> Here's mine: an act of terrorism is an attack designed to elicit a reaction massively disproportionate to the damage directly caused I see where you're comin

> Here's mine: an act of terrorism is an attack designed to elicit a reaction massively disproportionate to the damage directly caused I see where you're coming from, but I feel it's too subjective. The massively disproportionate action is not under the control of the terrorizer, but rather the publicist. The media really controls who we consider to be "terrorists", rather than any empirical metric. If we have counter-terrorist groups who just go after terrorists, shouldn't we define who terrorists are? We start using words like "cyber-terrorists", and now we're all included. I just find no value in the semantic classification of boogie men except for expansion of our police state.