From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sun 17 Nov 2002 - 03:16:09 GMT
> At 07:47 PM 16/11/02 -0600, you wrote:
> >> 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 doesn't make sense. The French were hoping to dissuade
> >Greenpeace from harrassing their nuke tests; that's 'gain', just
> >like Palestinians gaining all of Israel or Israel retaining its
> >territory. The Russians are hoping to retain sovereignty over
> >Chechnya, just as the Chechens are fighting to gain it, and the
> >Muslim terrorists killing Hindus in Kashmir want Islamic control of
> >the province. And Osama Bin Laden is hoping for the same thing that
> >Saddam Hussein is, that is, to become the Caliph of a reconstituted
> >Pan-Muslim nation. Earlier, Moammar Qaddafi hoped for the same.
> >Even the Unabomber was hoping to wean people off computers, and Tim
> >McVeigh was hoping to further the cause of white separatism and
> >domination put forth in his Bible, THE TURNER DIARIES, as was Bob
> >Mathews, when he formed The Order. And George Metesky, the Mad
> >Bomber, was hoping to force concessions from Con Edison Power
> >Company.
> >>
> >>
> It makes sense to my memetic conctruct Joe. These people (those who
> have actually participated in, or organised acts of terror) all had
> ideological aspirations. That makes them all terrorists, as opposed to
> the partner basher who may be either unbarably harrased, misguided or
> just a violent, sick-minded thug. BTW in my veiw terror acts are also
> carried out by people who are either unbarably harrased, misguided or
> just a violent, sick-minded thugs. Jeremy
>
Would this include those who hope to murder their way into an eternal
position in Paradise, there to enjoy the perpetual ministrations of
seventy-two virgins?
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 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 - 03:19:08 GMT