October Surprise Averted?

[Brassmask]

Yep.....no reference to calling the kid a domestic terrorist.  That was your leap, but thanks for the reminder Brass

So, you are really going to go with the idea that there is no way in hell anyone would ever or could ever infer from your post that the kid who was the focus of the article that BT posted was, in some way, a "domestic terrorist"?

REALLY?  SERIOUSLY?  You're going with that stance?

[sirs]

Sure, if they want to take a flying leap of illogic, when it was clarified NOT, in a follow-up

[Brassmask]

Sure, if they want to take a flying leap of illogic, when it was clarified NOT, in a follow-up

So your comment was just some arbitrary statement that you simply posted in this thread for fun and unrelated to the article in no way?  Why not start a new thread about domestic terrorists?

[sirs]

Why should I?  It was a perfect tangent to apply to this one.  Feel free to disasgree

[Brassmask]

It was a perfect tangent to apply to this one.

How so?

[sirs]

An article about an investigation into the potential plotting of some attack to camp David and or the Presidential motorcade made me contemplate all the acts of Domestic terrorism that have likely been averted, but unable to be reported on, for the likely possibility of having those stealth methods of investigation, that averted such acts, uncovered

It was pretty clear the 1st go around.  As was my reference that if the current investigation determines this bloke indeed was indeed plotting some terrorist-like action, THEN we can label him a domestic terrorist.

Up to speed yet?

[Brassmask]

Plotting doesn't make you a "domestic terrorist".

This kid had no political agenda.  Sounds more like he was some rich kid with too much time and money on his hands who fancied himself a CIA operative.  That's not a terrorist.

This has been my point.  Labelling anyone a terrorist is a dangerous thing.  Because of how the laws since 9.11 (like Patriot Act) are structured, if someone is deemed a "terrorist" then the "president" has the right to hold them without charge indefinitely.

The Columbine Kids were not "terrorists", they were sociopaths with access to weaponry and the internets.   That does not make you a terrorist.

Eric Robert Rudolph is a terrorist (and potentially CIA since he has three names!  LOL).  He had a political agenda.

If this kid was planning on killing the president, that makes him an assassin.  If he was going to kill a bunch of people in a building in order to influence our government to get out of Iraq or invade Iran, that would make him a terrorist.

From what I read, he is only probably guilty of some kind of forgery.

Calling him a terrorist because he was or might have been planning on doing something is akin to pre-crime judgment a la Minority Report.

[BT]

Assassination of a political figure is by definition terror.

[Amianthus]

to an article about a kid who had some pieces of paper and may or may not have set off some "pipe bombs" would seem to imply that you thought he might be guilt of said "domestic acts of terrorism".

Well, he had more than just some pieces of paper. Found items included: a map of Camp David marked with a presidential motorcade route, a document that appears to describe how to kill someone at a distance of 200 meters, two forms of fake identification: one portraying him as a Central Intelligence Agency employee, and the other in the name of a federal contractor purportedly protected by the Geneva Conventions, more than 50 pounds of chemicals, assault-style weapons and armor-piercing bullets.

[Brassmask]

to an article about a kid who had some pieces of paper and may or may not have set off some "pipe bombs" would seem to imply that you thought he might be guilt of said "domestic acts of terrorism".

Well, he had more than just some pieces of paper. Found items included: a map of Camp David marked with a presidential motorcade route, a document that appears to describe how to kill someone at a distance of 200 meters, two forms of fake identification: one portraying him as a Central Intelligence Agency employee, and the other in the name of a federal contractor purportedly protected by the Geneva Conventions, more than 50 pounds of chemicals, assault-style weapons and armor-piercing bullets.

So what?  Even all of that put together doesn't make him guilty of anything.

[sirs]

Plotting doesn't make you a "domestic terrorist".  This kid had no political agenda.  Sounds more like he was some rich kid with too much time and money on his hands who fancied himself a CIA operative.  That's not a terrorist.

I'll wait for the investigation to conclude, and if he was "plotting" some attack against the President and the U.S., he most certainly can be called a domestic terrorist.    oy

The Columbine Kids were not "terrorists", they were sociopaths with access to weaponry and the internets. 

Never said they were....nor were they plotting some attack on the U.S. or any of its government sources.  Nor were they waging some not stop campaign of terrorizing the civilian population.  That does not make you a terrorist.

If this kid was planning on killing the president, that makes him an assassin.

AND a domestic terrorist


 

[Amianthus]

So what?  Even all of that put together doesn't make him guilty of anything.

It's real good circumstantial evidence that he was planning on assassinating Bush. Which is against the law (planning it - you don't have to succeed to have broken the law.)

[Plane]

How much watching do we need to put up with in order to catch lone wolves like Ted Kaczynski's or Timothy McVeigh?


Anyone know Ted or Tim's middle name?

unusual for assassins to have no middle name.