From: AlunFoto
2010/2/18 John Sessoms <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com>:
> It was violence directed against innocent third parties for the purpose of
> making a political statement and/or influencing government policies.
>
> That makes it terrorism in my book whether he was affiliated with any group
> or not.
hmmm...
The lone "terrorist" is more often a person suffering from mental
illness. He/she may express disdain towards particular political
issues, but mostly they're out of sync with the world in general. For
reasons that has nothing to do with terrorism.
Oh, no doubt about it. The guy was nuttier than a fruitcake.
Read his manifesto if you can, although compared to him, Ted Kaczynski
reads like Dr. Seuss.
The sad thing is what I could figure out from his screed I mostly agreed
with. It just doesn't define wrongs sufficient to justify killing myself
or a bunch of others. His response is disproportionate and therein lies
the insanity.
But lone crazies as a source of terrorists is going to be a problem in
the U.S. where the Constitution embodies the fundamental right to be
nucking futs, and where mental health care is the red-headed step child
of our pay for play, for profit "health (I don't) care" system.
It just irks me that the way the government "defines" terrorism doesn't
take into account individual acting nutburgers. His act is a terrorist
act. His behavior is terrorist behavior. But because we can't link him
to some foreign ideology, he's not a terrorist.
It walks like a duck. It quacks like a duck. But it ain't a duck?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
