You are here


Some interesting thoughts


I was just curious if you had and idea why the government has not pressed charges of "terrorism" against those responsible for 16/11 because if you look at the law that is spelt out in 2002 amendment of the Criminal Offences Act it literally spells out what happened on 16/11.

Here is a part of the amendment pasted below.

The full version is available online at -

Criminal Offences (Amendment) Act 2002

"78A Act of terrorism

Every person who does an act of terrorism or threatens to do or does an act preparatory to or to further an act of terrorism commits an offence and shall be liable upon conviction to imprisonment not exceeding 25 years.

Section 78B Criminal Offences (Amendment) Act 2002 No. 24 of 2002 Page 2 78B Act of terrorism" defined "Act of terrorism" means an act which -

(a) may seriously damage a country or an international organisation;

(b) is intended or can reasonably be regarded as having been intended to -

(i) seriously intimidate a population;

(ii) unduly compel a Government or an international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act; or

(iii) seriously destabilise or destroy the fundamental, political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation; and

(c) involves or causes -

(i) an attack upon a person's life which causes death;

(ii) an attack upon the physical integrity of a person;

(iii) the kidnapping of a person;

(iv) extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property, likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(v) the seizure of an aircraft, a ship or other means of public or goods transport;

(vi) the manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons as well as research into, and development of biological and chemical weapons;

(vii) the release of dangerous substances, or causing of fires, explosions or floods, the effect of which is to endanger human life; or

(viii) interference with or disruption of the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource, the effect of which is to endanger human life.

Why does government think that a criminal offense of terrorism did not happen on 16/11?

Because the supporters of 16/11 certainly did want to:

intimidate a population; compel the government to act a certain way; cause extensive destruction to Government and private property; cause extensive economic loss; destablise the political and social structure of the country;

I mean, it is mind boggling that they government or prosecutors do not believe they can prove all these things (terrorist acts) that is being described with all the tens of thousands of witnesses that saw it happen before their very eyes.

I'm speechless.


tauhopohopo [at] yahoo [dot] com