3 ms·
The original definition of terrorism is "government by intimidation"[1]. i.e. If a government uses terror to control it's populace, it's terrorism, e.g., U.S. g
by meric 11y ago
The original definition of terrorism is "government by intimidation"[1]. i.e. If a government uses terror to control it's populace, it's terrorism, e.g., U.S. government intimidating it's workers not to whistle-blow is one example. Somewhere along history it flipped to "intimidation of governments". Whichever way you read the word, however, the U.S. is a state sponsor of terrorism[2], having provided support to Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden when they were fighting in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, amongst many others[3][4], not withstanding the acts causing terror such as the bombing of a Doctors Without Borders hospital[5], and in 2013 giving weapons to Syrian Rebels[6], which we know ISIS & Al-Qaeda[7] are the biggest factions.
To answer your question, Pinochet, Taiwan government in 70's, Stalin, would all be terrorists, according to the original definition of terrorism, as in "intimidation by governments". Somewhere along the way propaganda completely reversed the meaning of the word to "intimidation of governments by non-government actors". Either way, the word "terrorism" used in propaganda everywhere, it is a loaded word used carefully with craft to manipulate the people's perception of nefarious activities performed by governments from all around the world, the biggest of which is the U.S. government.
Terrorism, the word itself, is the weapon.
Terrorism are certain activities performed by one's enemies, when one wishes to use the word terrorism to intimidate the populace to allow the government to implement draconian policies.
1. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/may/07/terrorism http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/may/07/terrorism
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_to_Osama_bin_Laden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_...
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_state-sponsored_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_state-sponso...
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Allen_Davis_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Allen_Davis_incident
5. http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/05/us-bombs-doctors-without-borders-hospital-in-kunduz-merkel-in-new-delhi-isis-claims-killing-in-bangladesh-pakistan-prepares-punjab-operation/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/05/us-bombs-doctors-without...
6. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-b...
7. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11882195/US-trained-Division-30-rebels-betrayed-US-and-hand-weapons-over-to-al-Qaedas-affiliate-in-Syria.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/1...
U.S. claims to only supply weapons to "moderate" rebels, and U.S. describes Al-Qaeda as "moderate".
- varjag 11y ago> Somewhere along the way propaganda completely reversed the meaning of the word to "intimidation of governments by non-government actors". It's a bit more nuanced than that. For the first 100 or so years "terrorism" was self proclaimed policy by revolutionaries of all sorts, for example the first French Republic or a number of Russian 19th century anarchist factions. The term did not originate as propaganda or a political slur, it was proud banner of the activists at the time. Perhaps only by 1920s the extreme political left felt compelled to distance from the term, and the term was subsequently extended to any government or non-government intimidation activity.
- acqq 11y agoJust to point to this brilliant detail from the first link: "The state department regards attacks against "noncombatant* targets" as terrorism. But follow the asterisk to the small print and you find that "noncombatants" includes both civilians and military personnel who are unarmed or off duty at the time. Several examples are given, such as the 1986 disco bombing in Berlin, which killed two servicemen. The most lethal bombing in the Middle East last year was the suicide attack on USS Cole in Aden harbour which killed 17 American sailors and injured 39 more. As the ship was armed and its crew on duty at the time, why is this classified as terrorism? Look again at the small print, which adds: "We also consider as acts of terrorism attacks on military installations or on armed military personnel when a state of military hostilities does not exist at the site, such as bombings against US bases." " Perfect. Thanks.