Green Mtn
location: Observing the Progressive madness with considerably less amusement.
listening to: Grandchildren, the best reason for saving the future.
registered: 2004.04.03
posts: 2617
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
Certainly the meanings of words are modified over the course of time by publishers. Recent examples are escaping me but there have been many words dropped and added(annually) to dictionary's in recent years due to PC reasoning. I can tell you the Scrabble dictionary went through some drastic changes a couple of years ago. Made it much less colorful! Those 3 & 4 letter derogatory terms are missed.
Personally, I don't believe the notion of the dumbing down of america can be disproved. Just last week Paul Harvey announced on his noon time broadcast how that educationally the US of A brought up the rear among industrialized nations again. Certainly the trends since the Grace Commission have only worsened. (Have I got the right name? Wasn't it the Grace Commission the big state of education report from about '81. More money pissed away without result or accountablility).
The New Century Dictinary copyrights =1927-52
Terrorist, n. One who uses or favors terrorizing methods; specif., an agent or partizan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France; in Russia, formerly, a member of a political party aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror(cf. nihilism)
capital 1 n. latin. The head, of uppermost part , of a column, pillar, etc.
capital 2 [OF. F. capital, < L. capitalis, pertaining to the head or to life, chief (as n., ML. capitale, wealth, stock, < caput, head.] 1. a. Pertaining to the head or top; involving the loss of the head or life, as punishment; punishable by death, as a crime; fatal or serious, as an error; of letters, of the large size regularly used at the head or beginning of a sentence, or as the first letter of a proper name; of a city, town, etc., chief, esp, as being the official seat of government of a country, state, etc.; also, any form of wealth emmployed or capable of being employed in the porduction of more wealth;....
Capitol n, [L. Capitolium, < caput, head.] The ancient temple of Jupiter at Rome, situated on a summit of the Capitoline Hill; the hill itself; in the U.S., the edifice occupied by Congress at Washington(see cut on following page); also [often l. c.], a state-house.--Capitoline (-to-lin), a. [L. Capitolinus.] Of or pertaining to the Capitol at Rome, the hill on which it stood, or the god Jupiter(of whose worship the Capitol was the seat).
Seems both spellings are derived from the same latin root Kent.
2004 Britannica
Definitions of terrorism
Definitions of terrorism are usually complex and controversial, and, because of the inherent ferocity and violence of terrorism, the term in its popular usage has developed an intense stigma. It was first coined in the 1790s to refer to the terror used during the French Revolution by the revolutionaries against their opponents. The Jacobin party of Maximilien Robespierre carried out a Reign of Terror involving mass executions by the guillotine. Although terrorism in this usage implies an act of violence by a state against itsdomestic enemies, since the 20th century the term has been appliedmost frequently to violence aimed, either directly or indirectly, at governments in an effort to influence policy or topple an existing regime.
Terrorism is not legally defined in all jurisdictions; the statutes that do exist, however, generally share some common elements. Terrorism involves the use or threat of violence and seeks to create fear, not just within the direct victims but among a wide audience. The degree to which it relies on fear distinguishes terrorism from both conventional and guerrilla warfare. Although conventional military forces invariably engage in psychological warfare against theenemy, their principal means of victory is strength of arms. Similarly, guerrilla forces, which often rely on acts of terror and other forms of propaganda, aim at military victory and occasionally succeed (e.g., the Viet Cong in Vietnam and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia). Terrorism proper is thus the systematic use of violence to generate fear, and thereby to achieve political goals, when direct military victory is not possible. This has led some social scientists to refer to guerrilla warfare as the “weapon of the weak” and terrorism as the “weapon of the weakest.”
In order to attract and maintain the publicity necessary to generate widespread fear, terrorists must engage in increasingly dramatic, violent, and high-profile attacks. These have included hijackings, hostage takings, kidnappings, car bombings, and, frequently, suicide bombings. Although apparently random, the victims and locations of terrorist attacks often are carefully selected for their shock value. Schools, shopping centres, bus and train stations, and restaurants and nightclubs have been targeted both because they attract large crowds and because they are places with which members of the civilian population are familiar and in which they feelat ease. The goal of terrorism generally is to destroy the public's sense of security in the places most familiar to them. Major targets sometimes also include buildings or other locations that are important economic or political symbols, such as embassies or military installations. The hope of the terrorist is that the sense of terror these acts engender will induce the population to pressure political leaders toward a specific political end.
Some definitions treat all acts of terrorism, regardless of their political motivations, as simple criminal activity. For example, in the United States the standard definition used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) describes terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The element of criminality, however, is problematic, because it does not distinguish among different political and legal systems and thus cannot account for cases in which violent attacks against a government may be legitimate. A frequently mentioned example is the African National Congress (ANC) of South Africa, which committed violent actions against that country's apartheid government but commanded broad sympathy throughout the world. Another example is the Resistance movement against the Nazi occupation of France during World War II.
Since the 20th century, ideology and political opportunism have led anumber of countries to engage in transnational terrorism, often under the guise of supporting movements of national liberation. (Hence, it became a common saying that “One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.”) The distinction between terrorism and other forms of political violence became blurred—particularly asmany guerrilla groups often employed terrorist tactics—and issues of jurisdiction and legality were similarly obscured.
These problems have led some social scientists to adopt a definitionof terrorism based not on criminality but on the fact that the victims of terrorist violence are most often innocent civilians. For example, the U.S. government eventually accepted the view that terrorism was premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets. Even this definition is flexible, however, and on occasion it has been expanded to include various other factors, such as that terrorist acts are clandestine or surreptitious, that terrorists choose their victims randomly, and that terrorist acts are intended to create an overwhelming sense of fear.
In the late 20th century, the term ecoterrorism was used to describe acts of environmental destruction committed in order to further a political goal or as an act of war, such as the burning of Kuwaiti oil wells by the Iraqi army during the Persian Gulf War. The term also was applied to certain environmentally benign though criminal acts, such as the spiking of lumber trees, intended to disrupt or prevent activities allegedly harmful to the environment.
Types of Terrorism (I will post the remainder of the article if anyone is interested)
Although I found Kent's citations of interest and evolving, I don't believe Kent gave you a definition from the 1800's.
I recently obtained a reproduction of the original Websters Dictionary from the 1800's, on CD. Once I get it operational, which I haven't been able to as yet since it is windows only and I'm an Apple user, I will look up terrorist and let ya know what that says.
Nonetheless, it is obvious you and Kent don't care for each other Dan. Don't know why, don't care, but the venom is plaind. Particularly on your part this time Kent. But somebody threw out 'Spaz' too, I recall. Is that still a popular middle school slam?
Anyhow, this time, I'd say Kent picked the fight.
Take a break fella's and listen to Blues Travelers, 100 Years, and then come out typin'.-)
Be well Gents, gotta go work.
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
G
Green Mtn
(view)
Certainly the meanings of words are modified over the course of time by publishers. Recent examples are escaping me but there have been many words dropped and added(annually) to dictionary's in recent years due to PC reasoning. I can tell you the Scrabble dictionary went through some drastic changes a couple of years ago. Made it much less colorful! Those 3 & 4 letter derogatory terms are missed.
Personally, I don't believe the notion of the dumbing down of america can be disproved. Just last week Paul Harvey announced on his noon time broadcast how that educationally the US of A brought up the rear among industrialized nations again. Certainly the trends since the Grace Commission have only worsened. (Have I got the right name? Wasn't it the Grace Commission the big state of education report from about '81. More money pissed away without result or accountablility).
The New Century Dictinary copyrights =1927-52
Terrorist, n. One who uses or favors terrorizing methods; specif., an agent or partizan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France; in Russia, formerly, a member of a political party aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror(cf. nihilism)
capital 1 n. latin. The head, of uppermost part , of a column, pillar, etc.
capital 2 [OF. F. capital, < L. capitalis, pertaining to the head or to life, chief (as n., ML. capitale, wealth, stock, < caput, head.] 1. a. Pertaining to the head or top; involving the loss of the head or life, as punishment; punishable by death, as a crime; fatal or serious, as an error; of letters, of the large size regularly used at the head or beginning of a sentence, or as the first letter of a proper name; of a city, town, etc., chief, esp, as being the official seat of government of a country, state, etc.; also, any form of wealth emmployed or capable of being employed in the porduction of more wealth;....
Capitol n, [L. Capitolium, < caput, head.] The ancient temple of Jupiter at Rome, situated on a summit of the Capitoline Hill; the hill itself; in the U.S., the edifice occupied by Congress at Washington(see cut on following page); also [often l. c.], a state-house.--Capitoline (-to-lin), a. [L. Capitolinus.] Of or pertaining to the Capitol at Rome, the hill on which it stood, or the god Jupiter(of whose worship the Capitol was the seat).
Seems both spellings are derived from the same latin root Kent.
2004 Britannica
Definitions of terrorism
Definitions of terrorism are usually complex and controversial, and, because of the inherent ferocity and violence of terrorism, the term in its popular usage has developed an intense stigma. It was first coined in the 1790s to refer to the terror used during the French Revolution by the revolutionaries against their opponents. The Jacobin party of Maximilien Robespierre carried out a Reign of Terror involving mass executions by the guillotine. Although terrorism in this usage implies an act of violence by a state against itsdomestic enemies, since the 20th century the term has been appliedmost frequently to violence aimed, either directly or indirectly, at governments in an effort to influence policy or topple an existing regime.
Terrorism is not legally defined in all jurisdictions; the statutes that do exist, however, generally share some common elements. Terrorism involves the use or threat of violence and seeks to create fear, not just within the direct victims but among a wide audience. The degree to which it relies on fear distinguishes terrorism from both conventional and guerrilla warfare. Although conventional military forces invariably engage in psychological warfare against theenemy, their principal means of victory is strength of arms. Similarly, guerrilla forces, which often rely on acts of terror and other forms of propaganda, aim at military victory and occasionally succeed (e.g., the Viet Cong in Vietnam and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia). Terrorism proper is thus the systematic use of violence to generate fear, and thereby to achieve political goals, when direct military victory is not possible. This has led some social scientists to refer to guerrilla warfare as the “weapon of the weak” and terrorism as the “weapon of the weakest.”
In order to attract and maintain the publicity necessary to generate widespread fear, terrorists must engage in increasingly dramatic, violent, and high-profile attacks. These have included hijackings, hostage takings, kidnappings, car bombings, and, frequently, suicide bombings. Although apparently random, the victims and locations of terrorist attacks often are carefully selected for their shock value. Schools, shopping centres, bus and train stations, and restaurants and nightclubs have been targeted both because they attract large crowds and because they are places with which members of the civilian population are familiar and in which they feelat ease. The goal of terrorism generally is to destroy the public's sense of security in the places most familiar to them. Major targets sometimes also include buildings or other locations that are important economic or political symbols, such as embassies or military installations. The hope of the terrorist is that the sense of terror these acts engender will induce the population to pressure political leaders toward a specific political end.
Some definitions treat all acts of terrorism, regardless of their political motivations, as simple criminal activity. For example, in the United States the standard definition used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) describes terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The element of criminality, however, is problematic, because it does not distinguish among different political and legal systems and thus cannot account for cases in which violent attacks against a government may be legitimate. A frequently mentioned example is the African National Congress (ANC) of South Africa, which committed violent actions against that country's apartheid government but commanded broad sympathy throughout the world. Another example is the Resistance movement against the Nazi occupation of France during World War II.
Since the 20th century, ideology and political opportunism have led anumber of countries to engage in transnational terrorism, often under the guise of supporting movements of national liberation. (Hence, it became a common saying that “One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.”) The distinction between terrorism and other forms of political violence became blurred—particularly asmany guerrilla groups often employed terrorist tactics—and issues of jurisdiction and legality were similarly obscured.
These problems have led some social scientists to adopt a definitionof terrorism based not on criminality but on the fact that the victims of terrorist violence are most often innocent civilians. For example, the U.S. government eventually accepted the view that terrorism was premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets. Even this definition is flexible, however, and on occasion it has been expanded to include various other factors, such as that terrorist acts are clandestine or surreptitious, that terrorists choose their victims randomly, and that terrorist acts are intended to create an overwhelming sense of fear.
In the late 20th century, the term ecoterrorism was used to describe acts of environmental destruction committed in order to further a political goal or as an act of war, such as the burning of Kuwaiti oil wells by the Iraqi army during the Persian Gulf War. The term also was applied to certain environmentally benign though criminal acts, such as the spiking of lumber trees, intended to disrupt or prevent activities allegedly harmful to the environment.
Types of Terrorism (I will post the remainder of the article if anyone is interested)
Although I found Kent's citations of interest and evolving, I don't believe Kent gave you a definition from the 1800's.
I recently obtained a reproduction of the original Websters Dictionary from the 1800's, on CD. Once I get it operational, which I haven't been able to as yet since it is windows only and I'm an Apple user, I will look up terrorist and let ya know what that says.
Nonetheless, it is obvious you and Kent don't care for each other Dan. Don't know why, don't care, but the venom is plaind. Particularly on your part this time Kent. But somebody threw out 'Spaz' too, I recall. Is that still a popular middle school slam?
Anyhow, this time, I'd say Kent picked the fight.
Take a break fella's and listen to Blues Travelers, 100 Years, and then come out typin'.-)
Be well Gents, gotta go work.
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
