US Govt Declares Itself Terrorist State

[Dboy]

US Govt Declares Itself Terrorist State - by DBoy

Although there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism, it is generally understood that an act of violence commited against an innocent civilian population, or where a use of violence would reasonably be expected to harm innocent civilians, is terrorism. If the act is committed, sanctioned, or enabled by a government, then that action is state-sponsored terrorism. Legitimate military action can be defined as violence between armed opponents where the use of violence is not reasonably expected to harm innocent civilians. A "state" action is one conducted by a sovereign government. A "guerrilla" action is one conducted by a non-governmental entity. This represents my definition of terrorism, combined from the term "terrorism" as defined in the PATRIOT Act, and well as UN documents and other texts.

On Wednesday, September 6th 2006, the US Senate rejected a move by Democrats to stop the Pentagon from using cluster bombs near civilian targets and to cut off sales unless purchasers abide by the same rules. This vote was made in response to the US State Department announcement last month that it is investigating whether Israel misused American-made cluster bombs in civilian areas of Lebanon.

After the Israeli attacks against the civilian population of Lebanon, unexploded cluster bomblets are now widely distributed throughout south Lebanon, and have turned the region into a vast minefield. The United Nations Mine Action Coordination Center reported finding evidence that Israel used three types of U.S.-made cluster bombs during the war with Hezbollah militants. Israel also manufactures its own cluster munitions.

In my opinion, this action by the US Senate represents a pro-terrorist agenda, insuring that the US government can continue its state-sponsored terror activities in support of the genocide against the non-christian populations of Lebanon and Palestine by the Israeli Government. It is well past time that all American citizens wake from their slumber and work to remove terrorist actors, religious fundamentalists, corporate fascists, and traitors from positions of power. It is only by learning to live in peace that we can stop the terrorist threat, and the current rogue actors currently in control of the US Government are the largest threat to peace that mankind has ever known.

Then how do you define war (in the technical sense, not in the nonsense way the US refers to the "war on drugs" or the "war on terrorism")?

See BBC News:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5321606.stm

The exact location of these prisons is unknown but suggestions have been made that they exist in Thailand, Afghanistan and several Eastern European nations. You may ask 'why place these secret prisons in countries other than the USA'? The answer, I suspect, is two fold. Firstly it's a case of out of sight = out of mind. Can you imagine the stink if residents in Texas found they had a secret prison filled with terrorist suspects hidden amongst the oil wells and cattle ranches? The other reason is that they can torture confessions out of suspects to their hearts content without any real comeback from those who count - the voters of America. If it aint happening on American soil it aint happening, or at least the voters will care less about it.

For those who say 'terrorists don't play by the rules so why should we?'. The answer is simple, we all abhor terrorism of all kinds and rely on our democratically elected governments to protect us - but if our own governments are picking people up off the street, whisking them to military airports, removing them from their own country, placing them in indefinite confinement, torturing them with dog's and physical and sexual abuse, what are we left with? We are left with government by terrorism. The 'War on Terror' becomes the war BY terror.

Oh, on a side issue. I know the US has voted to continue the sale of cluster bombs. These are the bombs that were used by Israel against the civilian population of Lebanon and has now reduced much of the border area to nothing but a minefield of unexploded bombs. How many innocents will lose lives over the next few years due to the detonation of these terible weapons.

[Surfcrest]

You bring up a great point DBoy.

Is the nation that uses the weapon responsible as well as the nation that sold the weapon.
As it is probably a company based in a certain nation, are they now all three implicated
and to what extent?

It goes back to the concept of gun control, is it the nation's responsibility?
Or does the killer hold sole responsibility?

Perhaps this needs to be tested in U.S. courts, although I doubt it would go far
entrenched as the 2nd Amendment.

Surfcrest

Perhaps this needs to be tested in U.S. courts, although I doubt it would go far entrenched as the 2nd Amendment.

The Second Amendment is well past its use-by date. It was put in place to ensure a citizen army could muster at a moment's notice without having to worry about getting weapins from a central repository. The US hasn't had a citizen army for some time now

The cluster bombs that now litter Southern Lebanon were dropped in the last few hours of the conflict when the Israelis knew that a deal was iminent.
There is a reason for this. The plan was to make s strip of land (probably as far as the Litani River) uninhabitable- a "buffer-zone". This is why the Israelis spent so much time and money destroying villages even when there were no Resitance fighters present. And the infra-structure too, of course.
And this is why the Lebanese, encouraged by Hezbollah, got into their cars and drove home the very day the ceasefire was announced, despite the danger.
The policy of creating a buffer-zone between residents and the Israeli border has been tried before, in Gaza. Vast areas have been laid waste, fields, orchards, farms destroyed and homes flattened by constant shelling from artillery. 200 dead, more than 30 of them children, in the last few weeks alone.
The Lebanese were wise to this and scored yet another remarkable victory over the fifth largest army in the world. And their backers in the US too, of course.

I notice Dboy hasn't been able to come up with a definition of war yet that distinguishes it from his definition of terrorism

[Surfcrest]

The Second Amendment is well past its use-by date. It was put in place to ensure a citizen army could muster at a moment's notice without having to worry about getting weapins from a central repository. The US hasn't had a citizen army for some time now

As an outsider looking in, I wonder about that sometimes.
There was a time that Soviet invasion upon US soil could have possibly
been (although remotely) something that might have happened.
You think as a foreign nation occupying the US as the US is currently
occupying Iraq, would it be any easier an occupation?
The non-military fire-power within the US in hand guns might
be equal to or beyond the military itself.
Would that be something an administration would really
want to consider changing, despite the crime?
Obviously, not as a priority.

Surfcrest

[Dboy]

I notice Dboy hasn't been able to come up with a definition of war yet that distinguishes it from his definition of terrorism

Had not responded until now due to the fact that I was busy getting layed off today. That was fun. They flew 2 executives in from the "home office" to bring the axe down on me. The team I started up 2 years ago was completly shut down, which sucks cuz we were doing a good job. Truth is I'm happy to be away from that place. I suppose a stronger man would have just quit when it was obvious that it was time to go. I will be taking some time off, and plan on seeing as much of the world as I can afford to. I trust absolutely nothing about what this government (US) and media tell us about this planet and its peoples so I want to go found out for myself.

I was certainly wondering how this board would respond to a post like that. I wrote it to provoke a response and discussion. I'm not sure what to make of the generally favorable responses.

Anyway homintern, that is a good question. I'm not pulling my definitions out of my ass, I lifted bits from various documents that seemed to make sense to me. I even read through some Nuremberg docs. In my opinion when the US uses "war" as in "war on drugs", "war on christmas" (yeah we have that hehe), etc. it is metaphor meant to confuse the population. Terrorism is a *tactic*, not a group of evil men with guns. Drugs are various plants, chemical, spores. I've never seen a cannabis plant carrying an assault rifle. My point is that I think its dumb using the word "war" that way.

Did a quick search on war (google) and I found this definition repeated in multiple documents:

war 1. A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties.

So homintern, what's your point? I'm open to debate. "Parties" definitely sends this definition into a gray area. I think it would be constructive to create a non-biased definition of terrorism. If someone tries to do something like: "if I do it then its war, but if you do it then its terrorism"..thats just a bullshit definition. A definition doesn't change based on who's doing the thing being defined. You might be questioning "when does war become terrorism?" Or maybe "were the nuclear strikes on Japan terrorism?" I actually have an answer for that one. As I understand it, during WWII the Japanese Premier declared *all* Japanese citizens to be members of the Japanese armed forces, required to defend Japan against any enemy power (I cannot cite a source on this, its just something I recall..can anyone verify?) Of course it could be argued the other way, that from an ethics point of view, a 4 y.o girl dying of radiation burns cannot be called a combatant even if her own government declares her to be one.


Dboy

So homintern, what's your point? I'm open to debate

How do you distinguish between war and terrorism when it comes to civilian casualties? Frankly the points you make about casualies and terrorism could equally be made about warfare. People get hurt