Plane attack prompts debate over terrorism label (AP)

News Manager

Milforums News Bot
AP - When a man fueled by rage against the U.S. government and its tax code crashes his airplane into a building housing offices of the Internal Revenue Service, is it a criminal act or an act of terrorism?




Read more...
 
This is obviously a criminal act, but terrorist acts can also be criminal acts. Example: first bombing of the World Trade center and subsequent trial.

In this case the man is not pushing an agenda, he was mad at the IRS and probably the world, it is not a terrorist act.

Although this may turn into about the third or fourth time this forum has tried to define terrorism.:-D
 
Told you so.
After the Ft. Hood attack was called "terrorism," I do not see why this wouldn't be called terrorism either.

Chupike, you are wrong about the guy not pushing a bigger agenda:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1966476,00.html

"I choose not to pretend that business as usual won't continue," he wrote. "I have just had enough. I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt."

"... American zombies wake up and revolt."
Sounds like a bigger agenda to me.
 
Told you so.
After the Ft. Hood attack was called "terrorism," I do not see why this wouldn't be called terrorism either.

Chupike, you are wrong about the guy not pushing a bigger agenda:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1966476,00.html

"I choose not to pretend that business as usual won't continue," he wrote. "I have just had enough. I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt."

"... American zombies wake up and revolt."
Sounds like a bigger agenda to me.

"... American zombies wake up and revolt."
"Sounds like a bigger agenda to me." quote 13Th_redneck

Yea, I guess to you Zombies would look like a bigger agenda.:lol:

Not sure if it is Zombies or American zombies that make it an agenda.:roll:

And like I said all ready:
"Although this may turn into about the third or fourth time this forum has tried to define terrorism.":rock:
 
So when the Islamic "terrorists" refer to American infidels, I suppose that is only a reference to Americans who have cheated on their loved ones and therefore is relevant only to people who are guilty of infidelity?
When he added "American zombies," he is referring to the American public in general. It is called a figure of speech. An expression. Look up "figure of speech" in a reference book or site.

You really ought to try to involve yourself with the actual discussion at hand, rather than attempting to derail it with irrelevant nitpicking, something you tend to do whenever your argument hits a brick wall. That too by the way, was a figure of speech. I am not referring to the sound waves caused by your vocal chords impacting against a wall made of bricks. Just helping you out there.
 
Last edited:
So when the Islamic "terrorists" refer to American infidels, I suppose that is only a reference to Americans who have cheated on their loved ones and therefore is relevant only to people who are guilty of infidelity?

I don't know, but if that is what you think.:confused:
Could be one definition?
You also seem to have a hard on for things American, what relevance does your above statement have to the discussion?
Where did Islamic "terrorists" or American infidels come up in the original subject of this thread?

When he added "American zombies," he is referring to the American public in general. It is called a figure of speech. An expression. Look up "figure of speech" in a reference book or site.
You think?:sleep:

You really ought to try to involve yourself with the actual discussion at hand, rather than attempting to derail it with irrelevant nitpicking, something you tend to do whenever your argument hits a brick wall. That too by the way, was a figure of speech. I am not referring to the sound waves caused by your vocal chords impacting against a wall made of bricks. Just helping you out there.
The above statement would seem to apply to your ramblings more than what I posted.

You conveniently ignored the first sentence in the reference you posted:

"The long, rambling rant posted on a website eerily reflected the angry populist sentiments that have swept the country in the past year."



What ever rocks your boat.:sleep:

This man had chased his wife and child out of the house.
Set his house on fire.

He was clearly angry at everyone. So where is his terrorist manifesto? Where, in the rambling statements he made, did he state what he wanted to achieve?
Did he say he wanted to overthrow the government? No, he was pissed off at the IRS.
Who did he terrorize? His wife and child? That would probably fall under domestic violence.
Who did he wish to join him?

Not every thing that happens is terrorism.

You need to do a reality check, and get over yourself. What I posted was funny and relevant. As you are aware, how many times on this forum have people started topics to "Define Terrorism"?

Your opinion is that this man committed an act of Terrorism. What are the reasons you have to support this? Besides Zombies.:lol:

My opinion is that he commited criminal acts.

We are both entitled to our opinions, neither is wrong. Athough, on second thought yours is.:pirate2:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top