Skip to main content

View Diary: An act of domestic terrorism (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks for the extra information (0+ / 0-)

    But please don't speak so ill of the dead.  The bomb tech was doing his job and made a mistake, a costly mistake, but you make it sound like it was his fault the bomb went off, which is not the case at all.

    Despite the charges leveled on the two "bombers" by the courts, does this incident not fall under the US Code for terrorism?

    US Code, Title 6, Chapter 1, section 101, Statute 16:
    (16) The term "terrorism" means any activity that -
             (A) involves an act that -
               (i) is dangerous to human life or potentially destructive
             of critical infrastructure or key resources; and
               (ii) is a violation of the criminal laws of the United
             States or of any State or other subdivision of the United
             States; and
             (B) appears to be intended -
               (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
               (ii) to influence the policy of a government by
             intimidation or coercion; or
               (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
             destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.

    The fact that they were not charged as terrorists does not mean they weren't terrorists.  I think their actions are clearly a terrorist act if you follow the US Code.  The only reason they were not charged as terrorists is that proving such a case would be difficult.  There is no group, no larger conspiracy.

    In my opinion, such an action was more of a terrorist act than was Maj. Hasan's.  Don't get me wrong, what Hasan did was horrific, but if you use the definition of the US Code for terrorism, his actions just don't fit.  And even though his heinous acts were not really terrorism it didn't stop the pundits from calling him a terrorist.

    •  I wasn't attempting to speak ill of the dead (0+ / 0-)

      however just laying out the facts and the facts are the bomb tech did screw up.

      In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

      by jsfox on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 09:43:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, yes he did . . . (0+ / 0-)

        He didn't react to it as seriously as he should.  I live close to Woodburn.  It's a sleepy bedroom community south of Portland with a large outlet mall and a tulip farm.  So it is kind of understandable that the officer would be lax in his handling of the bomb.  He never thought of it as a real threat.  That aside, the bomb would have gone off even if it had remained in front of the bank.  But I fear that the defense will try to put the detonation of the bomb on the officer's shoulders.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site