

The Frightening New Definition of Terrorism - sinak
http://sina.is/redefining-terrorism/

======
barking
This is a definition from the London Metropolitan Police. I'd rather see a
definition from a UK statute or a UK court decision. The police don't make the
law.

~~~
youngtaff
Here's the relevant section of 2000 Terrorism Act in the UK - the police
appear to be just using text from that

[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1)

------
Theodores
You might want to have a look at who 'they' thought the terrorists were before
9/11:

[http://web.archive.org/web/20010611142635/http://www.fbi.gov...](http://web.archive.org/web/20010611142635/http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress01/freeh051001.htm)

Note how all the terrorist incidents of 1999 were by animal rights save the
world types. Al-Qaeda gets a mention but it seems that the feds were annoyed
by the 1999 'Seattle Riots' that went with the ruling elite meeting that went
on there for some three-letter-acronymed body (IMF, WTO, who cares).

The Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) was introduced into the UK when terrorism wasn't
widely regarded as a problem. However activities by the likes of Reclaim The
Streets were a problem, hence the need for legislation that was so broad that
domestic dissent could be criminalised as 'terrorism'. With the Miranda
incident they had all the legislation they needed.

