My biggest problem with all of this is the criteria for application of the label, "terrorist." I seem to have heard something about surveillance of PETA because some members are more "active" than the mainstream. Now I happen to like the FLA "People Eating Tasty Animals," and I agree that some more "active" members may well border on "domestic terrorism" in their techniques.
But if this is a "War on Terror" that gives the administration its justification for these powers, we must be careful where the focus is placed. If we start lumping "PETA-terrorists" and "Environmental-terrorists" and "Monkey-wrenchers" into the same bucket as Al Quaeda, we really are well on the way to being a police stated. I'm not by any means sanctioning the activities of those like I've listed, that might be called "domestic terrorists," but I believe that they are a law enforcement problem, not a Problem of State, like Al Quaeda.
But if this is a "War on Terror" that gives the administration its justification for these powers, we must be careful where the focus is placed. If we start lumping "PETA-terrorists" and "Environmental-terrorists" and "Monkey-wrenchers" into the same bucket as Al Quaeda, we really are well on the way to being a police stated. I'm not by any means sanctioning the activities of those like I've listed, that might be called "domestic terrorists," but I believe that they are a law enforcement problem, not a Problem of State, like Al Quaeda.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/newsbriefs/88/363#363