# No Bodily Harm (or threat thereof), No Terrorism **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 19, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590 "2004-12-19T02:20:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/1 "2004-12-19T02:20:27Z")
I would have continued this in the [original thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=292503), but **DtC** characterized it as a sidetrack so I’ll continue it here, because I think it’s an interesting topic. It may be more of a GD; however, what starts in the Pit stays in the Pit. 😃 To put things in context: > [@Metacom](#): > > So are you saying that the ALF and the ELF aren’t terrorist groups ([note that the FBI considers both to be domestic terrorists](http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/jarboe021202.htm))? Or are you saying that financially supporting terrorist groups doesn’t mean you’re affiliated with them? > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The FBI can suck my cock. I don’t consider them to be terrorist groups. Have they ever killed anybody? > [@Metacom](#): > > Would it be fair to say that you believe that bodily harm to a human is a necessary prerequisite for an act to be terrorism? > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Either bodily harm or a threat of bodily harm, yes. I now reply: Would you then acknowledge that your personal definition of “terrorism” seems to differ from that of the world at large? The American Heritage Dictionary defines it thus: > [@](#): > > The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or **property** with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. The distinguishing feature of terrorism is not that it hurts someone’s physical body, but that it uses physical coercion as a means to instill fear in order to influence something. If I were, say, a logger, the threat of having my equipment destroyed and my offices burned down–and thus having my livelyhood taken from me–would be just as powerful as a threat to my person. Why must human bodies be involved for an act to be terrorism, when be nearly any measure violence against property can be just as harmful (with the exception of flat-out killing someone)? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/2 "2004-12-19T02:25:33Z")
I think of terror as _physical_ terror. As literal fear for one’s life. Not annoyance at having a coat ruined. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/3 "2004-12-19T02:35:16Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I think of terror as _physical_ terror. As literal fear for one’s life. Not annoyance at having a coat ruined. “Having a coat ruined” is not what I’m talking about when I speak of terrorist acts involving property. A fur coat typically isn’t a major part of a normal person’s identity nor is it an item necessary for their livelyhood. Workplaces, valuable tools, and homes, on the other hand, frequently _are_ an important part of a persons identity or necessary to their livelyhood. Likewise, I think that destroying someone’s home or worksite (e.g., the ALF destroying a labratory or the ELF destroying a builder’s construction site) _is_ terrorism. If I depended on construction to support my family–to pay for health care, food, shelter, and other necessities–then harm to that which I build would ultimately have the same effect as harm to my person: I would no longer be able to provide for myself or my family or to function in society. The emotions I feel (terror) would not be that different. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/4 "2004-12-19T02:37:12Z")
It’s criminal but it doesn’t constitute an infliction of physical terror. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/5 "2004-12-19T02:55:37Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > It’s criminal but it doesn’t constitute an infliction of physical terror. I don’t believe I’ve heard the phrase “physical terror,” at least when used in a discussion of what constitutes terrorism. Is this an established phrase (not that it’s wrong if it isn’t, I just don’t want to be arguing against a definition the rest of the world regards as correct…)? To go back to the question I asked in my OP: Would you then acknowledge that your personal definition of “terrorism” seems to differ from that of the world at large? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/6 "2004-12-19T02:57:51Z")
No. I think most of the world at large associates the term with physical violence. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/7 "2004-12-19T03:11:43Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > physical violence. “Physical violence” is a rather redundant phrase, don’t you think? ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/8 "2004-12-19T03:15:24Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > “Physical violence” is a rather redundant phrase, don’t you think? (That was a bit too snarky–sorry. I assume you meant “violent acts against human bodies”?) ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/9 "2004-12-19T03:18:38Z")
While I think physical (bodily) violence is the first thought that comes to mind when the word “terrorists” is mentioned, I don’t think it’s exclusively that. When I think “eco-terrorists” I think of people burning buildings, destroying property, etc., to protest or make a political statement. Note that the word “terrorists” is in that term. Once people start doing significant damage for political protest or to “send a message,” they start to fit the “Terrorist” definition. However, my personal definition would mean _significant_ damage. A little bit of splattered paint probably wouldn’t be enough. Burning down someone’s house or their office building, however, would. You’re seriously screwing up someone when you do that, and even though you might not _mean_ to cause bodily harm, you definitely risk it (someone might be in the building that you didn’t know about, someone might be harmed trying to put the fire out, etc.). So no, I don’t think that “terrorist” _must_ mean doing physical bodily harm. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/10 "2004-12-19T04:04:09Z")
Yeah, I’d say that if a group were to go around painting people’s clothes red, _in order to frighten people into a certain act or lack thereof_, are engaging in terrorism. They’re engendering fear (fear of having one’s property defaced,) in order to score political gains. Now, whether that means it’s important enough to lock 'em up in Gitmo for a decade, well, no, just because it’s terrorism doesn’t mean it’s the end of the world. ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/11 "2004-12-19T04:05:18Z")
Yeah I agree (I mean with Metacom and yosemite). I don’t think the hallmark of terrorism is physical violence. It’s fear. And the use thereof. If someone threated to…say…unlease a computer virus that would disable every computer sytem in the country if they’re demands are not met, that’s a terrorist act. I think the question of whether ALF or ELF are terrorists is…are they performing acts of vandalism in to destroy the specific tools etc. so they can’t be used? Or are they trying to instill fear? If the later, they’re terrorists. By definition. Of course we could just solve the whole porblem by calling them freedom fighters. ---
**Author:** ![danceswithcats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9e8a1a/32.png) [@danceswithcats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/danceswithcats)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/12 "2004-12-19T04:28:43Z")
So in your opinion **Dio** it’s no hurt and no foul to start a fire, plant an incendiary device or otherwise destroy property, correct? That is a valid definition, because we all know that when things burn or blow up, cops, firefighters, and other people don’t respond, and therefore can’t possibly be hurt or killed as a result of this social expression. All the death and injury reports put out by the NFPA and FOP are resultant from benign incidents. Yeh. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/13 "2004-12-19T04:35:05Z")
I didn’t say it was “no foul,” I just said it wasn’t terrorism. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/14 "2004-12-19T04:37:18Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I didn’t say it was “no foul,” I just said it wasn’t terrorism. Even when they’re done with the intent of instilling an intense, overpowering fear in order to coerce someone? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/15 "2004-12-19T04:42:16Z")
I don’t think they’re trying to instill physical fear, just to sabotage equipment. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/16 "2004-12-19T04:49:27Z")
If someone threatened to burn down my house in hopes of coercing me to do something, I’d be pretty terrified. If someone did that to me, they’d be doing it to _instill fear_ in me, and you know what? It would work—it _would_ instill fear in me. Why else would they be doing it? ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/17 "2004-12-19T04:53:14Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I don’t think they’re trying to instill physical fear, just to sabotage equipment. We’re not discussing specific cases, we’re discussing terrorism in general. If they _were_ trying to instill fear, would it be terrorism? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/18 "2004-12-19T04:58:35Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > We’re not discussing specific cases, we’re discussing terrorism in general. If they _were_ trying to instill fear, would it be terrorism? If they were trying to install a physical fear of bodily harm, then yes I would consider that a threat and I would call it terrorism. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/19 "2004-12-19T05:04:14Z")
If they were trying to terrify me by threatening to burn down my house (and having no house would seriously screw me over, so I _would_ be pretty scared), would that be terrorism? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2004, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590/20 "2004-12-19T05:12:58Z")
Of course. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-bodily-harm-or-threat-thereof-no-terrorism/280590.md?page=2)