News

I think Luigi if guilty was making a commercial statement. He allegedly attacked the health fund with the highest rate of claim denials with bullets marked with a statement about how they don't serve their customers fairly

Hey, you know what, I wanted to go check my own bias here. It looks like I use the late 20th century and the contemporary definition of "terrorism", with a mental angle, apparently. Fascinating that the definition apparently shifts over time.

Used GPT to look up the etymology over history for that. (So the obvious grain of salt, but usually definition lookups are fairly straightforward.)

• 18th Century: It referred to the use of violence by a government to instill fear and maintain control.
• 19th Century: The use of violence by non-state actors to overthrow governments or achieve political aims.
• Early 20th Century: Violent acts, often targeting military or symbolic sites, conducted by groups seeking self-determination.
• Mid 20th Century: Cold War Era: Acts of violence committed by both state-sponsored groups and non-state actors aimed at political subversion.
• Late 20th Century: Violence targeting non-combatants, often involving hostage-taking, plane hijackings, or bombings.
• Post-9/11: The use or threat of violence by non-state actors to instill fear, coerce governments, and advance political, religious, or ideological goals.
• Contemporary: Violence aimed at civilians to intimidate or coerce for political, ideological, or religious purposes.

The angle part is, CEOs aren't civilians based on how the government treats them, how they are trumping up charges that a true civilian would never see happen, and how they always seem to escape the law unless they are caught doing tax evasion. They, like the three branches of Federal government, and movie stars, get to live well outside the laws that we mere peasants have to follow.

Not trying to be contrarian either, I agree, it was likely a political statement through the use of violence.