Free Breaking News

Support free news online by subscribing today!

Abdelbaset al-Megrahi: Freedom Fighter or Terrorist

Barack Obama calls to complain to Gordon Brown about freeing of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi

By Mirror.co.uk 11/09/2009

A terrorist is one who is defined as politically motivated and does violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

Terrorism and its Targets

They are also those who create fear in an audience beyond the immediate victim and those who violate the rules of modern warfare.   They are established in acts called the Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions; or they are actors (e.g., sub-state groups) who can’t declare war legitimately. Their goal is to achieve political change. Their targets are symbolic of the political issue in question. And their acts of terror are designed to get attention from the public and media.

Terrorism in Effect Acts of Violence

Terrorism refers to the use of violence for the purpose of achieving a political, religious, or ideological goal. The targets of terrorist acts can be government officials, military personnel, people serving the interests of governments, or civilians. Acts of terror against military targets tend to blend into a strategy of guerrilla warfare.

The question is one man a terrorist and another man a freedom fighter? Random violence against civilians (non-combatants) is the type of action most widely condemned as terrorism and those who perpetuate it are terrorists.  However,  this is only one point of view.  Acts of terrorism can be perpetrated by individuals, groups, or states, as an alternative to an open declaration of war.

Terrorism by State is a More Acceptable Form

States that sponsor or engage in the use of terrorist tactics tend to use more neutral or positive terms to describe their own combatants, – such as freedom fighters, patriots, or paramilitaries, while the state or states being fought tend to use more negative terms like terrorism.

Terrorism, committed by state combatants is also considered more acceptable than that of the “terrorist” who by definition does not follow the self-serving laws of war, and hence cannot share in the acceptance given to establishment violence. Thus the term is impossible to apply by its rational definition —states who engage in warfare often do so outside of the laws of war and often carry out violence against civilian populations, yet rarely receive the label of “terrorist”.  The common public distinction between state violence and terrorism is based on a perception that terrorism is random, and therefore more irrational than state violence, which is assumed to be more considerate of human life.

The Decay of Values Due to Terrorism

In the recent news al-Megrahi who was involved in the Lockerbie terrorist incident was released. Thus the more viable pursuit is to look into the moral dimension of terrorists and terrorism and we ask, why do these individuals and groups of individuals do such horrendous acts be they terrorists or just entities who employ terrorism? The most agreeable answers are the decay of values on the level where they become less appealing and important or the overall disintegration of the global community which fosters in turn hate, violence and aggression.

August 31, 2010 Posted by | News | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

The Taliban: Radical Group that Innovates terrorist violence

Afghan rescue and security personnel are seen at the site of a bomb explosion in Kandahar on July 10.

(AFP/File/Nosrait Shoaib),

The Taliban emerged in the early 1990s in northern Pakistan following the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. A predominantly Pashtun movement, the Taliban came to prominence in Afghanistan in the autumn of 1994. It is commonly believed that they first appeared in religious seminaries – mostly paid for by money from Saudi Arabia – which preached a hard line form of Sunni Islam. The Taliban’s promise – in Pashtun areas straddling Pakistan and Afghanistan – was to restore peace and security and enforce their own austere version of Sharia, or Islamic law, once in power. In both countries they introduced or supported Islamic punishments – such as public executions of convicted murderers and adulterers and amputations of those found guilty of theft. Men were required to grow beards and women had to wear the all-covering burka.

An attack occurred recently on a major Afghan police base in Kandahar that killed nine — including three American soldiers — was the best planned and most advanced that U.S. soldiers who fought it off have seen in the past year, U.S. military officials said Thursday. The assault began Tuesday night when at least three attackers blew up the rear wall of the elite police compound in a Taliban -saturated part of Kandahar. Although it was initially thought to be a car bomb, Davis said explosives planted alongside the compound wall caused the first blast.

Terrorism is an endlessly evolving act of violence. Some may argue that terrorism itself is the result of an evolution in violence. Some may view it as a crime, some as an act of warfare, but nevertheless it is constantly changing and changing the world we live in. Terrorism is a developing offense for many groups and nations, becoming an ever more prevalent mode of violence in today’s world. Because of this dramatic growth, nations like the United States have been forced into developing new defenses to thwart new enemies that use new weapons. It is a constant battle to stay one step ahead of terrorism. To prevent it entirely, counter terrorism organizations must dream up the unimaginable. Today’s terrorist is resourceful and does not hesitate when his/her life is at stake. New tactics and weapons are produced and distributed every day under the radar of military and law enforcement. Terrorism cannot be contained to a single geographical region, nor can it be reduced to a single people. The face of a terrorist may seem as unlikely as the language they speak, and not all are easily tracked. The probable sources of violence, in lieu of globalization, have begun outsourcing. Weapons and soldiers come from all ends of the earth and can appear and disappear without a trace.
Terrorism is difficult to combat because of its evolving nature. Every day there are new enemies with new weapons. They are located all over the world. It is important to recognize these constant changes and adapt along with them.

July 20, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , | Leave a Comment

Violent Islamism is on the Rise

Kris Sledge, 18, of Selinsgrove, Pa., was wounded by one of the bombs Sunday night in Kampala, Uganda. The attacks, aimed at people watching the World Cup, killed more than 70 people.

Charlie Shoemaker for The New York Times

In recent news Somalia’s most feared insurgent group, the Shabab, claimed responsibility on Monday for the coordinated bombings that killed more than 70 people in Uganda as crowds gathered to watch the final match of the World Cup. The Shabab have been waging a relentless insurgency against Somalia’s weak transitional federal government, and they have repeatedly threatened Uganda and Burundi for contributing troops to the African Union’s effort to stabilize the country. Radical Islamists tend to gravitate toward three major methods of achieving their ultimate objective. The first is to fight the Near Enemy prior to fighting the Far Enemy. The Near Enemy is anyone inside Islamic lands, whether it is an occupier or someone who has taken away territory that used to be Islamic. The second method is to fight the Greater Unbelief—the major enemy, which today is the United States—before the Lesser Unbelief. And the third method is to fight the Apostates (false Muslims) first, and then the other Unbelievers.

While professing unwavering faith in a transcendent deity, radical Islam is a militant, politically activist ideology whose ultimate goal is to create a worldwide community, or caliphate, of Muslim believers. Determined to achieve this new world order by any means necessary, including violence and mass murder, radical Islam is characterized by its contempt for the beliefs, practices, and symbols of other religious traditions. This intolerant creed is cited by Islamists as the philosophical justification for their terrorism. Radical Islam’s kinship with terrorism, and its willingness to use violence as a means to its ultimate ends, is clearly spelled out in a training manual produced by the radical Islamist terror group al Qaeda, whose operatives carried out the 9/11 attacks.

A clear and full internalization of the fact that Islamism is an ideology and not a religion will purify the whole question from a variety of difficulties. In many ways, Islamism is like an octopus. We have to aim directly at the head in stead of wasting our time and energy to deal with the complicated body. By evacuating religious contents from Islamism, we change our direction from theology to ideology, from religion to politics. In this way, we put forward the real face and real nature of Islamism. The Muslims, especially among the young people, who are potentially ready to give their lives for the sake of Islamist ideals, will find out that their struggle is not a part of a religious duty but purely an ideological and political one emanating from a dangerous utopia. Both liberals and conservatives assume that the Islamist holy war against the West revolves solely around Westerners themselves, rather than having something to do with Islam itself.

Antagonism against Islam has emanated from the West such as the sentiment in the United States and other countries. This has been further aggravated by the foreign conduct and practices of the United States in its allies in Muslim countries.

July 20, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Not Being a Father’s Son: Ending a Line of Fundamentalism

Uploaded on December 15, 2009 by lovelypetal

It is usually a challenge for a child especially a son to step beyond his father’s shadow. This is even more difficult if the father’s persona is that which is notable or even great. A son will have to really exert considerable effort to exceed if not match his father. But this is more complicated if the father is a controversial figure and the son chooses not to thread his father’s path and not follow in the latter’s footsteps. The son is faced with a distinctly difficult dilemma, to make it on his own in the world and betray his father’s legacy or stay in his father’s shadow and play the role of the stereotypical “good son”.

This is the core of the notable issue in recent news. Mosab Hassan Yousef, son of a Hamas founder, Sheik Hassan Yousef sought and won asylum in the United States. This came after Israel validated his claim that he work for the Israeli government while inside Hamas.  He was an agent feeding Israel intelligence about Hamas. He later fled to the US and sought asylum. His father already denounced him. But despite all these he was able to step out of his father’s shadow, he was able to cast aside the burden of his father’s legacy and take his own path in life. This is nothing less than a feat of human resilience and individuality that was justly rewarded by his grant of asylum.

On a deeper analysis of the events that unfolded it is a notable variation as to the trends as to the culture and behavior of fundamentalist terrorists. Usually is often the practice that the fundamentalist ideologies are proliferated via family ties and upbringing so that it can be deeply inculcated into the individual. This in effect is an efficient breeding method for creating zealous fundamentalists. This in effect contributes to the growing phenomena of terrorism. The act of defiance and deviance by a son of a hard – lined fundamentalist means there is always a choice even when the circumstances of family, culture and upbringing have significant clout on an individual. It is not therefore true that terrorists are brainwashed individuals who are pure fanatics and nothing else aside from that.

The chain of fundamentalist inculcation is not as pervasive as initially imagined since the son of Hamas co –founder proves that choice and the courage of individuals to plot their own course in life can undo fundamentalist psycho – political programming. After all in the war to curb fundamentalism that often is expressed terrorism is one not fought in distant battlefields but in the hearts and minds of individuals. The key to winning in this conflict of the 21st century is to undo the ideo – cultural conditioning the mind of an individual is exposed to and to emphasize choice. After all terrorists are not without a will of their own it is just that theirs drowned out.

July 6, 2010 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , | Leave a Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.