The same thing the guy that shot Dr. Tiller believed. Both of them should be prosecuted as domestic terrorists.

The thing that gets me about this is that he murdered a second man, and was hunting for a third, and the second man was not involved in the anti-abortion stuff. Apparently the first victim was displaying those horrifying dead baby posters in front of the high school, and that set this ******* off.

I too weep for our species.

Why should they be prosecuted as domestic terrorists?

Politically or religiously motivated violence like this is terrorism. It's no different than a suicide bomber or Tim McVeigh, other than scale.

Well, then at least one of them is a terrorist, by that definition. Putting a gun to someone's head in the middle of church and pulling the trigger would seem to qualify as an attempt to change government policy or public opinion through the deliberate creation of fear.

And it worked - the clinic closed after Dr. Tiller's death, leaving only one clinic in the country where a woman can have a late term abortion, regardless of medical necessity. The others have all been scared into not performing the procedures anymore.

The motives of this most recent shooting aren't entirely clear, but I'm pretty comfortable with the assumption that the act was intended to have an effect above and beyond the murder.

You tried this tactic in the thread about Dr Tiller's death, and it didn't fly then either.

His clinic didn't close because of the "deliberate creation of fear." it closed because no one else wanted to do his late term abortions.

"I completely understand and sympathize with this decision," he said in a statement. "I am currently exploring every option to be able to continue to make second and early medically indicated third trimester abortions available."

I don't consider any murder a terrorist act just because the person killed had opposing beliefs to the person comitting the murder.

Wait a minute...Late Term Abortions are still legal? I thought those were banned?

Well, then at least one of them is a terrorist, by that definition. Putting a gun to someone's head in the middle of church and pulling the trigger would seem to qualify as an attempt to change government policy or public opinion through the deliberate creation of fear.

And it worked - the clinic closed after Dr. Tiller's death, leaving only one clinic in the country where a woman can have a late term abortion, regardless of medical necessity. The others have all been scared into not performing the procedures anymore.

The motives of this most recent shooting aren't entirely clear, but I'm pretty comfortable with the assumption that the act was intended to have an effect above and beyond the murder.

Roeder was associated with the Freemen, a militia group that does not recognize the government of the US to be legitimate, and considered himself a "sovereign citizen". He was pulled over for driving without a license plate, and officers found bomb making materials in his trunk. None of that leads me to conclude that it was just a lone crazy guy lashing out. It leads me to believe he had a radical agenda that involved violence. Now, he might also be a crazy guy, but that doesn't mean this wasn't terrorism.

So, when I look at a terrorist, I find some common themes.

1) association with an extremist, militant organization

2) religious or political zealotry

3) a violent act directed at their "enemy", be that the US, gay people, or in the case of Dr. Tiller, an abortion clinic.

4) The results of an act - fear, and change as a result of that fear.

Generally speaking such attacks are well planned. Roeder's attack, at least, qualifies. He knew when his victim would be vulnerable and in a public area, and he assasinated him there, in front of a crowd, in a horrific fashion.

Not at all. Terrorism is motivated by a desire to change government policy or public opinion through the deliberate creation of fear. Political or religious motivation does not, by itself, mean an act is terrorism.

He was also associated with the Army of God, a group that stems from the Feemen and other radical groups. The Army of God produced pamphlets on methods for attacking abortion clinics, and was responsible for a lot of the attacks and assassinations in the 80s.

Groups like the Freemen work as feeder groups for other right wing militants like the Army of God.

To be fair, in America, terrorism has traditionally (over the last 8 years) been defined as whatever the government decides is most convenient to be labelled terrorism.

So, twenty or more years ago. Being associated with a group and doing the same sorts of things it did twenty years ago isn't much of a case for terrorism or political agenda. It really indicates a lone nutcase angry that his group is no longer doing these things.

Do they? Have you got any intelligence information on these groups and how they "feed" each other?

Just because two groups are "right wing" does not mean they feed each other.

Just because a person has political views on the right does not mean they are religiously on the right, or that even if they are that it is to the same degree any more than being politically liberal makes one religiously liberal.

This is the case in Iraq as well. For example, not all Shiite insurgents are primarily religious. Some support extreme Shia religious dominance of society; others are political organizations that happen to be Shi'ite religiously.

Just because the government is doing something stupid doesn't mean we all should.

Tell that to those who went off about William Ayers. His group never killed anyone but themselves, and his long past association with radicalism meant that Barak Obama was a terrorist sympathizer.

You can go check out the Southern Poverty Law Center if you like, or read any number of books or articles on radical militia groups in the United States.

Can you explain where you got that from my post? Because I didn't argue that, and would not do so. It does not logically follow.

Groups like the Freemen work as feeder groups for other right wing militants like the Army of God.

Again, I am not understanding where in my post you managed to come up with that idea. I certainly didn't express it.

Sure, which is why I list politics and religion as common factors in terrorism.