Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Trouble from the US ‘Terrorism List’
from Consortium News:
Trouble from the US Terrorism List
September 4, 2012
Over the years, the U.S. terrorism list has become less an objective assessment of groups that use violence against civilians than an ideological battlefield littered with blatant hypocrisies and outdated hatreds. The list has even complicated strategies for reducing political violence, writes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.
By Paul R. Pillar
The common American tendency to view the outside world in starkly divided Manichean terms between friends, allies and good guys on one side and adversaries and evil-doers on the other side arises in many circumstances but seems especially marked in discussions of terrorism.
The tendency is most visible in how the lists that have become mainstays of counterterrorist policy are widely perceived. The U.S. list of foreign terrorist organizations had an almost mundane purpose when it was established by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.
One of the principal features of that legislation was to criminalize the provision of material support to any foreign terrorist organization. This made necessary clear definitions not only of material support but also of foreign terrorist organizations. Hence the creation of the list, entries on which are determined by the secretary of state with the participation of other executive departments and according to criteria specified in the statute.
Notwithstanding this purpose support to the enforcement of a criminal law the list of foreign terrorist organizations gets regarded as if it were a more general act of condemnation that embodies what overall U.S. policy toward a given group is or ought to be. It is taken as a declaration of who is in the bad guys camp and who is not. ..............(more)
The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2012/09/04/trouble-from-the-us-terrorism-list/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1123 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trouble from the US ‘Terrorism List’ (Original Post)
marmar
Sep 2012
OP
RC
(25,592 posts)1. So, by the definition of our own laws
if you support the United States, you are by definition a terrorist?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)2. The word "terrorist" itself has no objective meaning.
In the sense that there is no agreement over who is or is not a "terrorist", it is used for its implication of illegitimate violence, as opposed to legitimate, state-sponsored violence, and not in any sense that tells you anything about the person it is applied to. What with "cyber-terrorists" and the like you can't even be sure the "terrorist" is trying to harm any real persons.