Jump to content
Islamic Forum
J.A.Abdullah

"terrorist"

Recommended Posts

As salamu alaykum

 

My latest video is about the Colorado shooting & the fact that the term "terrorist" is exclusive to Muslims :(

 

PLEASE WATCH & SHARE!

 

Edited by J.A.Abdullah
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Noun 1. terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

act of terrorism, terrorism, terrorist act - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noun 1. terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

act of terrorism, terrorism, terrorist act - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear .

 

what is your reference for these deffinitions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Online Free Dictionary /

 

This from Wikipedia-

 

Terrorist acts frequently have a political purpose.[29] Terrorism is a political tactic, like letter-writing or protesting, which is used by activists when they believe that no other means will effect the kind of change they desire. The change is desired so badly that failure to achieve change is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians. This is often where the inter-relationship between terrorism and religion occurs.

 

Websters New World Dictionary/second college edition

 

terrorism - the act of terrorizing;use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate and subjugate, esp. such use as a political weapon or policy 2. the demoralization and intimidation produced in this way .- terrorist- n. terrorize -adj.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noun 1. terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

act of terrorism, terrorism, terrorist act - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear .

 

it seems like this deffenition is your own one, since it's totally different than the references you mentioned, but any how.....

 

SINCE,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#cite_note-Hoffman-1998-p32-2

There is neither an academic nor an international legal consensus regarding the definition of the term "terrorism".[1][2] Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of "terrorism". Moreover, the international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed upon, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[3]

 

and historically, terrorism has been first performed by countries against indeviduals

The term "terrorism" comes from French terrorisme, from Latin: 'terror', "great fear", "dread", related to the Latin verb terrere, "to frighten". The terror cimbricus was a panic and state of emergency in Rome in response to the approach of warriors of the Cimbri tribe in 105BC. The French National Convention declared in September 1793 that "terror is the order of the day". The period 1793–94 is referred to as La Terreur (Reign of Terror). Maximilien Robespierre, a leader in the French revolution proclaimed in 1794 that "Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible."[11]

 

 

while getting back to your own deffenition, is it make any difference for you if your house/family/work/city/country is attacked, exploded and stolen by someone/small cell/big cell/ or even by an agrissive country?!! and what is the specific number that separates the small cells from the big cells in your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all respect , that definition was cut and pasted from Wikepedia , there are also many paragraphs beyond that definition offering other explanations on how the term is used , aftyer all Asad of Syria is calling the rebels "terrorists " .

Timothy McVeigh of the Oklahoma City Bombing was a terrorist , the shooter in Aurora Colorado was NOT . He is a deranged psychotic with no political , social or religious goal .

There should be a distinction made between Holmes and a "terrorist " . London Bombings , Mumbai Massacre , Madrid Bombing and 9/11 were terrorist attacks . This is what defines terrorism .

BTW , I would not exercise my own definition , though it would closely resemble the Wiki version , and then attempt a deception . These are the definitions I found . Obviously J.A.Abdullah's point is that ONLY muslims acquire that definition , and that opinion is in error . That is the point I am making . Basque seperatists are terorists , Mao Shining Light are terrorists , The Bulgarian Bomber are terrorists ./

Unfortunately easy access to assault type weapons in the US gives every deranged person with the will a chance to massacre fellow human beings be it for a moment of fame , a fit of misdirected anger , revenge or pure mental illness . Columbine ,Virginia Tech and Aurora Masacres were not acts of terrorism nor were the perpetrators terrorists , they were mentally deranged people witgh no goal other than to vent anger or exact revenge .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Large cell or small cell ...makes no difference .....it is the act itself and the alleged political social or religious agenda/purpose/expected result -that defines the terrorist . Those who do this bear the tag regardless of who they are .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with all respect, i think Timothy McVeigh of the Oklahoma City Bombing don't fullfill the deffenition, since he don't belong to any cells? and offecialy, who did give him the title of terrorist?

 

who, do you think, have the right to give deffenitions of "terrorism and terrorist" and who have the right to apply it in this world??

 

do you believe terrorists can reach the size of governments, armies and countries??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the press went out of their way to not brand McVeigh as a terrorist, though the government certainly did. Actually the Virginia Tech shooter WAS labelled a terrorist by all people for quite some time, and was originally reported to be Muslim because he was a terrorist. (I lost a friend of mine in that massacre, and I have many other friends that were at Virginia Tech.)

 

The government is trying to impose a charge of terrorism against the Aurora shooter, something they would have done against both the VT shooter and against the Columbine shooters if they got their way. However, those shooters all ended up killing themselves, so the point was moot.

 

What about the israeli terrorists that took part in numerous actions within the holy land, they aren't classified as terrorists nor have they been generally speaking. They are simply "israeli Nationalists". Now, resistance fighters are branded as terrorists, to those they are fighting at least. Heck, numerous writings of Charles, Lord Cornwallis from the American Revolution brand the Patriot soldiers as little better than terrorists. However, most times they aren't considered actual terrorists. Were the Mossad agents who attacked the USS Liberty terrorists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you got it backwards nightingale ,McVeigh was heavily influenced by an anti-government group and a particular leaders book . The Virginia shooter was never branded a terrorist , just a sick individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mossad agents did not attack the USS Liberty , the israeli Air Force did it . An no terrorists there either , the Liberty was in the middle of a war between Egypt , Syria and israel . The israelis claimed it was mistaken for an Egyptian ship , however there is much more to that incident than the US Govt. will ever admit . The Liberty was ordered by the Commander of the US 7th Fleet to sail west away from the war zone , however it headed S.E. towards the war zone .

That incident has nothing to do with the subject we are discussing .

 

And no , you're wrong again , the US i s not nor has it attempted to call the Aurora ,Virginia Tech ,or Columbine shootings a terrorist action . Where are you getting this stuff from ? You live in the US dont you ?

One would think you would know better .

Edited by Aligarr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Virginia. I know for a fact that the Richmond Times-Dispatch and the Roanoke Times both labelled the Virginia Tech shooter a terrorist. Where do you live that you can deny that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Florida , and have never heard the shooter at Virginia tech been called a terrorist . Not in any news article , not in any media report ...nowhere at anytime . Maybe you would have liked that but I just never heard of that , even unto today .Those newspapers you mentioned must be isolated from the rst of the media world . He acted alone , was supposed to undergo psychiatric care , was a loner , had no religious ,political or social agenda , how coud the shooter be called a terrorist ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far I have scanned the archives of the Richmond Times Dispatch and have not found any use if the word terrorist relating to the Apriln16 ,2007 shooting at Virginia Tech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Miriam-Webster:

 

Terrorist: 1. The use of terror as a form of coercion, or as a means to an end.

 

Terror: 1. A state of intense fear. 2. One that inspires fear (a person that causes extreme anxiety). 3. A reign of terror.

 

Now then, based off those...specifically with Columbine and the Virginia Tech shootings...regardless of mental states...how is it NOT terrorism? It doesn't need to be a political group doing it, as I've just pointed out. Acts of terror are far more prevalent than just acts committed by a group. Do you recall the 'manifesto' that the Virginia Tech shooter sent to the news media? Despite any mental issues, he MEANT for it to be an act of terror, which is why they originally called him a terrorist. Also remember that they originally identified him as Chinese as well, so the media makes what they consider to be mistakes regularly.

 

But do I consider him a terrorist? Yes. Do I consider the Columbine shooters terrorists? Yes. Do I consider the Aurora shooter a terrorist? Yes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine , so it is YOU then who consider them terrorists , not the US Govt ,whom you claim that wants to call them terrorists , and not the Roanoke Times or Richmond Times Dispatch but YOU ....therefore you make your own definition ....I merely listed three references which described what a trerrorist is . Tell me , do you consider the recent Bus Bombing in Bulgaria to be a terrorist act , perpetrated by a terrorist ?

I do not consider Aurora ,Columbine or Virginia tech the work of terrorists , but of psychotic and deranged people seeking revenge or angry over personal failures , no cause indicated , no ideology, no social or religious view indicated .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tell me nightingale , who were those shooters trying to coerce ?who were they attempting to instill fear in?What reign of terror did they seek to establish ? .

 

They sought to kill as many people as they could ,before being killed themselves or committing suicide at the conclusion of their act .

Edited by Aligarr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and btw Nightingale , did you determine yet , -whether the bus bombing in Bulgaria was a terrorist act ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wonna know different views on "American invasion for Iraq in 2003", is that considered terroristc action according to different deffenitions of terrorism??

did that attack terrify the innocent Iraqi people?

what was the main reason of attack, political or economic or religious or a compination?

how many been killed directlly through the American terrifing weapons, bombers, 9 ton bombs, F117, exhausted Uranium?

how many been killed through the pre-paid killer folks, blackwater and other spicial killers?

how many been killed for other reasons under the full responsibility of the occuping forces?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a war , a war the US should have never got into , but a war nonetheless . And as in any war there is collateral casualties . Was Saddam practicing terrorism against the Shia in the South and the Kurds in the North ? So , to an Iraqi I would consider it terrorism . The reasons for that war were political . The politics of the Bush Administration .And I'm in agreement with you regarding Blackwater , they WERE the responsibility of the occupying forces

 

Nothing is right in a war that was from the beginning-- WRONG .

 

I am glad the US got out .

 

However in the past 2 weeks over 400 have been killed in Iraq and 1500 wounded , not by the hand of the US or any foreign entity .

Who is doing that ? Blowing up people waiting in line for paychecks , blowing people up in Masjids while at prayer , blowing up people at funerals or pilgrims going to Holy Places .....what would you call that ? Is that "war " or "terrorism " ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tell me nightingale , who were those shooters trying to coerce ?who were they attempting to instill fear in?What reign of terror did they seek to establish ?

Aligarr, why not ask those questions to the surviving witnesses, the wounded or the families of the victims?

 

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What for ? It wouldn't change the definition of the shooter , of course they must have been "terrorized " , but by a madman without a cause , a deranged psychotic with no ideology or goal .Angry at the world for his own failures , just as the Virginia Tech and Columbine shooters .

Edited by Aligarr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What for ? It wouldn't change the definition of the shooter , of course they must have been "terrorized "

Please show some sympathy to the victims, Aligarr. Stop ridiculing and making fun of them with your cynical quote and unquote. When those people in the theater were terrorized they were terrorized, your silly quote and unqoute would not change that fact.

 

but by a madman without a cause , a deranged psychotic

He planned it for months. And you are a psychiatrist? And he is your patient?

 

with no ideology or goal .Angry at the world for his own failures , just as the Virginia Tech and Columbine shooters .

Says who? Send him to me and most likely I will be able to tell you of his goals.

 

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said Aligarr, one of my friends was amongst the killed at Virginia Tech. I know his family quite well and you don't think they were terrorized and experienced the same pain people who suffer from terrorism do?

 

What about the Norwegian shooter? He's the same thing as the Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora shooters. They are all terrorists. By the definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tell me nightingale , who were those shooters trying to coerce ?who were they attempting to instill fear in?What reign of terror did they seek to establish ? .

 

They sought to kill as many people as they could ,before being killed themselves or committing suicide at the conclusion of their act .

 

Isn't James Holmes currently on trial and thus not killed?

 

the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorist

 

source: http://www.webster-dictionary.net/definition/terrorist

 

 

source: http://www.webster-dictionary.net/definition/Terrorism

 

Webster is the most acceptable source for definitions in English first of all. Secondly, by using this the idea that Columbine was a "terrorist" act is mistaken as is Virginia Tech regardless of whether media used it to refer to it as well. However, Oklahoma City was a terrorist act.

 

Timothy James McVeigh (April 23, 1968 – June 11, 2001) was a United States Army veteran and security guard who detonated a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Commonly referred to as the Oklahoma City Bombing, the attack killed 168 people and injured over 800 people,[3] and was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.[3]

McVeigh, a militia movement sympathizer, sought revenge against the federal government for its handling of the Waco Siege, which had ended in the deaths of 76 people exactly two years prior to the bombing, as well as for the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992. McVeigh hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government. He was convicted of 11 federal offenses and sentenced to death. His execution took place on June 11, 2001 at the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana. Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier were also convicted as conspirators in the plot.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

 

Personally, though, I believe that he was not a sympathizer and was in fact a member of a particular organization that decided to disavow him because he got caught. Although, I cannot particularly remember the name of the organization at present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×