They were talking about this on CNN earlier. The definition seems pretty sketchy at best. Osama bin Laden, no brainer. I would probably lean toward a more liberal usage of the word. Here is the FBI's own definition:
Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code
18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "international terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism”:
"International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:
Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.
The other issue is the choice to fly over Ukrainian airspace. While I don't blame the pilots or the airline, they were going through an area that was dangerous. Supposedly they were up high enough that they would have been safe, but as one of the guest said 32,000 feet was the minimum requirement, the pilot actually asked for 35,000 and was told no. Now why they were told no and whether it would have made a difference are questions that needs to be asked.
= new reply since forum marked as read
