Dumb but sincere question. What criteria has to be met to make attacks a terrorist attack?

[patricia92243]

It can't be the number or people killed or maimed. Many, many other large numbers of people have been killed, and the murderer was not deemed a terrorist.

At least one of the recent Boston attackers was an American citizen and I understand he is to be charged as a terrorist. I believe Tim McVeigh was deemed a terrorist and he was American.

Is it the type of weapon used - such as a bomb?


There must be some consistent way an attack is determined a terrorist attack, but I cannot figure what it is.


I am not being a smarta** - I really don't understand and would like to know.

[LeftofObama]

1. Actually that's a very good question.

Kicking for more info.

Edit: I found this info at Wikipedia. It might help...

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition.[1][2] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror); are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians). Some definitions now include acts of unlawful violence and war. The use of similar tactics by criminal organizations for protection rackets or to enforce a code of silence is usually not labeled terrorism, though these same actions may be labeled terrorism when done by a politically motivated group. The writer Heinrich Böll and scholars Raj Desai and Harry Eckstein have suggested that attempts to protect against terrorism may lead to a kind of social oppression.

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Terrorism

[trof]

19. Good definition. As to "criminal organizations ...:

"The use of similar tactics by criminal organizations for protection rackets or to enforce a code of silence is usually not labeled terrorism..."

I would submit that it is.
It's to terrorize and coerce a particular target group.

[hlthe2b]

2. For the RW, nothing more than showing it was NOT a conservative "Christian" involved.

But, seriously, I don't know that we as a country or government have come to terms with what is and isn't "terrorism", but there seems to be consensus that terrorism involves some form of "pre-planned" conspiracy enabled by one or more people or groups that are united in some cause or ideology.

OKC, meets the definition of domestic terrorism for that reason, given Terry Nichols involvement with McVeigh (and perhaps others).

[Control-Z]

3. I don't have an answer for you.

But I've thought that Dr. Tiller's murderer was a terrorist and should have been named as one. Every one of the many groups and individuals who have bombed abortion clinics, threatened and murdered abortion providers, and terrorized patients, should be called out for the terrorists they are.

[marybourg]

4. The intent to "terrorize" the populace,; to cause

fear, rather than a crime for gain, revenge or personal preference. I'm sure someone can do better by looking it up; this is my off the top of the head definition.

[TwilightGardener]

5. I thought this out in another thread today:

For me, it's lots of people having the potential to die at once, and/or destruction of property on a big scale that affects a lot of people at once. The act is targeted at an entire population in general, not personal vengeance against coworkers, a grievance against a business, an unfaithful spouse, or even someone you dislike politically. I guess it's the difference between personal-scale animosity (or just plain mental illness) vs. hatred of a larger society or group, combined with larger-scale acts of mayhem and destruction.

[Terra Alta]

6. any act that causes terror

though that is a very broad definition and would include events such as Sandy Hook and Columbine.

[TDale313]

7. My understanding is it has to do...

With having a political/religious/ideological motivation. As opposed to a spree killer or mass murderer where the carnage is the sole motivation or the motive is more personal (disgruntled former employee for example)

[alsame]

8. I was wondering about this too. Here is what

I found on wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#USA_PATRIOT_Act

United States Department of Defense

The United States Department of Defense recently changed its definition of terrorism. Per Joint Pub 3-07.2, Antiterrorism, (24 November 2010) the Department of Defense defines it as "the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence to instill fear and coerce governments or societies. Terrorism is often motivated by religious, political, or other ideological beliefs and committed in the pursuit of goals that are usually political."

The new definition distinguishes between motivations for terrorism (religion, ideology, etc.) and goals of terrorism ("usually political&quot . This is in contrast to the previous definition which stated that the goals could be religious in nature.

USA PATRIOT Act

The USA PATRIOT Act defines domestic terrorism activities as "activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear 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, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S."

US National Counterterrorism Center

The US National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) define terrorism the same as United States Code 22 USC § 2656f(d)(2). The Center also defines a terrorist act as a: "...premeditated; perpetrated by a sub-national or clandestine agent; politically motivated, potentially including religious, philosophical, or culturally symbolic motivations; violent; and perpetrated against a noncombatant target." [57]

Was the Tucson shooting considered terrorism? He went there to assassinate a Congresswoman.

[reformist2]

28. That's actually a good definition, imo.

[Isoldeblue]

9. Under Federal law,

when a weapon of mass destruction is used, then it's classified as a terrorist attack. Listed under WOMD, are explosives and bombs.

HTH

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. I was wondering that myself

esp. now that it appears that Republicans will now be parsing every Democratic President's statements following one of these acts of mass death and chaos to make sure that he/she labels it correctly.

[Recovered Repug]

11. According to the US Code:

(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that -
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear 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; and

(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States.

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C113B.txt

[Chathamization]

15. So...shock and awe n/t

[treestar]

18. The intent is the key

Then again it is hard to say what 911 or the Marathon were for. Did the 911 terrorists think they would influence the US government to do anything they, the terrorists, wanted?

[SoCalDem]

12. I think it's about "intent"

You rob a guy at gunpoint...not terrorism

You break into a house..not terrorism

You stalk a person and send them threats ..could be terrorism, but most likely not

You set out explosives to harm unknown-to-you people..terrorism

You hide and randomly shoot unknown-to-you people..could be terrorism

You show up at a school and shoot up the place/killing people..could be terrorism

If the intent is to use the mayhem to instill fear in a community of people, it's terrorism, whether you use anthrax/guns/bombs/planes.

If the "crime" is for vengeance/jealousy/personal enrichment, it's not terrorism, however vengeance CAN have a terroristic slant IF it's done in the name of a religious/political/cultural philosophy, and it's done TO unknown people for the purpose of intimidating them.

Bullying is terrorism too, but on a personal level

[woo me with science]

13. Ah, that's the question, isn't it. That magic word, "terrorism,"

that allows indefinite war, first abroad and now, increasingly, it seems, right here, against any of us. That word is all that's needed to end up on a "Kill List" now, it seems, or to be imprisoned indefinitely. Or to have any of your rights against search and seizure violated. The criteria must be *at least* as stringent as for after-the-fact labeling of any young male as a "military combatant" after he has been slaughtered by a drone...

Surely only a real terrorist could ever be smeared with such an assumption. Surely a person would have to do something EGREGIOUS and TERRORISTIC before the government would EVER consider him worthy of any sort of scrutiny along those lines...




The NSA is building a massive data center in Utah to read every email you'll ever send.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002656593

Ridiculous FBI list: You might be a domestic terrorist if...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1790765

Doctors asked to identify potential terrorists under government plans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1261120&mesg_id=1261120

Homeland Security Kept Tabs on Occupy Wall Street
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002466099

Do You Like Online Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002257966

Top US counterterrorism official: drone critics are Al Qaeda enablers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002279862

"Arrogant complaining about airport security is one indicator Transportation Security Administration officers consider when looking for possible criminals and terrorists"
http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/04/15/tsa.screeners.complain/

etc., etc., etc...

[firenewt]

14. After clicking several of the links provided, it hits me - shit, now I'm on someone's list.

[Hugabear]

16. It has to be done by a Muslim

That's the teabagger answer.

[Poiuyt]

25. I've heard bigots say, "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."

So there you go. If a crime is committed by a Muslim, it's terrorism.

BTW, please don't pay attention to FBI statistics.

[treestar]

17. I had thought it meant holding hostages for a political goal

Demanding the release of certain prisoners, etc. Now it seems to mean any attack with a political motivation.

[Orsino]

20. Intimidation of bystanders.

Making them feel like the next victims, and afraid to oppose the terrorist's political agenda.

[msongs]

21. depends on whether the US government is doing it to foreginers or we are the victim nt

[rustydog]

22. Sincere answer: Be a political advantage for the GOP

screw the constitution, ignore that he is a naturalized American Citizen. For political points, they want him declared an enemy combatant and tried outside the American system of justice and put before a tribunal...

Of course, BP, who killed 11 by ignoring safety rules isn't an enemy combatant. the Corporation that owns the fertilizer plant (that killed how many now?) isn't being considered an enemy combatant....

It is useful politically or used when incompetent persons in power fear they cannot win in an actual court of law.

rant over.

[Bolo Boffin]

23. If right wingers think they can use it to impeach Obama

then it's a terrorist attack.

[stevenleser]

24. For me it is a non-state actor that targets civilians.

A nation state that targets civilians has committed a war crime. A non-state actor that targets combatants are not terrorists.

[thesquanderer]

26. Glenn Greenwald on this question

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/22/boston-marathon-terrorism-aurora-sandy-hook

[Tommy_Carcetti]

27. An agenda (beyond personal revenge), with the violence meant as a means to further the agenda.

Typically there are also either conspirators to the perpetrator or a group that the perpetrator belongs to that is highly sympathetic with the perpetrator's agenda.

Definitely the place of origin is completely irrelevant. Both native born and foreigners are equally capable of committing terrorism.

The agenda typically has some element of politics in it. Agendas could also be born out of religion but one does not need religion to commit terrorism, nor does the fact that violence is committed by a supposedly deeply religious person does not always make it terrorism, either.

There is a lot of movement, especially from the right, to label the Fort Hood shootings terrorism, but I'm not so sure it fits the labels.

Yes, Nidal Hasan professed himself to be a Muslim and appeared to be upset by the apparent friction between the West and the Muslim world. However, he also was an Army psychologist who dealt with stories from Iraq and Afghan war veterans on a daily basis. I believe it was his constant inundation with stories about the carnage overseas in Muslim countries that caused him to go over the edge and shoot and kill 13 people and injure many more. I don't think he was necessarily trying to make a greater statement about Islam or strike fear into ordinary Americans. To the contrary, I think he just snapped and took it out on the people (soldiers) who he identified as responsible for his inner angst. Much like a bullied student takes out his anger on other students, regardless of whether or not his victims actually engaged in bullying.

I've also found that while not exclusively, terrorists with agendas are more apt to use weapons like bombs than just guns. Bombs take skill to manufacturer, often requiring months and months of planning and advance scouting. That indicates someone with a long term agenda in mind. Whereas mass shootings are more often associated either with personal revenge, angst or psychosis, they are much more rash and can be planned much easily. Thus showing that the murderer who is the mass shooter is more often someone who just snaps.

The target of a terrorist attack is made to be afraid of subsequent attacks, either by the perpetrator or by like minded people. Whereas in a mere mass shooting, the perpetrator typically expects to either die or be captured in the aftermath, and that pretty much ends that.