Another Terrorist Attack In US.

[the_great_she_elephant]

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=malheur%20national%2...

At least there haven't been any casualties - yet.

[***super_nova***]

---

@djilukjilly wrote:

 Pretty shameful to equate it to terrorism when its not.

There is a certain motive behind this post but I cant be bothered going into it. It has already  been exposed by most on here.

---

Armed men taking over federal building are noy terrorists?!!!!!!!!!!!   According to FBI code:

Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code

18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism”:

"International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

• Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
• 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
• Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.*

"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

• Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
• Appear 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
• Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

18 U.S.C. § 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that:

• Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and
• Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including § 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and § 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.).

* FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. § 1801(c).

[***super_nova***]

Some good point in this article:

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/10-questions-defending-oregon-militia-need-to-answer/

[bluecat*dancing]

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/04/3735722/meet-the-child-abusing-arsonists-at-the-center-o...

[opmania]

It's no wonder some people

Have a warped perspective

If they prescribe to this kind 

Of one sided propaganda Nova.

In the current state of world hostilities

a terrorists is generally known to the masses 

as a member of a radicalized Islamic group,

Regardless of a dictionary definition.

Many of whom I might add are of white ethnicity.

As was similar to several years ago terrorists

Could be associated with the IRA

To know who would be a terrorist

Has to be proven, but to expect a terrorist to be

radicalized Islamic in the current state of world 

Events is not only a natural thought process but a very valid one.

So if a thread bares the title

Another terrorist attack in USA,

It is only natural that anyone would

Immediately have fears of another attack from Islam.

Which unlike vigilante farmers in US has a very clear and present danger to all

Westerners who are known to be their enemy.

[this-one-time-at-bandcamp]

That's only relevant if the reader is incapable of understanding the OP..........which, apparently, some on this board are.

[opmania]

I certainly don't profess to understand the OP

or the motives that would drive this thread nor

Do I care  to. The simple fact is you only have to

read the title to be alarmed and this is what most

People have an objection to if I understand their

posts correctly

[Anonymous]

and any reasonable person would have

thought the OP was referring to a terrorist

attack in the current context.

a better title would be 'another act of

domestic terrorism in the US' - but we

all know, it would not have achieved

the desired effect.

[opmania]

Perhaps this thread has enlightened a few more 

People who now have a better understanding of 

The OP

[jimmy*part4]

---

@opmania wrote:

I certainly don't profess to understand the OP

or the motives that would drive this thread nor

Do I care  to. The simple fact is you only have to

read the title to be alarmed and this is what most

People have an objection to if I understand their

posts correctly

---

That's right. Because there wasn't a terrorist attack. No one has been killed or shot, or for that matter...not even a stubbed toe.

[opmania]

Maybe an old cow trod on a few toes let loose

In the paddock.

You never know the spiralling effects of terrorism

And the casualties that don't even warrant a mention