A Conversation for The Alternative Writing Workshop

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 1

Fire Bat

Entry: terrorism (an opinion) - A784334
Author: Fire Bat - U198318

Well, as i said at the top, this is my opinion, and I would like to hear other opinions, and I hope it will open your mind a bit.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 2


close, but no cigar. smiley - tongueout

terrorism has nothing to do with religion, it is only carried out in it's name.

in fact most religions kick you out if you get caught being a terrorist acting in their name.

terorism is about hate and intolerance and hopelessness.

you feel you have nothing to lose, and are already open to prejudice, so fall easy prey to some silly cult.

The way to solve terrorism is to defeat the hopelessness, and then the cults have nowhere to draw new terrorists from.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 3

Fire Bat

I disagree with your opinion that the religion is not wht drives terrorism. Maybe there are cases in which it is not religion- it is idealism, but how can you say that the Muslim terrorist don't get the approval of their religion? And if you don't want to talk about Muslims, let me inform you, that in the country where I live, Israel, there is a radical JEWISH group that committed a few terror acts upon Arabs, that discluding the settlers, which some of their acts i see as terror for everything, acts in the name of the sacrasy of the Land of Israel! I don't say that the whole Judaism is behind them, this claim would be rediculous and the are banned by most cycles of the religion, but the fact that events like this happened and still happen make me point a finger towards Religion, the "entity" that created those fanatics.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 4


but the fact that a cult leader is conning the hopeless into these acts in the name of religion does not make the acts religiosly inspored or sanctioned.

I live in britain, and if you are caught belonging to any of the (so called religious) paramilitary groups commiting violence, then which every denomination your church is, you are automatically excomunicated.

The same applies in a lot of other countries.

terrorists work on the basis of hate, not religion. religion or race or sex or any of a large number of other minor differences can be the excuse, but in the end, it comes down to hate and bullying.

The mantra of the terrorist is generally "you are different, and I hate you for it. You don't do as I say, so I will frighten and kill you for it".

while you may have sectarian violence in mind, your article claims to be about terrorism in general, not terrorism by ... insert group here ..., so dealing in the generalities is a better approach.

white supremacists don't do it in the name of religion, but they are still hate-mongers and some are terrorists.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 5

Noggin the Nog

If things are hopeless enough you can be a terrorist for no idealogical reason at all; it's called nihilism. Otherwise you become a terrorist because you don't have the power to get people to listen to you by any other means, or to conceal from yourself that your ideology has no rational foundation and cannot be argued for by any other means. Or indeed any combination of the above.


A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 6

Fire Bat

I agree with you. While the title is too general, when I wrote the essay, I was thinking only about the terrorism in my country and the one felt by the world at 11/9. I agree that hate is the basic emotion that controls terrorism, but we are no mind-controllers, and I think it's obviouse that war does not put out the hate, it increases it. but there are resons for the hate, reasons which are usualy idealistic, and religion does create an idealism. I think I should change the title, but I can't seem to find a suitable replacement. I need a title which will not be general and will bring out the main subject of the essay, as i described it at the begining of this post.
if you have any ideas, and more comments, please turn my attention towards them.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 7


You don't have to be that hopeless.

all you need is a complete lack of visible options.

at that point you become very vulnerable. religion is based upon using this path to get you to listen, and increase your dependancy on the religion.

cults go one step further.

Once you are hooked into a cult, it is easy to be brainwashed, especially if they don't give you something else to live for.

I have sufficient knowledge of the techniques that I could recruit people into a cult, and train them to be suicide bombers. so do a number of other people who comment regularly in peer review.

I could also get them to do it in the name of just about any cause that you can come up with.

it realy isn't that hard to do.

and at no point would I need to be religiously inspired to do so.

however religion does make a very good key to opening that door.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 8


"hope noone will be offended from it", change this to "hope none will be offended by it". I haven't had time to go through it all.

Alji, smiley - zensmiley - wizard of the Red Dragon (Swynwr y Ddraig Goch) (conducting a sun sign poll at A712595)(Member of The Guild of Wizards U197895 looking for wiz kids to join, though you don't have to be a wiz kid just know a bit about some subject that you think will be of interest to others or just bore the pants off them. This is an equall opportunities space open to all sexes, ages and abilities)

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 9

Martin Harper

> "Until this year, people around the world saw terrorism only through the subjective eyes of the press. They knew that, in a small country called Israel, there are a few Arabic organizations, that are killing Jews and other people that happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't think most of them even cared. Now, things are different. The world has been shocked. A terrorist organization has dared to act outside the borders of Israel, habitat of terrorism, and not only this, it started big."

There was plenty of terrorism outside Israel before, and there will be again. One might point to Northern Ireland, just as an example. And arguably the Israeli government has been terrorizing the Palestinians.
The world has been shocked? Well, the USA was shocked maybe, but not the entire world...

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 10


I don't think that the usa was really shocked, just momentarily shaken out of it's usuall complacency for a few months.

It is almost (but not quite) back to business as usual in the usa as regards interacting with the rest of the world, so I feel quite confident in predicting that there will be a second "september 11th" type event.

If the people involved blame you behaviour, and you don't change it, you can hardly be surprised when they don't change their response.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 11

Rik Bailey

The palestinians have been oppressed for years by the Isrelie goverment and you try to make it sound the other way round. Do you know your countrys history? A friend of mine comes from Palestine he was shot and tortered because he spoke up and against what the Isrealie goverment is doing. The only way Isreal gets away with all this is through the support of America. I have no problems with Jewish people or you or anyone apart from those who are out to course trouble. I strongly suggest you remove the bit about Arabs as it may start a lot of arguments if people start reading things like that, which are completly biased and not really based on true facts.


A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 12

a girl called Ben

The problems I have with this piece are mitigated by the statement that it is personal opinion.

My main problem is the idea that the world was blind to terrorism, when in fact it was only the public in the USA who were blind to it.

Off the top of my European head I can point to the terrorist groups, both loyalist and republican in Ireland, to ETA's actions in Spain, to the Badah Meinhoff group in Germany, to the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, not to mention Italy, the Phillippines, and so the list goes on.

Forgive me if I say that I think that the piece shows limitations in your outlook and experience. This would not matter if you stated more clearly what those limitations are, then it would clearly be an expression of your own point of view. At the moment it sits uneasily between the subjective and the objective, and I think it needs to move one way or the other.


A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 13


Fire Bat,

Are you planning on doing anything with this article?

One of the things I would say in it's favour is that you certainly sparked off a debate, and it got me thinking.

As it stands, this does come across as a fairly generalised piece of opinion, citing religion and fanatics.

Religion is used by the terrorist leaders, and I think this is where the focus should be. These leaders may not believe everything they claim to. Bin Laden, Hitler, Hussein were/are not necessarily fanatics, but have been able to excersize a level of control over others which has driven people to dying for the greater good.

I believe that as Ben said, you should decode whether this is going to be subjective or objective. I would also suggest a bit more research into terrorism around the world, because as has been said previously in this thread, the rest of the western world has had run ins with terrorist groups, it was just that on 9/11 someone had the audacity to strike in the USA.


A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 14

Rik Bailey

The problem is the use of terrorism is pointless, as both sides call each pther terrorists.
Isrealie goverment calls palestinians terrorists and vice verse and America calls the rebel Afganis and Iragis terrorists and they call america terrorists.
The word terrorist depends on your perspective and which side your on.
I think this could be made in to a good enwith some work to it.

So I agree with.


A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 15


you are partly right.

name calliing definately does go on a lot, however there is a quite simple test to verify if someone is a terrorist or not.

If the people involved primarily go after civilians, they are terrorists. if their targets could be militarily justified, then it is more likely that they are fighting a geurilla war.

As to terrorism being pointless, this is also not quit right.

the point of terrorism is to get the oposition to start negotiations and negotiate in good faith. after this point, further terrorist activity is counter productive.

however I would be more of the belief that you should run your campaign as a geurilla war rather than targeting civilians.

finally, I don't think america is terrorist, only very incompetent (which can look very similar). you only need to look at the number of "friendly fire" incidents to see that they are not very professional as a group (although most of the individuals are).

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 16

Rik Bailey

I know what your saying but Iwill try to explain what I mean.

alot of the time people who are involved in guerrila warfare are labelled as terrorists, and to fully explain what I mean by the word terrorist is useless look at India and Pakistan or Isreal and Palestine.

After septembet the 11th Pakistan had to let America use its airbase's in the war of afganistan, why, because if they did not then the Indian goverment would say they support terrorism and are terrorists and get America backing for war to start against Pakistan as it can be labelled as anti terrorist.
As for Palestine and Isreal Ariel Sharron said that the palestinians are terrorists to support his recent attacks against the Palestinians that happened just after sept 11th.

the biggest mistake Bush made on a global scale is by saying there going to go to war in Afganistan as it supports Terrorism, as after that it made it alright to attack other people as long as its in the so called name of fighting terrorism.

I guess my point is, that the word terrorism has turned in to a tool to be used so you can attack your enemys without worrying about what the U.N will do.

So if you can't follow what I'm trying to say, I'm not good at explaining what I mean using words on a computer screen.

An what you say about if they attacl civilians or not as a test for terrorism you are quite right if you look at it from one view point but from both side of the coin it does not work out.

for example take Russia and the checkz, one side is labelled as using terrorism the other side is not, yet both sides have used terrorism. but over hear you do not hear about what the military of Russia did to some place you only hear what the checkz did to a place in Russia.

Or Isreal and Palestine, When a Palestinian blows up a shop his labbeled a terrorist, but when the Isrealie goverment use's bulldozers to destroy parts ofrefugee camps for Palestinians in the middle of the night, or shoot up a street they are portrasyed as fighting terrorism or its not mentioned at all.

Most recently we have Iraq and America, we constantly hear about Iraqie terrorists killing american soldiers but we hardly ever hear of American soldiers killing Iraq civillians.

You could say that one is a accident the other is not, but there have been many unprovoked attacks on civilians by American soldiers and even some media people for seeing things there not ment to see, bu hardly hear about them.

As For the America being terrorist I was just saying that for many Iraqies in Iraq America is seen as the terrorists and many Americans see the Iraqis as terrorists.

Hope you understood what I'm blathering on about.


A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 17

Ferrettbadger. The Renegade Master

Of course one mans terrorist is anothers freedom fighter. During aparthied, Nelson Mandela was considered a terrorist.

I agree with Xyroth sentiments about lack of hope and poverty causing terrorism though.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 18


A point about terrorism which seems to have been missed is that if a country has a standing army (like china for example) then while it can be guilty of the same human rights abuses as terrorists, they have difficulty being terrorists due to walking down the street wearing the uniform.

The exceptions to this are the french secret service attack on the greenpeace ship rainbow warrior, and some of the attacks by isreal in the form of MOSAD.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 19

Ferrettbadger. The Renegade Master

As I understand it the very definition of terroism is that it is violence perpetrated by a non state organisation. Any act carried out is therefore not a terrorist act, something to do with reralism or suchlike.

A784334 - terrorism (an opinion)

Post 20

Fire Bat

First of all- this IS a subjective article as it is called- "terrorism (an opinion)". My opinion has changed a bit since the time I wrote this, probably due to two lectures/conversations I had with an Israeli Imam (some kind of a Muslim priest) which claims that the terror is not really supported in the Kuran, but there is still the Jihad problem, which I have not quite understood- Jihad literally means "effort" and it allows certain things to be done in certain situations, which I'm not so sure of.
Second of all:
"Terrorism- the use of (threats of) violence, especially for political reasons."
(Oxford Student's Dictionary for Hebrew Speakers)
This is the dry definition. Of course, there are also wet ones, which are very subjective. The problem with the definition above is that they don't explain why war is different from terrorism (if it is)- war also uses violence and usualy has political reasons.
It is problematic to say that terrorism is conducted by non-state organisations, because many people see Sadam Husein as a terrorist, altough he was a state (and yes, he actually WAS Iraq).
Third of all- I see that there is a problem in the article- it is too comprehensive (hope I used the right word). I sould try to focus it maybe by talking about "recent arab terrorism" instead of terrorism in general. What do you think?

Key: Complain about this post