Why is a terrorist, a terrorist?

In my police department, we profile each traffic violator we stop. this is done for a reason. then why should airplane passengers not be profiled? in this case, profiling for the safety of the other passengers. i am for profiling. it keeps order and safety in check, especially in airplane travel. in the world, there are leaders and there are followers. i believe most terrorists are followers. they are brainwashed into believing a just cause for the benefit of one individual person.

Terrorists do what they do for the same reason that some of our most famous terrorists acted the way they acted. It is usually to try to inspire change or make a statement. The Boston Tea Party was a terrorist act. They were saying something about taxes and showing disagreement. By destroying cargo that did not belong to them.

They acted that way because they truly believed in what they were trying to say.

Why is a spade a spade? You ask the imponderable. Best guess, they’re wired wrong. A common trait in all wack jobs.

If you notice the young man in the most recent event is being lauded for his attempt. I agree with @john65pennington in regards to terroritsts being followers to an extent. The men that are high up on that chain are hidden in the mountains. You do not see BenLaden on a plane, ready to meet the virgins instead are young men, turned radical.
I feel very sad for the father of the young man, who tried to warn us and at the same time save his son. This movement is so powerful they push family out of the way.

@EmpressPixie, I am curious as to know what the USA citizens have done to provoke the Muslim socitey that they feel the need to anilalate us (the Infidels). There have been attacks no only here but Spain, England, and other places. I just hope you are not making excuses for them.

I notice that the Boston Tea Party was described as a terrorist act. I disagree, at least as far as today’s terrorist acts are concerned. To me, a terrorist is someone that attacks people unrelated to the perceived offense. For instance, the 9–11 murderers killed airline passengers and office workers because they disagreed with U.S. policy in the middle east. If they, for instance, launched a grenade at the White house or Pentagon, it would have been an act of war, not a terrorist attack. Instead, they cowardly killed airplane passengers and office workers that had no say in American policy.

Regarding the tea party, the revolutionaries attacked the East India Company that was instrumental in developing trade and taxation policy in collusion with the British Monarch. They were a legitimate target,

I think that real profiling would be useful, especially to speed up screening. I can’t understand why we have an arbitrary “no fly list” and no profle for travelers with actual contacts with terrorist organizations.

BRAVO @Ron_C !!!

@Cotton101 you asked when terrorism started. Try this link,,http://www.kingshouse.org/terrorism.htm

Thank you everyone…got a doctor’s appt. Will comment on the answers later!

The word “terrorist” has always been politicized. One side’s “terrorists” are always another side’s “freedom fighters.”

I would prefer to limit the word “terrorist” to those who specifically target civilians to create fear and panic. Note that this would mean many U.S. actions in warfare count as terrorism, such as the firebombing of Dresden and the two atomic bombs in WW2.

@Ron_C, the 9/11 hijackers targeted military and political targets—the Pentagon and the White House. And in al-Qaeda’s twisted ideology, the world’s economic system is a vast weapon, run by evil Zionists, used by the Western kufr (infidels) to keep the Muslims down, and used to finance wars that kill Muslims and occupy Muslim lands. So of course it makes sense to target the World Trade Center.

So in the mind of al-Qaeda operatives, they weren’t attacking targets “unrelated to perceived offenses.” It’s entirely likely that they targeted the civilians they did because they felt those civilians in those buildings were culpable.

And I hope I don’t have to say this but no, I don’t in any way shape or form support any killing of civilians ever, certainly including 9/11.

Oh, I see. We need to work on definitions so that we are all on the same page.

To me, a terrorist act is an act done meant to intimidate or frighten (ie, terrorize) and is done to perpetuate a goal or ideology. Massive property damage, to me, counts.

Also, I am not defending any terrorists nor am I making excuses for them. It was asked why they do what they do and I offered a reason. I do not agree with terrorism. I am also simply pointing out that the USA, the country I live in, has a background that includes terrorism by my working definition. It’s that “the winners write history” thing. The fact that we won the war and were able to form our own nation means that we remember the act fondly.

I believe most Americans know so little about the rest of the world that they CANT answer this very good question because their only “knowledge” comes nit first-hand but through through the filters of government, media,
heresay, prejudices, etc. I’m not saying no one on this thread is right or wrong. But speaking for myself, I feel too uninformed to answer.

Getting back to profiling! John made a good point! If we are honest, this is a possible solution to the problem, I’m sure the ACLU would not agree. Personally, don’t think terrorist should be protected by the Geneva Convention as they are not fighting for a country…and more than that, the method of which they kill. These are people that are controlled by hate and twisted idealogies! Certainly don’t think they deserve the same treatment as a man in uniform representing his country.

Many would say, by profiling, our values are no better than the terrorist. Well, people who fly planes into blgds. and kill thousands of innocent people should they not be treated differently?

@Qingu I can see that the suicide-murders may have seen some of their victims as enemies but, still, they apparently used commercial airlines and attacked targets that had the maximum potential for civilian casualties. I don’t condone the U.S. and Israeli methods in the middle east but they are, at least, not deliberately targeting civilian targets. I believe that the “peripheral casualties” are unacceptable but an effort is made to reduce them. As a former military person, I know that the military does not purposely target civilians. The mercenaries the government hires are not so discriminating.

@Ron_C, I agree with that. I was just disputing that, in the hijackers’ minds, their victims were “unrelated.” Though perhaps it is folly to speculate about what goes on in their minds; I doubt it’s ever that consistent to begin with.

Maybe not consistant but they are persistant!

what never ceases to amaze me is the lack of attacks on Western targets, i also find it quite reassuring, count your lucky stars folks, that the rest of the world is far more tolerant than you guys, or perhaps they are merely incapable of effectively responding to American commercial and military chauvinism. At the end of the day when we study the impact that the west has on the planet, i think we got off light really, don’t you think. Terrorism will accompany capitalism and imperialism like a shadow, get used to it, there are probably those amongst us who even accept a little terrorism as the price to pay for wealth and hegemony. As long as it happens to someone else….who cares.

@mammal so, after 9–11, we should have done nothing?

A horriby misguided belief that death is more glorious than life.

@Qingu You have that straight. I think they are just like cult members. They believe everything that their leaders say is the undisputed truth. It is very sad for a person to be so mind controlled.

BINGO

@Ron_C…. well, in all fairness you wouldn’t see the Boston tea Party as a terrorist act, you’re on the side that won after-all.

@Flo_Nightengale…. you really cant work out why the whole world hates America? Even it’s allies? Huh!
Well here’s a quick run down of why the Muslim world hates America. Islam is in itself fundamentally opposed to pretty much everything America stands for, greed, excess, exploitation, self image etc etc
Additionally America is Israels principal ally in the world, supplying it with weaponry that Muslim countries can only dream of being allowed to buy (including nuclear technology), which are then used against them.
Israel, a country that is entirely made up of land stolen from Muslims.
America also supports various quasi-fascist regimes such as Saudi Arabia & Kuwait which use brutal methods to suppress the rights & freedoms of their people, people who have been desperate for democracy for about the last 30yrs or so.
If this doesn’t give you some idea of why some Muslims hate America then there really is no helping you.

@Flo_Nightengale far be it, for me, to support American policy in the middle east but your reasons for Muslims hating the U.S. don’t ring true. First of all I agree that the U.S. offers too much support for Israel. I disagree that Muslims want democracy. It is apparent that in Iraq and Afghanistan, they prefer tribal leadership. Iran may want democracy but religion has too much say in government and law. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are actually family grants from the British empire and all we can do is try to get along with them. They are a problem for the Arabs to solve.

The middle eastern people want what the U.S. has but don’t want to give up their religious majority or allow religious or even ethnic freedom. I also don’t believe that greed, excess, and exploitation are strictly American qualities, just look at the leadership throughout the middle east. I believe the only argument is who holds the wealth, they just want it for themselves and are less likely to share than the Americans (that includes all the North American countries).

What do you want to discuss next, how about “women’s rights”?

@Ron_C…. hiya Ron, good to see ya again. I will accept that my arguments have been boiled down to their most basic but I wanted to give a flavour, perhaps a starting point for further reading, rather than provide a complete answer… that’s far too much like hard work :) I think one of the biggest problems here is that we in the west talk about the Muslim world as if it’s one harmonious entity, when in reality it’s as fractured & disparate as the west. There are Shi’ah, Sunni, Sufi, & Ahmaddiya Muslims, & even these groups have numerous sub-groups, similar to Christianity.
I quite strongly disagree with your assertion that Muslims don’t want democracy, they do, they just don’t want it imposed upon them by us, & they want to develop their own brand of democracy that better suites Islam. & I agree, greed, excess etc aren’t strictly American traits, but Americans are the poster children for this way of living. I mean, what sort of nation proudly declares ‘greed is good’.

@TheJoker Really thought with the election of Barack Obama this “hate issue” would be less on the part of the Muslim nations toward America. Not sure if that has happened yet. Hard to know..

Understand your comment about our idealogies being totally different. But, having said that, there are a lot of good Muslims who support America. The problem, as everyone knows, is the radically extremist Muslims.

This is such a complicated issue. Wish there was an answer, but the best minds in the World cannot figure this one out…far be it, for me to understand and know the answer.

@Cotton101…. couldn’t agree more my friend. I dont honestly think there is an answer to it, too much has been said & done by both sides.
& you are right. People (including myself) are softening their opinions towards America thanks to Obama, it’s just that the amount of damage Bush did will take a long, long time to get over.

@TheJoker You are correct about the Muslim world being widely split and that they don’t want democracy “imposed’ on them. I submit that you cannot “impose” democracy. It is something that has to rise naturally. Imposition is definitely undemocratic. That is what the previous administration did not understand. All we can do is offer them self governance. That is also why I don’t believe that we should stay in Iraq of Afghanistan. We gave them a chance, they either run with it or find their own government.

By the way, it is the republican party motto that “greed is good” and not the philosophy of the other ⅔rds of the country.

@Ron_C… I stand corrected, I’m glad there are Americans like you about Ron!

Gosh, hate to get on the Bush issue..but, his administration did more harm than any administration in my lifetime to our country’s standing with the rest of the world. It was an arrogant administration. And, what is even funnier, Obama is trying to repair that damage and the Repubs call him weak..LOLL..just amazing…politics….geeezzzzz

@Cotton101….. Hehe, American politics can be rather hard to get your head round from the European perspectave!

@TheJoker hey, certainly understand my friend! ditto!

@Cotton101 I spent November in Europe and found myself apologizing for Bush’s transgressions. All I could say is that I never voted for him, I don’t believe that he was legally elected and I did work on Obama’s campaign.

America’s policy during part of Clinton’s and all of Bush’s administrations was to dismantle the U.S. government, promote policy with military force, and insure that the multinational corporations make significant profits.

@Ron_C ditto my friend…hope Obama can repair some of that!

@Cotton101 That was my hope also but so far, I am not encouraged.

@Cotton101 & @Ron_C… In a funny sort of way Obama reminds me of Tony Blair. Lots of anticipation & hope, idealism etc when he came to power, followed by the slow recognition that he was actually just more of the same as integrity got swapped for pragmatism…. fingers crossed Obama wont go as far as Blair did though.

a terrorist can not be a terrorist unless they are terrified….that is how they measure their success…how terrified they make us….9\11 was for sure terrifying…but this idiot that had a bomb in his pants is just a joke to their own community and mine!...

@TheJoker, I’m not sure if you were paying attention to Obama’s campaign. From the beginning he ran as a pragmatic centrist open to compromise with everyone from Republicans to Ahmadinejad.

It’s kind of annoying when liberals blame Obama for not living up to the fictional revolutionary narrative they’ve foisted upon him.

@Qingu…. you’re probably right. Although what I meant was that the feel of the Obama campaign was one of honesty & trust, as the New Labour campaign was under Blair. I’ve nothing against compromise, it’s the bedrock of democracy, so long as it remain honest….. as it didn’t under Blair.