What Do We Mean By "Terrorism"?

By Robert Thompson
Jun 19, 2007, 11:46
AxisOfLogic

In a previous article ("Terrorist Threats and the Right Answer" - Axis of Logic, 12th November 2006) I considered the very real threat of terrorism and its causes, but, apart from rejecting Mr Bush's ridiculous "War on Terra", I did not go into the definition of what we mean when we talk or write of "Terrorism".

The stupid and simplistic answer is where we accept that it is any attack made blindly and regardless of the cost in innocent lives, but only where it is committed by those with whom we disagree.

It is a constant irritation to me, among others, that so many politicians and journalists, whether deliberately or not, always apply this final limitation and, on that basis, refuse to consider identical acts to be terrorism where they are committed either by those of whose aims they approve, by those with whose aims they have some sympathy or by those with whom they feel some kind of more general affinity.

Once the stupidity of this attitude is pointed out, far too many such politicians and journalists, brush aside the accusation that they are deliberately avoiding the truth, and tend instead to refer to the need to protect the public, without seeming to reflect on their own responsibility if they have been, or have supported or have encouraged, those against whom the alleged "terrorists" have tried to resist by using similar criminal means.

Many examples of this selective definition can be seen around us, and at present we see it in its worst form when a man such as Anthony Blair agrees with any and every accusation of "terrorism" made against freedom fighters (as we would have recognised them during the Second World War) by his great Fuehrer, George W. Bush, or by any one of the latter's vast and powerful army of propagandists, backers and handlers.

We must learn to distinguish between those who are willing to use violence against the innocent without caring about horrific casualties and those who dare to fight back against oppression and murder. The many thousands who have suffered terrible "collateral damage" from the wild misadventures of the Bush administration and its allies cannot just be left as statistics, they cry out for justice and the international community should react to condemn the terrorism inflicted on them and to punish it.

Mr Bush and his like may feel closer in spirit to the violent men of Neoconservatism and Zionism, but I feel closer to the poor and suffering who are their victims. Furthermore, I am sure that the world's worst terrorists are their oppressors, not the pathetic misguided men and women who, in their despair, can see no other way of resisting than to commit crimes in return.

Let us resolve not only to be hard on terrorism, whatever may be the excuse for it and whoever may commit it, but also on those who drive others into committing similar acts as the only way out that they can see.

© Copyright 2007 by AxisofLogic.com