How about the DHS report which labels some right and left wing groups as being likely terrorist groups. If you believe in the following:
Extreme Right-Wing : groups that subscribe to aspects of the following ideals: they are fiercelynationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty (especially their right to own guns, be free of taxes), believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/orpersonal liberty and a belief that ones personal and/or national way of life is under attack and iseither already lost or that the threat is imminent (sometimes such beliefs are amorphous andvague, but for some the threat is from a specific ethnic, racial, or religious group), and a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism. (2011: 26)
Sure their definition of terrorism is this:
TerrorismThe definition of terrorism used by the GTD is:the threatened or actual use of illegal force, directedagainst civilian targets, by non-state actors, in order to attain a political, economic, religious or social goal,through fear, coercion or intimidation.3It is important to note that the classification of an event as terrorism depends as much on threats as the actual use of violence. For example, instances in whichindividuals seize an aircraft and threaten to blow it up unless their demands are met are defined as terrorist events. Note also that by specifying the threatened or actual use of force the definition of terrorism used by the GTD excludes hoaxes. The requirement that these events be limited to the actionsof non-state actors means that considerable violence and terrorism that is directly attributable to statesor their militaries is also excluded. And the requirement that the act have a direct political, economic,religious or social goal means that ordinary criminal violence is excluded. Thus, the GTD excludes state terrorism and many types of crime and genocide, topics that are important and complex enough to warrant their own separate analysis.
But it doesn't make me feel any better knowing there is a law that one can be locked up by the military without due process of law for being suspected of terrorism.
LINK
I would like to hear someones thougths on the report, I don't think it got much if any attention except for some, uh questionable websites.
Extreme Right-Wing : groups that subscribe to aspects of the following ideals: they are fiercelynationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty (especially their right to own guns, be free of taxes), believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/orpersonal liberty and a belief that ones personal and/or national way of life is under attack and iseither already lost or that the threat is imminent (sometimes such beliefs are amorphous andvague, but for some the threat is from a specific ethnic, racial, or religious group), and a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism. (2011: 26)
Sure their definition of terrorism is this:
TerrorismThe definition of terrorism used by the GTD is:the threatened or actual use of illegal force, directedagainst civilian targets, by non-state actors, in order to attain a political, economic, religious or social goal,through fear, coercion or intimidation.3It is important to note that the classification of an event as terrorism depends as much on threats as the actual use of violence. For example, instances in whichindividuals seize an aircraft and threaten to blow it up unless their demands are met are defined as terrorist events. Note also that by specifying the threatened or actual use of force the definition of terrorism used by the GTD excludes hoaxes. The requirement that these events be limited to the actionsof non-state actors means that considerable violence and terrorism that is directly attributable to statesor their militaries is also excluded. And the requirement that the act have a direct political, economic,religious or social goal means that ordinary criminal violence is excluded. Thus, the GTD excludes state terrorism and many types of crime and genocide, topics that are important and complex enough to warrant their own separate analysis.
But it doesn't make me feel any better knowing there is a law that one can be locked up by the military without due process of law for being suspected of terrorism.
LINK
I would like to hear someones thougths on the report, I don't think it got much if any attention except for some, uh questionable websites.
