What IS Terrorism?

There have been several long threads recently with people fighting over whether something is terrorism. It's time we had a working definition.

Dictionary.com
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Wikipedia - long article, with history.
The term "terrorism" comes from Latin terrere, "to frighten."
also, "the killing of innocents by a private group in such a way as to create a media spectacle"



Title edit by request


[edit on 11/11/09 by masqua]

Personally, I think terrorism MUST include an aspect of intentionality. The person must be trying to cause fear for a large number of people.

With that caveat the Fort Hood shooting was likely NOT terrorism if you think the guy was angry, scared, and wishing to take out his frustration.

It would be terrorism if you think he was trying to strike fear into the hearts of people in general.

I think it was a shooting, not terrorism. Mass media added that he yelled "Allahu Akbar" so this would be classified as terrorism and cause the general public a lot more drama. (so maybe the mass media agenda is more "terrorist" than this guy's actions!)


[edit on 11-11-2009 by notreallyalive]

Moderator please change my title to remove the attempt at italics

Thank you

[edit on 11-11-2009 by notreallyalive]

terrorism is another possible way to describle our way of life

we need to live with the government's terrorism every day ... thats really sad

we really live in a hollywood movie ... I am sure of it

it cant be real ahhaha thats too much for us to take ...

reply to post by notreallyalive


The term `terrorism` is certainly over-played .

Is it only reserved for `the enemy` ?

Could one consider the doctrine of Shock and Awe as terrorism ?

Old meaning.

Terrorism- The act of inflicting fear in a purposeful fashion.

New meaning.

Terrorism- The act of not becoming controlled by forceful propaganda by a group or government of a state.

reply to post by notreallyalive


The definition of terrorism depends on who defines it.

I recall reading one time that even across our government, there are different versions of how terrorism is defined.

What's the difference between terrorism and attacked? Maybe terrorism is just a vague word to use in an effort to control the population.



PS- think you can fix your title by clicking edit.

double post deleted

[edit on 11-11-2009 by seataka]

Originally posted by UmbraSumus
reply to post by notreallyalive

 

Is it only reserved for `the enemy` ?

Good question. It does sort of force an "us vs them" mentality. If they weren't the enemy before, they are after the event

Could one consider the doctrine of Shock and Awe as terrorism ?

I was honestly embarrassed when they started using this term... It IS terrorism! Sad day for America the Bully.
[since this is a sensitive area please recognize that I do not dislike America; I simply dislike the audacious show of force]


[edit on 11-11-2009 by notreallyalive]

"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." --

Henry Kissinger, speaking at a conference hosted by AKbank in Istanbul Turkey on May 31, 2007

reply to post by notreallyalive


I agree if you kill 20 ppl you don't have to be a terrorist you could just be crazy. Would you consider those 2 guys who where in the Hollywood shoot out terrorists? NO what about bank robers? NO

If you kill people and people are terrorized by this you are NOT a terrorist! you are just scary that's it. The fort hood killer for example. How is he a terrorist? He was Muslim and hated the war. So what everyone hats the war including Muslim/s cuz h killed 13 ppl doesn't change a damn thing


GREAT THREAD BROTHER!!!!

The examples I investigated all seem to benefit the government in the form of laws or gun control or things they want from the people. I can not think of any reason a terrorist would do something to the people... unless, religion is involved or racism kind of crimes. KKk was a terrorist organization. they basically ran the country around the 1900's they were real powerful organization. anyway, governments response to acts of terror on its citizens always seem to punish them further with laws...
as a roman judge would ask ... " Who Profitted..?" -- can anyone find a terrorist act that the terrorist gained something-anything..? but a few days after terrorist acts... the government responds with legislation... like you can legislate a terrorist... ~ I smell a pole cat - just investigate this for yourself ... and if this is true - then well - ah ~ ah = speechless