You must log in or # to comment.
From what the manifesto found on him allegedly said, it sounds like his actions were politically motivated. And violence in pursuit of a political goal is kinda the definition of terrorism.
No?
It’s very obviously an action made with intent to cause terror. It doesn’t have to be political or violent. There is often an aspect of violence and political motivation but it isn’t a requirement
It’s pretty much always meant violence for an ideology or cause. And the political motivation is very much what makes the difference.
Words do have definitions.
“Different definitions of terrorism emphasize its randomness, its aim to instill fear, and its broader impact beyond its immediate victims.”
From the article you cited
Well then define non-combatants. The person he shot was at fault for hundreds if not thousands of deaths. Saying he didn’t personally do them would be like saying a general is not responsible for their troops actions.
Well then define non-combatants.
“a person who is not engaged in fighting during a war, especially a civilian, chaplain, or medical practitioner.”
Sure he was responsible for deaths due to denying health coverage. But he’s still a civilian.
So is the president, who orders drone strikes on civilians.
The president is not a civilian. They are Commander-in-Chief of the combined armed forces.
So it was a civilian on civilian kill. Not a militant group/gang/mercenary.
If the “battle” was pertaining to healthcare denials, he was currently battling and his group took up battle after he was gone.
The perpetrator of an act of terrorism isn’t part of the definition. They need not be affiliated with a group or military.
I find it curious how many people on Lemmy were gleefully posting about CEOs and billionaires being scared because of this attack, and then to see push-back about the label of terrorism (where fear is part of the outcome, hence the name).
The saying is “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” right?
I get that we aren’t likely to agree. But “my version” of what terrorism is… You know because I’m an entitled person who gets to make shit up… but you’ll get what I mean… is to instill fear in the masses by performing an act. When you fly into a building, people say “they could have flown into my building”. When you launch a missile at a housing complex, people think that could have been my housing complex (gave up on quotes). When you blow up a communication device or a car… People think that could have been my car, phone, pager.
When you kill a CEO, no one is worried for their life when they say “that could have been my CEO”. They are more like shit… I wonder if Tim would get that job? Fuck I hope it’s not Pam. So unless the masses are being terrorized by an army of Pam’s… I just think it’s not terrorism
using definitions is cheating
Its wildly overused though isnt it. Anyone can say almost anything and claim its political. And in the case of your definition, governments leverage terrorism on many of us on a day to day basis. Every protest met with force is terrorism, by that definition you proffered. So do we have a right of self defense against politically motivated violence?
He likely intended to cause terror for the victims minority.
George Washington used violence to advance his political agenda of a sovereign USA. Was George a terrorist?
Yes, why would you think he wasn’t?
Because we often only phrase things as terrorism when it’s “bad”
Exactly. The baddies are called ‘terrorists’. The term the media uses to describe good terrorists is ‘rebels’ and sometimes ‘freedom fighters’.
If he used violence against noncombatants.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terror attacks though.
Oh, well then Muad’dib isn’t a terrorist because he only killed a mass murderer. Military brass are considered combatants, and Brian ordered thousands to their deaths.
Yes, he was a good terrorist. He wasn’t captured by the enemy.
Luigi was pretty dumb wearing that creepy outfit at a McD. He was captured. Regardless of how you feel about him, being captured was a major failure.
Yeah, Luigi fucked up so bad that he wasn’t even the shooter and he still got caught /irony
It’s not terrorism if you win.
History is written by the victors.
Then we’ll just have to win.
God damn put that exchange on a t-shirt
4th of July is a national celebration of terrorism.
More Sicily than Milan
”We are all domestic terrorists…”
-CPAC (Republicans) 2022
It isn’t settled though. Innocent until proven guilty.
Correct. I meant the debate about whether Italians are white is settled.
I don’t feel terrorized. Wonder who does
Ruthless CEOs and other greedy, rich scumbags, of course.
Reasonable take.
The dead guy was the terrorist.
But he was white…?
So was Timothy McVeigh.
The good old boy???
Good? No, he murderd a lot of innocent people.
Old? He was in his 20’s? Did he live to see his 30th birthday?
boy? Apparently.
fine “Domestic” terrorist
So he was a “lone wolf” then
See, his mistake was not killing him during a Career Day at an elementary school. If he took out kids as well, he wouldn’t get a terrorism charge.
Dark humor is like food, not everyone gets it.
“I learned it from watching you, ok?!?!?”
Freedom fighter
Ftfy
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter
Publish this everywhere to get musk dumped on day 1
Let’s hope the jury disagrees
They charged him with terrorism so a regular jury won’t get to make that decision. It will be a federal grand jury of selected stooges, and maybe even a secret court.
Oh. So that was their play.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
“Nothing will meaningfully improve” is a good translation of biden/harris’s “nothing will fundamentally change” promise.
It also addresses people pretending like knocking down statutes and similar moral victories are meaningful progress twoards addressing real problems.
A federal grand jury isn’t a replacement for a regular federal trial jury. They’re completely different things. A grand jury decides if there is a strong enough case to take the charges to trial, or if they should just be dismissed. When a grand jury isn’t used, the trial judge makes that determination themselves. I agree that the terrorism charge will affect how the trial is conducted, but I don’t know enough on that topic to comment further.
That’s true but the way that a federal jury works is very different.
It allows them to choose people from outside of the area in which the crime occurred.
Making it a federal trial jury instead of a state trial jury allows them to charge this single murder against an individual perpetrated by another individual who made no public statement with a much more severe crime than the state laws that he broke would normally allow.
It’s also important to note that making it a federal trial makes it less public as there will be no cameras allowed. They don’t want him tried in the state of New York because that could legally be televised which is a bad look when you’ve already got judicial homicide lined up and the trial is purely performative.
Being that they can choose people from all over and that the process of jury selection is even more opaque at the federal level they can make sure there won’t be any nullification issues.
The way they are treating Luigi whether or not he’s guilty indicates that it’s not relevant whether or not he’s guilty. They legitimately don’t care, this is about sending a message that the poors don’t get to fight back.
Thanks to fucking Patriot Act. The SS and NKVD bullshit should be repealed.
CEO’s: Second degree murder is the highest you can charge him with for killing a CEO in NY? But we want to torture him and make an example of him so the proles don’t get uppity!
DA: No problem sirs, we can make that happen.
It’s been curious to see the number of major media pundits doing the “Wonder how long his pretty little face will last in prison?” jokes while his fellow inmates are vocally supporting him
Really lets you know which side everyone is lining up on.
