Domestic terrorism in the U.S.


This is terrorism, isn’t it?  What definition of terrorism would leave this out?

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 4th, 2009 at 10:20 pm and is filed under Civil Rights, Health care, Jurisprudence, Terrorism, U.S. Constitution. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

9 Responses to Domestic terrorism in the U.S.

  1. j a higginbotham's avatar j a higginbotham says:
    June 10, 2009 at 1:45 am

    The same people who differentiate between “traditional” and “Democratic” filibusters are the people who will not admit this is terrorism. There are plenty in the US who will not call these actions terrorism because they agree with the goals, if perhaps not entirely with the methods.

    Like

  2. Ed Darrell's avatar Ed Darrell says:
    June 6, 2009 at 12:39 am

    Looks like traditional terrorism to me. Maybe it’s the domesticus genus that confuses us. We have people using guns and threats to discourage Americans from exercising Constitutional rights. It’s a time-tested formula for terrorism, though we usually think of it as being done by people wearing robes and sheets covering their heads — but all the elements of terrorism are there: People with nominally protected rights, other people with guns, afraid to show their faces, issuing anonymous threats of death punctuated with an occasional lynching murder to make the threats real and more terrifying.

    Looks like terrorism, sounds like terrorism, smells like terrorism. Cops have a duty to do, but somehow always seem to be somewhere else when the duty needs to be done.

    Santayana’s ghost mouths the word, “terrorism.” Am I in error some where?

    Like

  3. j a higginbotham's avatar j a higginbotham says:
    June 5, 2009 at 7:17 pm

    Preciselly.

    Like

  4. Nick Kelsier's avatar Nick Kelsier says:
    June 5, 2009 at 6:14 pm

    Oh you mean like how Republicans complained about Democrat fillibusters a few years ago and some of those same Republican officials/leaders are calling for a fillibuster now?

    Like

  5. j a higginbotham's avatar j a higginbotham says:
    June 5, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    Cf. “traditional filibuster” and “Democratic filibuster”.

    Like

  6. Nick Kelsier's avatar Nick Kelsier says:
    June 5, 2009 at 12:34 pm

    I’m going to assume that Higgin’s is being sarcastic instead of serious because only people with 50 functioning brain cells would say that what happened to Dr. Tiller isn’t an act of terrorism…

    But in case Higgin’s is being serious…what is “traditional terrorism” and how is what happened to Dr. Tiller not it?

    Like

  7. Ed Darrell's avatar Ed Darrell says:
    June 5, 2009 at 5:24 am

    Why isn’t it domestic terrorism? We have a population of people whose work is constantly threatened by violence. We have a population of people whose exercise of rights is constantly threatened by violence. How is it not terrorism?

    Like

  8. j a higginbotham's avatar j a higginbotham says:
    June 4, 2009 at 11:23 pm

    Don’t try to manipulate us with your “Democratic terrorism” usages. This is clearly not “traditional terrorism”.

    Like

  9. Nick Kelsier's avatar Nick Kelsier says:
    June 4, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    The right wing Republican definition, of course.

    Like

Please play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes. While your e-mail will not show with comments, note that it is our policy not to allow false e-mail addresses. Comments with non-working e-mail addresses may be deleted.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.