What is a terrorist?

We have heard a lot of nonsense lately about whom is a terrorist. Some political folks have said that Hair Braiders are! Others have said that a certain editor is. Still others have suggested that anyone who opposes the PLP is!

To me a terrorist is someone who uses force or violence to advance their agenda. Someone who uses arguments, reason, persuasion or even "hard sell" tactics is not a terrorist.

My fear is that if we give to loose a definition to that word there will be a lot of us who will be classified as a threat! It seems that the PLP want to brand anyone who thinks as a terrorist - even some of those who are already dead!

My fear is that if we give to loose a definition to that word there will be a lot of us who will be classified as a threat! It seems that the PLP want to brand anyone who thinks as a terrorist - even some of those who are already dead!

Sounds like a 21st century witch hunt to me CG. :rolleyes:

Sounds like a 21st century witch hunt to me CG. :rolleyes:You could be right!

What is a terrorist?

We have heard a lot of nonsense lately about whom is a terrorist. Some political folks have said that Hair Braiders are! Others have said that a certain editor is. Still others have suggested that anyone who opposes the PLP is!

[To me a terrorist is someone who uses force or violence to advance their agenda. Someone who uses arguments, reason, persuasion or even "hard sell" tactics is not a terrorist.]

My fear is that if we give to loose a definition to that word there will be a lot of us who will be classified as a threat! It seems that the PLP want to brand anyone who thinks as a terrorist - even some of those who are already dead!

Does this definition make George W. Bush a terrorist?

Does this definition make George W. Bush a terrorist?You could say that if the bombs were dropping on you! There is the problem. "One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter." The word is defined by the persons being attacked, not the ones attacking.

I was over at a friend's house the other week. We were sitting in his livingroom trying to "fix all the world’s problems" when his four year-old son came in and went straight for his Dad’s glass of beer! My friend removed the glass just in time. "No! he said. You are not having any of this beer!" The four-year old looked indignant, screwed up his little face and yelled "TERRORIST!" Then he stormed out of the room.

That is why I distrust the word. It is to easy to "use" it as a weapon to brand and shame others - even the four-year old knew that!

to me a terrorist is simply any person or group who causes terror to others - to terrorize others in any which way shape or form. some biggety people could put others in terror just by their presence. :p lol

What is a terrorist?

We have heard a lot of nonsense lately about whom is a terrorist. Some political folks have said that Hair Braiders are! Others have said that a certain editor is. Still others have suggested that anyone who opposes the PLP is!

To me a terrorist is someone who uses force or violence to advance their agenda. Someone who uses arguments, reason, persuasion or even "hard sell" tactics is not a terrorist.

My fear is that if we give to loose a definition to that word there will be a lot of us who will be classified as a threat! It seems that the PLP want to brand anyone who thinks as a terrorist - even some of those who are already dead!

I guess that makes both Bishop Samuel Greene and Bishop Neil Ellis terrorists....
Hmmm that's interesting!!! :what:

I guess that makes both Bishop Samuel Greene and Bishop Neil Ellis terrorists....
Hmmm that's interesting!!! :what:
Possible....?

But the word "terrorist" is like the word "enemy." They are both words we use to brand others. We seldom use them about ourselves.

a terrorist is a funny lookin guy in a turban.....
with a quran in one hande and an explosive device in his pocket!!!:cheers:

It depends.
If you want truth, then it is a word, nothing more.
If you want words it is a misunderstanding and dissatisfaction...nothing more.
If you want understanding and satisfaction...then it is ones opportunity to surface, to cede and cease power, to control, to dominate one idea, one group over the other whether it be government or opposition...nothing more…and so forth all things depends…
It depends.

It depends.
If you want truth, then it is a word, nothing more.
If you want words it is a misunderstanding and dissatisfaction...nothing more.
If you want understanding and satisfaction...then it is ones opportunity to surface, to cede and cease power, to control, to dominate one idea, one group over the other whether it be government or opposition...nothing more…and so forth all things depends…
It depends.
True, what you say, but it is a loaded word that engenders great emotional meaning. It is just a word? Yes, but who wants to be called a terrorist?

True, what you say, but it is a loaded word that engenders great emotional meaning. It is just a word? Yes, but who wants to be called a terrorist?

I can never give you the answer you want but I will answer you this way:
I like very much your slogan; it speaks very strongly “The Truth will set you free. The only trouble is that you may not like the truth, or being free!”
I may be concern of what others say about me, or what they label me with. The labeling may not have been my intention. However, others will say what they want anyway. There is not much I can do about that, but what I can do I do, I work and I stay within the framework of the rules (law) and no matter the word or the intent of the word “actions speaks louder than words.” “Action speaks loudest”.

What took Jesus down was only what was said, ever since saying what they want when they want to who want have been a method very much abused. If I am called a terrorist today, would it be any different than the times when being called a witch was harmful or when Jesus was accused of being the king of the Jews or the son of God.

The word terrorist reflects harmful meaning but what different it is today than it was in the pass with phrases that no boggles and affects the mind of society? Today the term terrorist affects the minds of society, but the most troubling part of society is not terrorist as it is termed but terrorist as in our social actions, our social ideas, our social gains.
Society is in trouble and the trouble with society is to blame some once else, a hope that is more greatly favored in hopes to fix the break.

In other words we can keep things within the frame words of the rules or we can abuse it pushing it far beyond its limits. We can only hope that it stays within the frame works of the rules, otherwise what can you or I do, what can we do if they use these such classifications outside the framework of there rules. Perhaps we may be delayed for a while but “The Truth will set you free. The only trouble is that you may not like the truth, or being free!” Your slogan is very strong, stick with it, it speaks very loud.

Thank you, consultbahamas good to hear from you. I have added another part to my slogan. I can’t remember who said it but it is a good one. "I’m not OK, you’re not OK, but it is OK."

How we struggle to label each other, and ourselves. We use bad words and good ones but the truth is that none of us are what we think we are. None of us are OK, but it is OK anyhow.

Perhaps we do not need to judge and label as much as we need to listen. If we had listened to the "Terrorists" and they listened to us, would they be "Terrorists?"

Thank you, consultbahamas good to hear from you. I have added another part to my slogan. I can’t remember who said it but it is a good one. "I’m not OK, you’re not OK, but it is OK."

How we struggle to label each other, and ourselves. We use bad words and good ones but the truth is that none of us are what we think we are. None of us are OK, but it is OK anyhow.

Perhaps we do not need to judge and label as much as we need to listen. If we had listened to the "Terrorists" and they listened to us, would they be "Terrorists?"

OK, your slogan is very good CG, I like it.
My answers is never to undermined or to dismiss the issue or the opinions of others but only to express the view I see, and the view that all see is as equal to the view I see, I intend never to knock down but rather to build up and to build on, thank you.

OK, let me deal with the word terrorist as it is implied by society, I will attempt to answer you within the rules that governs this word.

I have written more than fifty articles leading up to the war on Iraq, the war which suggests the attempt to expand the war on terrorism to put down the idea of terrorism around the world. I have forwarded and copied all the articles to almost every international news agency around the world including local news papers and political organizations here in the Bahamas. Several of these articles were read or published by several international news agencies, I can not say that these letters got the same attention locally (here in the Bahamas).

In my articles I have attempted to define terrorism and ways to deal with it. Whether or not the terrorist will be a terrorist if we listen and he listens still depends. It depends if we are serious about what we are dealing with, if we are concern with dealing with terrorism and eradicating this beast and the ingredient to the beast, only then can we create a monster to put the beast down. When the beast is down then we have the ingredient to the monster and the monster itself to be put down, what will put the monster down? Well, then, I think perhaps we may have to create a demon to put the monster down and on and on and on it goes. Is this the way? At least it is an answer.

So what seems to be the most likely thing to do? Listen, “yes all must listen” nothing lost, and perhaps nothing gain, but at least we didn’t make anything new, nothing different. But we must do more than listen; all must agree to a truce, cease action and eventually get up shake hands and walk away with a clear and meaningful consensus. Perhaps this does not completely resolve the issue but it is at lease a meaningful beginning a path to roll back the ingredient that is making the beast.

You suggested, “If we had listened to the "Terrorists" and they listened to us, would they be "Terrorists?” Every thing depends; we can learn from other things how to deal with something else, so I will answer this way. We can either listen or we can go on fighting this war on terrorism the way we have been fighting cancer and aids. How much lives, time, effort and money have we spent and unwilling to put behind fighting these illnesses, whereas preventing (maintaining health) these illness packs a whole lot more guarantee. The method to prevent far outweighs the methods to cure, but is it not true that much more effort and resources are placed behind the cure and help us to live our habits in comfortable ways?

In the case of terrorism the same is true; to define terrorism is to identify it and perhaps to break it down. But breaking it down is not enough, rather it must be properly identified. It takes courage and a man working with the cool and level head to do this, not an angry man, not a man who sees opportunity for himself and a group of his own chosen individuals around him and their way to everything. No! Rather to see what is encouraging it, what is fueling such idea, what is giving nature and life to this beast this source and deal not only with the terrorist but the effective intelligent method that compliments more the intention rather than methods that expands it. It depends, both sides of this issue must work within the framework of the rules, I see not one thing which exists with one side only to itself.

You asked “If we had listened to the "Terrorists" and they listened to us, would they be "Terrorists?”
We say we are freedom fighters and those who those who listens to us are not terrorist but are also freedom fighters, we like them; we say they are our friends. But to the terrorist those who listen to them are also freedom fighters, they like them, they are friends. If this war goes on to long and both sides continue to recruit to their sides then it is only a matter of time before the fighters forget what they are fighting for and sooner or later another beast is born. You tell me who should listen to whom? Who will be what by listening? Otherwise what should we do about the terrorist? What can we do to put an end to terrorism and this war on terrorism? Thank you for listening.

Thank you for your reply, consultbahamas. You asked a lot of questions. I hope I can answer them all by saying that I believe that we have to listen to those who oppose us, to those who have a grievance with us. (Not only in the global conflicts, but in our everyday lives.) If we can talk about it and come to an agreement than there is no need for fighting. Once the killing starts it is very hard to stop it - not impossible, but hard. This war on Terrorism will be a long one - fifty years, a hundred? Who knows when it will end because with each death there is more reason to seek vengeance, more fuel for hate.

Terrorism is born of desperation! Very acute desperation! No man is going to blow himself, or other people, up if he is only mildly dissatisfied with his condition of life. He has to feel great desperation to do that. Where does this come from? What caused it? It happened because people did not listen to the grievances of those whom we now define as terrorists. A similar thing happened in Northern Ireland and Africa, to name just two. Remember, even a rabbit, if pushed into a corner will bite!

I can’t help the feeling that this Terrorism has a very strong religious element in it - all Terrorism does! That makes it even harder to repair because there is no man more determined that one who has "God" on this side! I hope the U.S. has a number of people who are well versed in Islam. It would be very unwise not to understand the religious components of this latest blood bath.

Is it to late to talk, to listen? No, it is not but each side must come to the table and be ready to humble itself, and give a little and to take a little. That will be hard but it can be done. However, right now it seems easier just to kill each other.