Very true. Not many people know that the UN, and most countries haven't truly defined the word "Terrorism, or Terrorist" so that the definition of the word would have every nation on earth agree on that definition.
If there is no agreement on the definition of terrorism, how can any civilized society even try to bring any of the people who have harmed a nation, and it's people, to justice? Therein lies a big problem...
Here's some more from wiki...(being careful of course, that we don't have any idea who is adding and subtracting from these definitions and paragraphs at any given time) There is lots more at the link below:
Definition of Terrorism....
en.wikipedia.org
snip: >>>>Few words are as politically or emotionally charged as terrorism. One 1988 study by the US Army (PDF) found that over 100 definitions of the word "terrorism" have been used. For this reason, many news sources avoid using this term, opting instead for less accusatory words like "bombers", "militants", etc
Few words are as politically or emotionally charged as terrorism. One 1988 study by the US Army (PDF) found that over 100 definitions of the word "terrorism" have been used. For this reason, many news sources avoid using this term, opting instead for less accusatory words like "bombers", "militants", etc.
Terrorism is a crime in many countries and is defined by statute (see below for particular definitions). Common principles amongst legal definitions of terrorism provide an emerging consensus as to meaning and cooperation amongst law enforcement personeel in different countries.
Among these definitions, several do not recognize the possibility of the legitimate use of violence by civilians against an invader in an occupied country, and would thus label all resistance movements as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence. Ultimately, the distinction is a political judgment.
<<< snip
snip>>>>United States
The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal Criminal Code. Chapter 113B of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code defines terrorism and lists the crimes associated with terrorism[6]. In Section 2331 of Chapter 113b, terrorism is defined as:
"..activities that involve violent... <or life-threatening acts>... that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and... appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and ...<if domestic>...(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States...<if international>...(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States..." <<<< snip
snip>>>>>Laws and government agencies
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations: "...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).
Current U.S. national security strategy: "premeditated, politically motivated violence against innocents."
United States Department of Defense: the "calculated use of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."
USA PATRIOT Act: "activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S."
The U.S. National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) described a terrorist act as one which was: "premeditated; perpetrated by a subnational or clandestine agent; politically motivated, potentially including religious, philosophical, or culturally symbolic motivations; violent; and perpetrated against a noncombatant target." [7]
The British Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism so as to include not only violent offences against persons and physical damage to property, but also acts "designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system".
[8] This latter consideration would include shutting down a website whose views one dislikes. However this, and any of the other acts covered by the definition would also need to be (a) designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, AND (b)be done for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause.[the latter three terms are not defined in the Act]. [9] <<<< snip
Snip>>>>>Criticisms of the term
Jason Burke, an expert in radical Islamic activity, has this to say on the word "terrorism":
"There are multiple ways of defining terrorism, and all are subjective. Most define terrorism as 'the use or threat of serious violence' to advance some kind of 'cause'. Some state clearly the kinds of group ('sub-national', 'non-state') or cause (political, ideological, religious) to which they refer.
Others merely rely on the instinct of most people when confronted with an act that involves innocent civilians being killed or maimed by men armed with explosives, firearms or other weapons. None is satisfactory, and grave problems with the use of the term persist. Terrorism is after all, a tactic. the term 'war on terrorism' is thus effectively nonsensical. As there is no space here to explore this involved and difficult debate, my preference is, on the whole, for the less loaded term 'militancy'. This is not an attempt to condone such actions, merely to analyse them in a clearer way." ("Al Qaeda", ch.2, p.22)
Other arguments include that:
There is no strict worldwide commonly accepted definition.
Any definition that could be agreed upon in, say, English-speaking countries would be biased towards those countries.
Almost every serious attempt to define the term have been sponsored by governments who instinctively attempt to draw a definition which excludes bodies like themselves.
Most groups called "terrorist" deny such accusations. Virtually no organisation openly calls itself terrorist.
Many groups call all their enemies "terrorist".
The word is very loosely applied and very difficult to challenge when it is being used inappropriately, for example in war situations or against non-violent persons.
It allows governments to apply a different standard of law to that of ordinary criminal law on the basis of a unilateral decision.
There is no hope that people will ever all agree who is "terrorist" and who is not.
The term as widely used in the West reflects a bias towards the status quo. Violence by established governments is sold as "defence", even when that claim is considered dubious by some; any attempt to oppose the established order through military means, however, is often labelled "terrorism".
If we labelled groups terrorist on the basis of how their opponents perceive them, such labels would be very controversial, for example:
State of Israel, but also the states of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban
The Contemporary Palestine Liberation Organization, but also the United States and CIA
Groups conducting revolution, such as the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), are routinely denigrated as "terrorist"
Almost all guerrilla groups (like Tamil Tigers or Chechen rebels) are accused of being "terrorist", but almost all guerrilla groups accuse countries they fight against of being "terrorist" too.
Organizations such as the American Revolutionary Sons of Liberty—revered in the Unites States—might have been considered "terrorists" by today's standards, which suggests the standards for applying the label are not consistent.
Resistance movement during World War II. Some historians even claim that resistance in Poland used biological weapons.
All forms of colonization (especially by North Americans and Europeans) which exposed indigenous peoples to diseases they had no immunity to, especially if they were vaguely aware they were doing it.
The word "Terrorist" is pejorative.<<<<<snip |
