Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.
The old adage 'one man't terrorist is another man's freedom fighter' comes to mind.
Personally I draw the line at deliberately targeting innocent civilians.
Ariana Grande was not training soldiers in Manchester.
I have seldom heard a more succinct and still well thought out explanation. Both Mr. Lister and Hiltermann make a most important case for a review of those designation.
they are indeed counterproductive and misleading. As you say, where is the thin line between terrorism and freedom fight? The latest and totally irrational case being the PKK.(the Kurds have been used by all of their neighbours and Europe and the US) .
The MauMau were considered terrorists while they were fighting for their independance, so were Algeria and Tunisia’s freedom fighters.
If I were to list all the terrorist groups of Israel who killed and mauled for their independandce, as are Hamas and Hezbollah.
Afghanistan did not invite the British, the USSR nor the US. The latter got BinLaden to organise their attack.
so yes, someone has to start rethinking, the UN has the votes but not the teeth, of how we could negotiate without this label, which is the first impediment to any success.
By expanding terrorism to include acts like what happened in Charlottesville, there is the danger of an umbrella law that sees any random act from an unhinged mind looking at life in Guantanamo Bay with no trial.
Would it include any mass shooting? Any car driven through pedestrians?
We also have to face the truth that if we hear an Arabic name - we immediately assume it's terrorism.
This is a perfect example.
The story is there
Then there is this headline...
And what is the first thing that enters your mind?
There is still no link to terrorism, he is still the same mentally disturbed man he was in the first headline.
But his name changes everything.
I know. It is devastating.
I have to admit, as soon as I read his name I thought "Ah, death to the infidels, of course."
But I have NO further information and there has been no news about it today.
But this is where we are in the world.
Two interesting posts.
The problema is that "terrorism" as commonly used by both the ignorant and those who should know better, boils down to any act that causes terror.
This is false, terror is terror.
An "-ism" is a belief, and an "-ist" is one who acts on that belief.
So terrorism is a belief, or the act of a terrorist, which both causes terror, and carries with it a message, to affect the behavior of those who are victims, or afraid of such.
Here is an example labeled as terroristic by someone on the net, addressed to me because my community is 10% Muslim.
"Young muslim´s car jumps curb and people are injured" Act of terror, possibility, but because of anti Islamic propaganda, many jump to that confusión. Adding other bits of ignorance to
justify their prejudice. One example, Muslims are poor, don´t own cars, so this guy must be supported by some terrorist cell.
Fact, yes Muslims are poor, but if you know Young Muslims, their financial priorities are quite different from what one might expect. 1. a lot of their earnings go to support families in their home country. As a result many who come here are single men, who to sabe money share living space, and to get to work on Schedule, go in togather to share a car.
Fact. The Muslim in his early 20s, had just gotten his license and Access to a car a week ahead of of the event. Unlike the non Muslim population, as a kid he had Little opportunity to model his driving skills on his parents.
As with all traffic accidents, the pólice investigated and charged him with unsafe driving, because he lost control of his car. No evidence that he did it on purpose, or that he aimed at harming anyone.
E.g. the propaganda and prejudice declared the kid guilty without any facts to support it besides Young Muslim. (see answer to next post related).
Basicly you answered your own question. The "so many" itself is an unstatisticly vague assumption based on media coverage. Terrorism is sort of thefruit of the month, with Islam the default, which the stats don´t figure. By Count the majority of terrorist actions in the U.S. were committed by native born White Americans with Christian backgrounds, some motivated by a faulty interpretation of Christianity, just as 9-11, Barcelona, etc. actions are neither supported by the Koran, nor the major of Islamic religious and political leaders.
While not denying the criminality, and wrongness of their actions, it depends on where one stands. Kurds, IRA, Basques, Palestinian, and some other terririst activities are motivated by what are essentially freedom movements against foreign forces that are interfering with their right of self detrmination. Not much different then the Free French fighting the Germans in France after it had been over run. At the time, in most cases, these are considered heros to their own people, labled terrorists by the outsiders. The problema is if the struggle goes on for too long, or the solution is not complete or perverted, terrorism becomes a way of life, so it is very different to get the terrorists, romantic heros to their own people to stand down.
Another factor is that some terrorist groups are encouraged by outside forces for reasons, of their own, then once in the field, and after they discover the motives of their supporters, they turn on them.
Example the U.S. supported terrorism by Afghanis and AQ against the Russians. The U.S. supported corrupt governments in Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Viet Nam, Iraq, Iran, and is currently supporting a corrupt government in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan--not because we love them and want to help them but because we have something personal to gain from this support.
You are correct. The young Algerians whom Bin Laden hired on behest of the CIA, to fight in Afghanistan against the USSR, were dropped like hot potatoes as soon as th Russians left. All they knew and had learned was fighting, no pay, so the became mercenaries an terrorists in their own country, having nowhere else to go.
Great post, as usual.
As for "outside influences" I think ISIS take credit for a whole stack of attacks that had nothing to do with them.
They took credit for the Orlando gay nightclub shooting, which - it turned out - was committed by a sexually conflicted man.