Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (1868)	7/20/2005 8:38:50 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542014

you seem to want to 'complicate' the issue by inserting an 'element' of protest I don't particularly want to, but I'm prepared to be open-minded about it. It would be hard, logically, to deny it categorically, methinks. Of the terrorists that we've experienced, we can clearly see many who have perceived grievances against a regime more powerful than they. If you look at the IRA or abortion clinic bombers, for example, you find perceived grievances that they feel helpless to "rectify" and that they are communicating through their acts. Personally, I consider that element teeny and irrelevant given their atrocities, but I don't see any way to aptly and objectively deny its existence. i understand that terrorism and terrorist are technical terms, modus operandi being the defining element And you provided a description of same. I have no quarrel with it. It describes that "defining element" neatly. It is useful in that it enables comparison and contrast on the basis of modus operandi with other technical categories. But it is not a full definition of the term nor is it one of common parlance. While the defining element may be modus operandi, there are other elements. This simple definition from Webster is fuller: " violence (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands." Your "definition" didn't mention "protest" because it was incomplete, not because it obviated protest or other rationale. Every action humans take has a purpose, of sorts. It's not like people engage in terrorism because all the tennis courts are booked that day and they're bored and have nothing better to do. They're trying to accomplish something. Acknowledging that they have a purpose does not legitimize their tactics.