What defines a terrorist?

[Natoma]

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/04/TampaBay/Man_pleads_guilty_to_.shtml

A jewish man, Robert Goldstein, pleaded guilty in Florida to attempting to blow up a local mosque. He got 12.5 to 15 years in prison.

Goldstein -- who is Jewish -- wanted to make a statement for "his people" against Arabs and Muslims in light of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to court documents.

If Goldstein were a Muslim who plotted to blow up buildings, he would have faced a much harsher sentence, said Ahmed Bedier, communications director of the Florida office of the Council of American-Islamic Relations.

"This appears to be a double standard," he said. "This sentence also sends a message that it just might be worth the risk to attack American Muslims."

They also found a typed list of 50 Islamic worship centers in the Tampa Bay area and Florida, court records state.

Investigators discovered an arsenal in the home at 9209 Seminole Blvd., including two light antiarmor rockets, handguns, a 50-caliber rifle and homemade bombs.

"OBJECTIVE: Kill all 'rags' at this Islamic Education Center -- ZERO residual presence -- maximum effect," the plan read.

Altaf Ali, CAIR's executive director in Florida, said he had hoped the prosecutors would treat the case with "more seriousness," given the potential damage posed by the plot.

"We wanted them to treat this as a domestic terrorist cell," Ali said. "These are not tough enough sentences for what they planned to carry out."

So maybe we need a better definition of what a 'terrorist' is. 'Terrorist' is a term that is thrown around very lightly these days imo, but seems to only apply to muslims.

Also, we need to do better with our Muslim relations before launching anymore campaigns in the middle east, or even talking about anymore campaigns.

 

[nutball]

Nelson Mandela was a (convicted) terrorist. Nelson Mandela was also a freedom fighter.

It just depends who you ask.

That's the problem with the term.

Shift timescales by a few centuries and look at things from the point-of-view of your enemies, and George Washington is a terrorist.

 

[Sxotty]

A terrorist is any one who tries to kill civilians for a political cause.

 

[Natoma]

Exactly my point Sxotty. So if this incident in Florida had been Islamic in nature, you would have heard on the news that yet another Al-Qaeda cell was rounded up and a terrorist brought to justice.

But this guy is sentenced to 12.5 - 15 years, and is not labeled a terrorist or "enemy combatant." The only discernable difference is that he's jewish. Is there a double standard? I dunno. It seems to be that way.

p.s.: Nutball, I agree wholeheartedly. That's why I when Putin talks about the Chechyen rebels as terrorists when it was the Russians who brutally annexed Chechnya. How our government condemned the Russians for it, but once 9/11 happened, we turned a blind eye and agreed to let the Russians label the freedom fighters of Chechnya as terrorists so we'd get their help in our "war against terrorism."

 

[nutball]

A terrorist is any one who tries to kill civilians for a political cause.

Define a "civilian". IMO that's as hard as defining a terrorist, at least in some conflicts in the world (in others it's fairly straightforward, maybe...).

 

[DemoCoder]

Well, given that those so-called "freedom fighters" were seizing theaters full of people and blowing up apartment complexes, I don't see any problem letting the Russians call them terrorists.

Ironically, the "terrorists" in Afghanistan, when they were fighting the Russians, were actually killing the Russian military and not Russian civilians.

 

[Natoma]

Well, given that those so-called "freedom fighters" were seizing theaters full of people and blowing up apartment complexes, I don't see any problem letting the Russians call them terrorists.

Ironically, the "terrorists" in Afghanistan, when they were fighting the Russians, were actually killing the Russian military and not Russian civilians.

What would you do DC if another country attacked the US and brutally annexed us? There are two sides of the coin in any conflict. And frankly considering what was done to the Chechens, I don't consider them fighting for their homeland, terrorism.

As I stated before, when the Russians annexed Chechnya initially, the move was condemned by the US as barbaric and uncalled for. We *supported* the Chechens. But once 9/11 occured and we needed Russia's help, we agreed to Putin's demand that the Chechens be recognized as terrorists.

That is what I find fault with DC. But that was a side note more than anything. What do you think about the original article?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

A jewish man, Robert Goldstein, pleaded guilty in Florida to attempting to blow up a local mosque. He got 12.5 to 15 years in prison.

First off, your "executive summary" is wrong.

He did not ATTEMPT, he "plotted." That's a very big difference. ATTEMPT implies actually performed some action that failed in whole or in part. "Plotting" is just that: planning it. I only point this out because that would make a big difference to me in any actual sentencing based on the (limited) info we have concerning the facts of this case.

Just don't misrepresent what little facts we have.

The only discernable difference is that he's jewish.

...And that he didn't actully perform the terrorist act "yet", nor is he affiliated with any group from what I can (neither of us knowing the facts of the case) but is singular or two person in nature, and according to the defense, was "only" planning to destroy property not lives, and he's an American Citizen (I assume).

Is there a double standard? I dunno. It seems to be that way.

I agree that the "definition" of a terrorist is not defined in stone, and must be looked at in a case by case basis, and can even be "in the eye of the beholder". . I just certainly wouldn't say that the "only difference" between this and other recent cases is because "he's Jewish."

12-15 years is pretty stiff for "only" having "conspired". It is deserved though.

 

[nutball]

He did not ATTEMPT, he "plotted." That's a very big difference. ATTEMPT implies actually performed some action that failed in whole or in part. "Plotting" is just that: planning it. I only point this out because that would make a big difference to me in any actual sentencing based on the (limited) info we have concerning the facts of this case.

So an Al Qaida plot is OK? But an Al Qaida attempt isn't?

 

[Natoma]

You sure are arguing semantics here Joe. I mean, I don't think it's a question that this guy would have been labeled a terrorist or an enemy combatant if he were muslim.

Also, what about Jose Padilla? He had committed no crime, had no evidence of wrong doing, is an american citizen, and there wasn't even any evidence that he even conspired to commit any terrorist acts against the United States.

Yet he's labeled an enemy combatant and sent to a federal prison, without access to his family or a lawyer. He is muslim btw.

p.s.: What nutball said.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

So an Al Qaida plot is OK? But an Al Qaida attempt isn't?

Um, no "plot" is OK. Did I not say the sentence was deserved? As I said, I see several differences between this and other recent cases. For one, Al Qaida is an "organization" who is actually responsible for 9/11 for example. So anyone affiliated with Al Qaida is in a different class than some other individual with some different history.

 

[Natoma]

So an Al Qaida plot is OK? But an Al Qaida attempt isn't?

Um, no "plot" is OK. Did I not say the sentence was deserved? As I said, I see several differences between this and other recent cases. For one, Al Qaida is an "organization" who is actually responsible for 9/11 for example. So anyone affiliated with Al Qaida is in a different class than some other individual with some different history.

Ok. But this guy clearly stated that he was planning these acts against muslims "for his people." There were clear religious and political underpinnings to his reasoning. He had a partner, so theoretically you *could* label them a "terrorist cell."

All I'm saying is that considering how much the government has tossed around the term "Terrorist" since 9/11, I find it highly dubious and circumspect that this guy is "merely" sentenced to jail.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

You sure are arguing semantics here Joe.

What do you think you're doing?

I mean, I don't think it's a question that this guy would have been labeled a terrorist or an enemy combatant if he were muslim.

I certainly question it. If "the muslim" was found to be affiliated with Al Qaeda, then yes, I am certain that he would have been labeled a terrorist. If not, then probably not.

Also, what about Jose Padilla? He had committed no crime, had no evidence of wrong doing, is an american citizen, and there wasn't even any evidence that he even conspired to commit any terrorist acts against the United States.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2037444.stm

Al-Qaeda link

He apparently dropped out of view after leaving the US in 1998. This, officials say, was when he first visited Afghanistan.

Norma Leon, the Padilla family's former landlady, told the Chicago Sun-Times that Mr al-Muhajir's mother was worried because her son had left the country and become a member of a cult.

"She was scared for him," Ms Leon told the newspaper.

In 2001, officials say, he made contact with Abu Zubaydah, a senior al-Qaeda commander who is in American custody and apparently co-operating with the FBI.

Al-Qaeda, the US authorities allege, asked Mr Padilla to go to Lahore in Pakistan, where he learnt how to make a dirty bomb.

In Karachi, Pakistan, he is alleged to have met several other al-Qaeda members.

Officials have not said whether these meetings took place before or after the 11 September attacks on the US.

On 8 May 2002, he was arrested after flying into Chicago's O'Hare airport from Pakistan, for what the US authorities say was a reconnaissance mission.

That's the difference. The link to Al Qaeda. I know your next argument: but then the Government can just claim anyone is an "Al Queda" member, and that's all it takes?

Yup. Pretty much. We do have to put a certain amount of faith in the gov't for having sufficient evidence to claim someone is linked to Al Queda.

The point is, that's how the cases are different.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

All I'm saying is that considering how much the government has tossed around the term "Terrorist" since 9/11, I find it highly dubious and circumspect that this guy is "merely" sentenced to jail.

I understand your concern, but the facts are, the cases are different. It's not just "Jewish" vs. "Muslim." It's mostly a difference of "Al-Qaeda" (who's intentions, motivation, and ability to carry out is no longer of question.) vs. "Non Al-Qaeda".

 

[Natoma]

You are correct Joe. They are different. One case has *hard* *physical* evidence backing up the terrorist claims. The other case has dubious ties and innuendo.

But the one with the dubious ties and innuendo gets the harsher sentence? That speaks volumes.

 

[MrShides]

terrorist: radical who employs terror as a political weapon.

for it to be considered terrorism IMO (this is only IMO) he would have to be creating civil unrest in the GENERAL public. Not just a select group. This is a hate crime.

 

[Natoma]

All I'm saying is that considering how much the government has tossed around the term "Terrorist" since 9/11, I find it highly dubious and circumspect that this guy is "merely" sentenced to jail.

I understand your concern, but the facts are, the cases are different. It's not just "Jewish" vs. "Muslim." It's mostly a difference of "Al-Qaeda" (who's intentions, motivation, and ability to carry out is no longer of question.) vs. "Non Al-Qaeda".

What about Timothy McVeigh. If someone had found out about his plot before he committed it, what do you think would have happened in that instance?

As far as we know, he was acting alone. Wouldn't he fit the definition of a terrorist?

Doesn't this guy in Florida, Robert Goldstein, fit the definition of a terrorist?

 

[Natoma]

terrorist: radical who employs terror as a political weapon.

for it to be considered terrorism IMO (this is only IMO) he would have to be creating civil unrest in the GENERAL public. Not just a select group. This is a hate crime.

To argue semantics (yes Joe, I'm being hypocritical. sue me. ), you could say Al-Qaeda are trying to create civil unrest in a select group. That group is called "Americans."

I know what you're saying, but I think that thus far, terrorism has been defined as political/religious biased acts against american citizens. At least, that's how the government has so far seen to define it. That definition is what I think is a little dubious when looking at how it affects Robert Goldstein.

What is the difference in this statement:

Goldstein -- who is Jewish -- wanted to make a statement for "his people" against Arabs and Muslims in light of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to court documents.

and this

Osama Bin Laden -- who is Arab -- wanted to make a statement for "his people" against Americans and Jews in light of the Gulf War terrorist attacks, according to court documents.

Save for in one case, the nut job got to act out his aggressions against a particular people.

 

[nutball]

Um, no "plot" is OK. Did I not say the sentence was deserved? As I said, I see several differences between this and other recent cases. For one, Al Qaida is an "organization" who is actually responsible for 9/11 for example. So anyone affiliated with Al Qaida is in a different class than some other individual with some different history.

Well therein lies the rub Joe. You guys in the US may well have a sore spot when it comes to Al Qaida (and for understandable reason I might add). But Al Qaida don't even come close in the "which bunch of terrorists has killed the most people, ever" stakes.

Did you know that the IRA killed more people during their campaign than died on 9/11? This is from a bunch of half-baked "civilised" terrorists (eg. they'd usually phone in a warning before setting off a bomb).

Sure Al Qaida think bigger, sure they target the US as a soft target. On 9/11 they caught you with your pants down, which is why an attack on such a scale was possible. In the global perspective none of this seperates Al Qaida from any other bunch of terrorists planting bombs and sniping or whatever. None of this makes Al Qaida special in any sense.

 

[MrShides]

hate crime:

Osama Bin Laden -- who is Arab -- wanted to make a statement for "his people" against Israelis and Jews in light of the Gulf War terrorist attacks, according to court documents.

terrorism:

Osama Bin Laden -- who is Arab -- wanted to make a statement for "his people" against AMERICANS in light of the Gulf War terrorist attacks, according to court documents.