I especially like this reasoning: "Additionally the disclosure, or threat of disclosure, is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism..." (from the "Ports Circulation Sheet" document cited in the article.)
By this token, any kind of lobbying is also terrorism. Hell, any kind of activism in a political space "is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause".
Seems like a perfect illustration of the kind of slippery slope the world is on.
This article seems to also parallel well with the Russian detention of a Greenpeace ship and charging crew with piracy: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-02/piracy-charges-against.... Effectively, "it's piracy because we say so", just like "it's terrorism because we say so" logic in the "Ports Circulation Sheet" document.
By this token, any kind of lobbying is also terrorism. Hell, any kind of activism in a political space "is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause".
Seems like a perfect illustration of the kind of slippery slope the world is on.
This article seems to also parallel well with the Russian detention of a Greenpeace ship and charging crew with piracy: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-02/piracy-charges-against.... Effectively, "it's piracy because we say so", just like "it's terrorism because we say so" logic in the "Ports Circulation Sheet" document.