Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  
Home

People Should Understand the Definition of Terrorism

Submitted by BuzzFlash on Fri, 07/28/2006 - 3:29pm.

MS. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON

This is a recap by Parry that I was glad to be reminded of, especially why the Marines were targeted in Lebanon years ago. I have been guilty of swallowing the word "terrorism," which does seem to be used against just one group of people, even though Israel, the US, and the Arabs are all guilty of killing thousands of innocent people. All are guilty. And, it seems that there is no difference, no real intelligence in any of the leadership today. Bush fits right in. The problem is that these leaders such as Bush and the others who are the ones instructing the violence, they never have to be afraid for their own skin. That is what is wrong with this picture. I resent every single penny spent on the protection of Bush. Every cent.

This from Parry's "Whose Moral Clarity?'":

Take, for instance, the widespread agreement that Hezbollah earned the opprobrium as “terrorist” because one of its suicide bombers destroyed the U.S. Marine barracks in 1983 killing 241 American servicemen in Beirut.

While this incident is routinely cited as the indisputable evidence that Hezbollah is an evil “terrorist” organization, the reality is much murkier. Indeed, under any objective definition of “terrorism,” the Beirut bombing would not qualify as a “terrorist” act.

“Terrorism” is classically defined as violence against civilians to achieve a political goal. In the case of the Marines, however, their status had changed from an original peacekeeping mission in the midst of Lebanon’s civil war into the role of combatant as the Reagan administration allowed “mission creep” to affect the assignment. (snip)

I didn't know or remember this horrible US incident in 1985, too busy fighting the troubles of the Reagan/Bush years here at home trying to survive, which is also what many people are having to do today, working more than one job to survive. Back then, for a short time, I had three jobs. Sounds preposterous doesn't it. Companies were going belly up, and hiring part-time workers, of course without benefits. And, Dallas, at that time was full of people from all over the US, whose towns had collapsed because of the "bowling ball effect," across the country, as it was referred to back then.

In 1985, Casey targeted Hezbollah leader Sheikh Fadlallah in an operation that included hiring operatives who detonated a car bomb outside the Beirut apartment building where Fadlallah lived.

As described by Bob Woodward in Veil, “the car exploded, killing 80 people and wounding 200, leaving devastation, fires and collapsed buildings. Anyone who had happened to be in the immediate neighborhood was killed, hurt or terrorized, but Fadlallah escaped without injury. His followers strung a huge ‘Made in the USA’ banner in front of a building that had been blown out.”

Consortiumnews.com

If that above incident and all of Bush's war and occupation are not considered terrorism ... Americans are only fooling themselves. We are the biggest terrorist on the block today.
 
Thanks BuzzFlash,
 
Shirley Smith

MS. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON




»

Terrorism is such a murky

Submitted by tseving on Sat, 07/29/2006 - 8:39am.
Terrorism is such a murky term. If memory serves, British General Howe once accused insurgents as terrorists because they fired from behind fences and trees, targeted officers, and refused to line up and fight in formation. Those 'terrorists' went on to found our nation. The 'Bush speak' definition might be: 'anyone who opposes the reign of US King George II." Let us remember that when Osama was taking US money to commit terrorist acts against the Soviets in Afghanistan, he was not a terrorist. He was a "freedom fighter." tseving -Surviving Bush one day at a time
»

Terrorism

Submitted by GeneGlickman on Fri, 07/28/2006 - 4:34pm.

This statement was made by Edward Peck, former Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism in the Reagan Administration. It appeared on Friday, July 28’s edition of Democracy Now. I believe it deserves wide distribution, especially because of its source. It comes from an expert on “terrorism” who was high up in a previous Republican administration. Here is what he said:

“I have a piece of paper here I would like to quote from, if I may, because this discussion comes up so many times. In 1985, when I was the Deputy Director of the Reagan White House Task Force on Terrorism, they asked us -- this is a Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism; I was the Deputy Director of the working group -- they asked us to come up with a definition of terrorism that could be used throughout the government. We produced about six, and each and every case, they were rejected, because careful reading would indicate that our own country had been involved in some of those activities.

"After the task force concluded its work, Congress got into it, and you can google into U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331, and read the U.S. definition of terrorism. And one of them in here says -- one of the terms, 'international terrorism,' means 'activities that,' I quote, 'appear to be intended to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.'

"Yes, well, certainly, you can think of a number of countries that have been involved in such activities. Ours is one of them. Israel is another. And so, the terrorist, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. And I think it’s useful for people who discuss that phrase to remember that Israel was founded by terrorist organizations and terrorist leaders, Menachem Begin, who became statesmen and went on to win the Nobel Peace Prize.”

»