Paul Prescod:
> I would say that states cannot directly engage in terrorism. States
> directly engage either in war (if with another state) or brutality (if
> with their own citizens). Anyhow, it is neither here nor there.
> ...
States cannot directly engage in terrorism only if one defines terrorism as a non-State activity. Otherwise, they do the same things terrorists do, for the same purposes. The difference is (1) states do the things much more effectively and continuously, and (2) many people legitimate or condone in states, or in some states, what they condemn elsewhere. As far as I'm concerned, "State terror" is redundant and the legitimation of State actions is a serious political problem.
-- Gordon