What is terrorism? And why does the United States support it?
…and a public option is extreme?
Terrorism is one option of a handful of prerequisites for a First Degree Murder Charge in New York State, which Luigi is being charged with.
If he had killed a person in another state he likely wouldn’t have Terrorism included in his charges despite it being the same crime.
Because the prosecutors didn’t pursue a first degree murder charge, or the murderer had other qualifications for the charge.
If what Luigi did was terrorism then I support terrorism! Viva La terror!!!
Step into the arena, many many people far smarter than you or me have hashed this debate and still have no consensus.
There is no general consensus on the definition of terrorism. The difficulty of defining terrorism lies in the risk it entails of taking positions.
The political value of the term currently prevails over its legal one. Left to its political meaning, terrorism easily falls prey to change that suits the interests of particular states at particular times. The Taliban and Osama bin Laden were once called freedom fighters (mujahideen) and backed by the CIA when they were resisting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Now they are on top of the international terrorist lists.
General Assembly Resolution 42/159 acknowledges that the cause of terrorism often lies in the “misery, frustration, grievance and despair” that leads people to seek radical change. The resolution identifies the root causes of terrorism as occupation, colonialism and racism. A definition of terrorism should thus be comprehensive, in order to avoid double standards.
