what's in a word?

[Paul Mackin]

This is the traditional meaning of the word, I always thought.

Non-terrorist gun killing may be the greater threat in one sense, but a
lesser one in another.  Fear can change people in bad ways, but THAT ship
has sailed.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:44 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> So, by this logic, the motive of the killer determines whether the
> violence is an act of terrorism.  Only if the intent is to instill a sense
> of danger/terror in the surviving populace would the act be properly called
> terroeism.
>
> David Morris
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "
>> As one friend pointed out, Paris is not actually any more dangerous than
>> before Nov. 13. What's changed, dramatically, is our perception of imminent
>> danger. And that makes all the psychological difference."
>>
>> And that's what makes it TERRORISM.
>>
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/12/03/does-motive-matter-in-mass-shootings-like-the-one-in-san-bernadino/even-in-paris-guns-look-like-a-greater-threat-than-terrorism
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20151204/b127dca2/attachment.html>