What is terrorism?
One of the great debates of our time is the question of what is terrorism and who is a terrorist? Most of the time to me, it seems a label used to describe any activity that a state doesn't like.
Is there any such thing as an absolute terrorism, or is it a subjective decision. Is one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter? Is state terror legitimate to protect its citizens? Do non-state actors have the same rights if they enjoy popular support? Who has the right (if anyone) to authorise terror? And has the subject of "terror" been so often and liberally used that it has lost all meaning, and cannot help us to navigate our way round the real problems.
The Asma Society recently held a conference for Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow. The Editor of the Danish newpaper that published the offending cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed attended and was shown a number of cartoons in reponse. You can see the rest of the series here. He promised that he would publish them, in his generous spirit of liberalness. We wait to hear from him and his publishers.
Is there any such thing as an absolute terrorism, or is it a subjective decision. Is one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter? Is state terror legitimate to protect its citizens? Do non-state actors have the same rights if they enjoy popular support? Who has the right (if anyone) to authorise terror? And has the subject of "terror" been so often and liberally used that it has lost all meaning, and cannot help us to navigate our way round the real problems.
The Asma Society recently held a conference for Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow. The Editor of the Danish newpaper that published the offending cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed attended and was shown a number of cartoons in reponse. You can see the rest of the series here. He promised that he would publish them, in his generous spirit of liberalness. We wait to hear from him and his publishers.
posted by Shelina Zahra Janmohamed at 11:48
2 Comments:
I suppose trying to muddy the meaning of terrorism helps one sleep at night. Certainly if my children were blowing up buses and trains and I didn't not want to condemn them or face reality, I too would say that they were freedom fighters. But suppose those buses and trains were not filled with soldiers but simply schoolchildren who had nothing to do with denying my freedom? Would you still allow me to call my sons freedom fighters or vicious, barbaric terrorists?
You know the answer. It's not as unclear as you first imply. Deep inside your heart of hearts you know you are ashamed of these Muslims. If you weren't ashamed you would never have needed to equivocate.
Your binoculars are back to front when you can interpret questions searching for clarification as 'muddying'.
Is American 'friendly fire' on British troops in Iraq (even though they are supposed to be on the same side) a form of terror when they refuse to reveal this information to the families of the dead men? Or because it is a state perpetrator and 'friendly' a form of terror or not? I'm asking questions about how we distinguish strategies and incidents of violence as terror or not.
Post a Comment
<< Home