California’s Anti-Terrorism Center Can’t Define Terror!

The spokesperson for the California Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Center – a state agency – can’t define “terrorism.” But the center did feel justified in implying to the Oakland Police that the April 7 Oakland Port protests would involve terrorist activity – most likely encouraging the OPD to fire shotguns and throw grenades at the peaceful protest.

When asked to define terrorism, spokesman Mike Van Winkle said, “I’m not sure where to go with that.” But he was able to draw coherent, logical conclusions about terror: “You can make an easy kind of a link that, if you have a protest group protesting a war where the cause that’s being fought against is international terrorism, you might have terrorism at that (protest). You can almost argue that a protest against that is a terrorist act.”

He continued: “I’ve heard terrorism described as anything that is violent or has an economic impact, and shutting down a port certainly would have an economic impact.”

We here at Slingshot hope this guy (and the whole agency) gets removed for these comments — although we aren’t holding our breath. According to this logic, any labor strike would be “terrorism” because it would have an “economic impact.” Or how about a boycott against, say, non-dolphin safe tuna. Actually, pretty much any act — other than going to work — would be terrorism. Like perhaps, smoking pot, or calling in late for work so you can have sex again. Economic impact, you know. Haul ‘em off to Guantanamo.