Defining Libertarianism (was Defining Terrorism)

James Noble noblejames at
Thu Jun 27 07:56:04 MDT 2013

> > We've declared (well at least I have, and since I saw no disagreement I
> > think we all concur) that the US government is a state sponsor of
> I guess the point of my "defining terrorism" thread was missed.  The
> US government is not a state sponsor of terrorism.  It is certainly
> not a shining example of morality, but it's not sponsoring terrorism
> either.  Anyone who thinks it is has an overly broad definition of
> terror, or (worse) has been listening to Chomsky.
> -Dan

How do drones affect your opinion on if the state sponsors terrorism. A
while ago I watched a segment where the reporter said that the victims knew
the drones were flying over several times a day. Generally they do nothing
but occasionally there is sufficient evidence to blow up a building in an
attempt to kill some high ranking person. Now I don't know anything about
the drones. What I do know is for a long time the government said they
weren't killing civilians. Yet it seems every time they announced killing
someone the "bad guys" spoke of the civilian casualties. Just recently
Obama said something to the effect that they were going to be more careful
and only use the drones when the target was an imminent threat. From my
perspective that is an admission that the drones were being over used. That
they were killing civilians and lying to the American public about it. That
sounds to me like terrorism. Now for a minute imagine if we had drones
flying overhead and occasionally the done would destroy a cafe or some
other building. How many people in this country would advocate going to

More information about the PLUG mailing list