A few weeks ago I met an interesting guy in Parliament Square. On him he had a copy of the UK legal definition of terrorism as can be found here http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000011_en_1
His claim was that the War in Afghanistan is terrorism under this definition on many counts and that paying your taxes is funding terrorism.
I am aware that the law is worded carefully as to remain rather ambiguous but I dont understand how anyone can refute his claims based on what I have read.
I challenge anybody to do so especially the lawyers amongst you (Edward Levey et al)
Have fun
Danny
5 comments:
It has been in my mind for some time now that if the goal of terrorism is to create behavior through fear then anyone who uses violence or the threat of violence is a terrorist. In my world the terrorists are the IRS, the police, and the courts. These are entities that cause me to do what I would not only because they wield the threat of force. This thought though is not useful because it perpetuates the labeling of fellow human beings, perpetuates division and distrust. Terror is only in the mind and only is we allow it to be. Love, even if it dies, is stronger.
yes i agree in principle, however i do think it is rather interesting to look at the governments own legal definition of terrorism and find out how the lawyers explain it away because the wording is exactly as you describe it here - its using violence or threat of violence to scare people.
yes i agree in principle, however i do think it is rather interesting to look at the governments own legal definition of terrorism and find out how the lawyers explain it away because the wording is exactly as you describe it here - its using violence or threat of violence to scare people.
A small published book (about 70 pages) published by Noam Chomsky has a good deal about the official definition of terrorism and how it should be applied but isn't to our leaders. Very insightful called "Media control" ISBN:978-1-58322-536-3
A wise man once said something to the effect that the definitions of the words "War" and "Terror" were so close together that the so called "War on Terror" is in fact a "War on War"...*scratches head*...who said that...Oh yeah, it was you. ;)
War creates terror (as in fear) in those who experience it first hand (I consider myself fortunate to have been able to avoid this experience so far). Terror (as in ism) is an essential agent in warfare. In order to gain an advantage opposing countries in a war will stop at nothing to bully, or coerce the other side into submission. They certainly don't run around hugging each other, although things might improve if they did.
My question for you and anyone else is: Is it a "war on war"?...Or does the misinformation that is spread about every war create "terror on terror"? I'd say it's somewhere in the middle and that they feed off one another and can spiral out of control in the escalation of these conflagrations. Great topic. Cheers.
Post a Comment