From: Jeremy Bradley (jeremyb@nor.com.au)
Date: Sun 17 Nov 2002 - 00:59:50 GMT
At 09:46 AM 16/11/02 -0500, you wrote:
SNIP...............(Lawry)
> Would a wife-beater be a terrorist? Would a
>policy-maker who threatens harm to foreign populations, or domestic ones?
>SNIP.......
>Cheers to all,
>Lawry
>
Good Questions Lawry
I think that, whilst the wife (or husband) beater rules and coerces by the
use of terror, the personal abuse involved is for personal 'gain', and is
therefore not terrorism. A policy maker on the other hand, eg. those who
refuse to address climate change, who makes policy decisions which impinge
on the lives and quality of life of civilian populations, including unborn
generations, for political and/of commercial 'gain', is a terrorist.
Remember that 'working' definitions seem to include the concept that
terrorism is a criminal act committed against civilians or a civilian
population outside of a declared war. The other criteria is that the terror
act intentionally targets the wellbeing of the target community. Therefore,
the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour by the French SS
was, whilst carried out by a sovereign State, probably was a criminal act
of terror.
That's what I reckon any'ow mates.
Jeremy
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun 17 Nov 2002 - 01:13:14 GMT