Americans evacuated buildings, shut down airports, and rushed to see their loved ones because they were terrified of what might happen next . After that tragic day, terrorism has become more of an alarming topic than ever before. So many questions arose after the attack on the United States. Why would someone want to commit such a horrible act? Why would a person kill themselves only to kill others?
Though everyone accepts that terrorism is a kind of crime, a heinous one at that, the very fact that a terrorist for one is a martyr for others has made the situation very puzzling. It is simple to tell between a crime and an act of terrorism on reason of guilt/innocence proceedings and sentencing procedures. An ordinary criminal, when he pleads guilty, is awarded a sentence in keeping with his crime and serves the sentence in prison. But terrorism works on the basis of an ideology, it is a belief that motivates someone or a group of individuals to engage in acts of violence as they believe that this is the only way to make their grievances heard or felt. Some links or similarities between ordinary crimes and the issue of terrorism are: 1.
Suicide terrorism, as defined by American-French anthropologist Scott Atran is the “targeted use of self-destructing humans against noncombatant civilian populations to effect political change”(Atran 2003: 1534). Many different cultures have varying opinions on the definition of suicide terrorism, and affiliate it with a suicide mission, when the two are separate entities altogether. In a suicide mission, those who participate go into it knowing they may not live, and die accomplishing their mission, whereas in suicide terrorism, it is through their deaths that the mission is accomplished (Horowitz 2008: 3). The real targets in suicide terrorism, are not necessarily those who are targeted, but those who witness the events, as the main objective of this form of terrorism, is to instill fear in a larger population. Those who choose to commit this atrocity, are usually part of terrorist regimes, known as cells, whom through “indoctrination and training under radical leaders, wilfully commit to die for what is perceived as a good method of relieving
The United States Department of Defense defines terrorism as “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological,” (Feith, 2004). Terrorism can be conducted by an individual or a formal organization. A terrorist organization usually initially begins as a special interest group with just a few members, and through recruitment, militia formation,
On the other hand, Luban, would say Yoo ignores the law models and war models if they deny terrorist suspects protection as required. Yoo says, in order to convict a defendant of torture the prosecution must have establish that the torture occurred outside the United States, the defendant acted under the color of law, he victim was within the custody of the defendant, the pain or suffering should be intended. Torture is performed on victims to obtain information or confession, to punish them, for intimidation, or for discrimination. Mental pain is effected by intentional or threatened infliction of severe physical or mental pain, administration or threatened administration of mind altering substances or methods that disrupt senses or personality, threat of imminent death or threat that another person will be immediately subjected to death. Luban raised two models; first is the war model, which supports the use of lethal force on enemy troops irrespective of whether they were personally involved with the adversary.
Due to the semantic field of fear and terror running throughout the discourses of Bush and Blair their choice of lexis is crucial in conveying their political ideologies. The introduction of Bush’s speech was of dire importance. Antithesis is being used within the first sentence; Bush begins his discourse “… Our fellow citizens, our way of life…”, and then ends with “deadly terrorist acts”. Due to the contrasting image portrayed listeners feel their “way of life”, they, as individuals and citizens of America are at threat, of “deadly and deliberate terrorist attacks”. This further promotes the global normalisation of terrorism and the “War on terror”.
Ted Honderich’s concept of “Terrorism for Humanity” In this essay I will discuss Ted Honderich’s concept of “Terrorism for Humanity”. I will discuss his principles behind the concept and its application on the world we live in. I will discuss what makes a life good and what makes a life bad. Could it be said that we, the citizens of the first world, could be justified targets of a terrorist attack by those worse off than us. That if Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel is justifiable and if the same can be said for the September 11th attacks on America.
There were various scenes that portrayed V as a terrorist and other’s that portrayed him as a hero showing him sticking up for others that were tortured like him. In V for Vendetta, V’s character is a hero, V’s actions are justified to achieve his goal, and he is a major symbol in the film. In the Film V For Vendetta, V represents a hero throughout the story while also performed terrorist acts. V believes that the country had forgotten the meaning of their buildings, which he feels is similar to the government forgetting the meaning of everyone having the right to live free. V’s main goal is to scare the country with terrorist attacks in order to bring them together.
Intervention into a celebrity’s personal life, creation of bias reports regarding national or international issues and display of obscenity without viewer discretion, gave media the power to violate the rights of their freedom of expression. It cannot be denied that molding news in such a way can have an intense impact on the viewers. Media, in Pakistan, has exaggerated a lot of news only to gain popularity and public demand, showing dead bodies on roads after a bomb blast or violence in the country has only increased disrespect of our country internationally. So much as people have started considering Pakistan as a terrorist’s nation. Once a person from abroad reluctantly came to Pakistan, and to one’s shock, Pakistan seemed to possess a vast scenic beauty that one was not aware of.
Governmental groups, that we were at war against, were considering the decision to use this type of weapon in order to defeat their enemies in larger numbers. With their belief that this was the right way to win the war against us is a case in point of relativism. Majority of Americans viewed this method of war as wrong. Goodman also states, “Wholesale murder is wrong, then, not just for its scale but also for willfully negating individuality, typing its victims, and stirring hatred against the putative failings of the