Terrorism
Many people are confused about what terrorism really is and its true nature, and some other just want to label any enemy as a terrorist. There is alot of definitions and we will go through many. I think this topic is very important to know how we think and feel in order to understand each other, because even those who talk about terrorism don't know what it's.
Let's take the general definition from this website:
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
According to Wiki:
There is a disagreement on definition of terrorism. However, there is an intellectual consensus globally that acts of terror should not be accepted under any circumstances.
According to the FBI:
There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined
in the Code of Federal Regulations as “...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)
If the FBI itself can't define terrorism for us so how can anybody trust what America--the leader in this war--label as terrorism?
Also, how do you expect that everybody will agree with you just because you think a certain organization is a terrorist group if there is no SINGLE universal accepted definition for terrorism?
Let's have an example ...
US university shooting kills 33
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6560685.stm
Federal Officials: At Least 32 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266310,00.html
According to the first definition which i posted, we conclude that this is an act of terror, and we can surely call it as terrorist attack without hesitations because, it's:
"The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons".
Therefore, the university shooting is a terrorist attack but the media called it just "shooting" and i'm so sure that if a muslim killed only 2 or 3 in that university, not 33 as what this Korean guy did, people will automatically call this incident a terrorist attack, and the media might call it "America under attack" or "a new terrorist attack on our nation".
So, i don't want to jump into conclusion and i'll leave it open for all of you to discuss and judge. But, you have to know that, even though there is no mentioning for a religious act in any definition as a must for an attack to be an act of terrorism, but i never heard of any attack which the media called terrorism unless it was done by Muslims.
Do you want a proof that it's just about religion? and more specificaly, about Islam/Muslims, not the war on terror in general?
This is the proof ladies and gentlemen from the tongue of the President of the United States of America:
This statement clearly prove without a doubt that, the war on terrorism is no more than a crusade war, and everytime we hear or read Mr. Bush say this word, so everybody will remember this war is indeed, a crusade war against Muslims.
Nevertheless, when this crusade war is in the past, so alot of people come easily to condemn it (well, not everybody), but they won't call the current war as a crusade war just because it has another name now, which is the war on terrorism, so it's no more a crusade war !!! :cover:
This is how so many people today in the world see it, this is the truth.