Terrorist attempts to burn down clinic

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by it5five, Jul 1, 2007.

  1. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #1
    http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070630/NEWS/70630003/1001

    This guy tried to burn down a woman's clinic on the incorrect assumption that they perform abortions there.

    But here's what really bothers me: He only got 5 years in prison.

    What this guy did is no different from what some Islam extremists do, except its the Muslims labeled as terrorists and not the Christian. Can someone explain what makes this case different from a car bomb?

    If the religious right-wing weren't complete hypocrites, this guy would be locked up in Guantanamo for years without a trial.
     
  2. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #2
    Well, far be it from me to argue anybody goes to Gitmo. This should be made a fuss over. If this guy is worthy of a trial, every terrorist is.
     
  3. it5five thread starter macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    I agree, nobody should be sent to Gitmo, I was only using that as an example of a reaction that a right-winger would have toward a "terrorist".
     
  4. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #4

    Is this another thread about the defininition of the word "terrorist"? Because there is a fine line between terrorist and idiot. This guy got five years for attempted arson. The article says he drove the car into the the lobby then tried to light a gatorade bottle filled with gasoline at 4:30am. No one was there. So his intent, while stupid, was to inhibit abortions, not to kill anyone.

    You're take on this situation is interesting. Only you have called this guy a terrorist. And you've blamed the "religious right-wing" for his sentence. If he had tried to burn down a taco bell he would have gotten the same 5 years.

    Aren't liberals supposed to see the many subtle levels of grey in situations?

    It seems this guy is more idiot then terrorist.
     
  5. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #5
    The Department of Homeland Security labelled the Animal Liberation Front as terrorists, yet they only target property and have to date killed no-one. How is this different to what it5five is describing?
     
  6. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #6
    How many have been arrested for having thoughts or plans to bomb something? Many. I mean I could go to jail for a long time if cops found plans to make a bomb and a schematic for a large building in my possession, regardless of whether or not I could pull off the plans or if I was going to do it when there were people there or not. Where's the grey area there?
     
  7. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #7
    I'm not sure. But the ALF has covert cells in 35 countries and routinely sabotages facilities that are involved in animal testing. The arsonist didn't say he was part of any international organization. He seems to be working alone. When do criminals become terrorists?
     
  8. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #8
    Covert cells in 35 countries,source please.
     
  9. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #9
    When they get denied rights to a fair trial?
     
  10. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #10
    Actually you could have plans to make bombs or anything illegal. You could get arrested when you start aquiring ingredients to make it.

    Like those guys who were planning to kill G.I.s and blow up Fort Dix. They got arrested when they started down a path and reached the point where the FBI considered the completion of the plan imminent.
     
  11. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #11
  12. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #12
    No. Criminals usually commit acts to serve themselves, terrorists usually commit acts to serve an ideology and/or political movement.

    You could argue both ways with the case in question if you consider the above statement true.
     
  13. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #13
    From that article it appears someone at biteback claims there are covert cells in 35 countries.At the very best this is very dubious, how any evidence could be found of covert groups with-in a devolved and leaderless group is beyond my understanding.
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #14
    The "shoe bomber" was obviously not on the A-team, and he didn't succeed. Does that mean his sentence should be lighter? What about the attempted car bombers in London this past week -- should they not be seen as terrorists because they weren't smart enough to get the cars to explode?
     
  15. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #15
    Thats a good point but those events that you named are pretty high profile eventhough they didn't succeed. Anything to do with a plane or airport in the wake of 9/11 usually has steep penalties attached to it. However my point was not that he wasn't a terrorist because his fire didn't start or his plan didn't succeed, it was if he could be considered a terrorist at all.
     
  16. it5five thread starter macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #16
    Wait, so just because the recent London car bombs are high profile makes them terrorist attacks?

    Are they still terrorists even after we know the bombs would have not hurt anybody.

    So are the london car bombers still terrorists, or just idiots now?
     
  17. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #17
    @it5five

    Well he did apologise.

    But seriously each case is taken on it's merits. It's a good thing we don't have sentencing by forums eh.

    Look at the disparity in sentences for murder. You could argue that murder is murder, but the law always sentences by looking at 'worst case scenarios' and while this is bad it's far from a 'worst case'. It would appear that at 4.30 am his intention was to destroy property rather than deliberately kill people.

    I'm more jazzed off with drunk and disqualified drivers who kill people and get a few years. The law can be an ass.
     
  18. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
  19. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #19
    Or in the case of the burning guy rolling around on granite at Glaswege airport, red. But white people like Richard Reid, can be in this one too. That's the beauty of democracy, anyone can be a terrorist. Don't forget the unabomber (white) and the other guys who tried to bomb the former wtc carpark. <rolls eyes>
     
  20. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #20
    I see no two-way argument. The attack on the clinic was motivated by an ideology, therefore the man in question was a terrorist. So why only five years?
     
  21. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #21
    so if a muslim militant drove his suv into a airport and tried to set it on fire at 4:30 am, in an area where noone was working at the moment, you think he wouldn't be labelled a terrorist?
    make at least an attempt at objectivity. jeesh.
     
  22. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #22
    Aye, there's the rub, they wouldn't do it when there was no one there, that's why they're terrorists, Palestinian sewercide bombers don't go into empty cafés, pizza shops, or vacant school busses. Guess why? <rolls eyes>

    The English language is possibly the most vibrant language on the planet and words keep subtly changing. In the the old days people could have a gay old time watching The Flintstones. Nevertheless 'terrorist' still has a fairly literal meaning. To create a feeling of widespread terror and unease, not by threats but by lots of blood and guts, usually extremely violent and indescriminate. And especially using human imbeciles as a 'smart' weapon. So there needs to be some sort of organised deliberate pattern. I think this is what we mean when we talk of terrorism today.
     
  23. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #23
    You think that's changed? I just thought they were subtly referring to what went on at the Water Buffaloes Lodge :D
     
  24. princealfie macrumors 68030

    princealfie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Salt Lake City UT
    #24
    Okay, so what does that make brown rice then?
     
  25. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #25
    Good to see our argy bargy hasn't dimmed your sense of humour :)

    Er...terrorble?, Actually that's the only rice I eat.
     

Share This Page