ever be given. Drop the "fluff" in this description and you have
"the threat of unlawful force against people or property". So someone
could become a terrorist by making a verbal comment about
key-scratching a politician's car. Way more than "wiggle room".
s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569&DE=1
http://www.fusiontap.com
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
