How Governments Twist TerrorismStates craft terror definitions and designations to absolve themselves and satisfy their constituencies.Philip Giraldi Mar. 12, 2015 |
Israel 'Admits It May Not Be Able to Destroy Hamas,' Blames America
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Signs Executive Order to Punish 'Antisemitic Rhetoric' on College Campuses
Israeli Lawyer Who Pushed 'Hamas Mass Rapes' Hoax Accused of Scamming Donors
All-Indian Crew On Ship That Crashed Into Baltimore's Francis Scott Key Bridge
RFK Jr Names Nicole Shanahan as VP Pick
The Washington Post reports that “terrorism trend lines are ‘worse than at any other point in history.’” But what is terrorism? It has frequently been pointed out that “terrorism” is a tactic, not an actual physical adversary, but it is less often noted that a simple definition of what constitutes terrorism is hardly universally accepted, while the designation itself is essentially political. The glib assertion that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter fails to capture the distinction’s consequences as the terror label itself increasingly comes with a number of legal and practical liabilities attached. Describing an organization as terroristic in order to discredit it has itself become a tactic, and one that sometimes has only limited connections to what the group in question actually believes or does. Read More |