Incorrect Usage of the Word 'Terrorist'

Many have claimed that the people who don't appreciate the U.S. involvement in their countries and take extreme actions against the U.S. military, are considered terrorists. But, what the people who use this term, don't understand (or, do understand and have an agenda) is, that the meaning of 'terrorist' according to Merriam Webster's is: 'a state of intense fear' or, 'one that inspires fear'. But, these so called terrorists are being described by the Republicans and supporters of the Bush Administration, as people who hate what America stands for (meaning freedom, liberty, equality, etc.). Does it make sense for someone to all of a sudden hate freedom, liberty, and equality??? There has to be something we are missing here, because to hate the natural rights given to man, means you are not human.
In order to better understand the roots of this apparent 'hatred' I have done some research and found that Al Qaida was formed during the occupation of the Russian military in Afghanistan, and the CIA helped with the effort as well. How did they help? Well, they sort of trained and gave weapons to this guy named Osama bin Laden. So, basically the U.S. is fighting their own co-creation in the War On Terror.
My main point is basically, that a terrorist is someone that all they want to do is to create fear in someone; they have no political agenda, and usually they have no allies that are countries.
In the case of Al' Qaida on the other hand, it is clearly shown that they do indeed have a political agenda, they do indeed, have allies that are countries, and, on top of all of that, they are using religion as their means of propoganda, as is the U.S. If you don't believe me, read any of Bush's State of the Union addresses.
Sorry I got a little of topic at the end, but I hope you understand now.

as per TheCatalyst
My main point is basically, that a terrorist is someone that all they want to do is to create fear in someone; they have no political agenda, and usually they have no allies that are countries.

I would seriously beg to differ.
Terrorism is politically motivated, history will verify this. The difficult part is not mixing the acts of terrorism with the acts of insurgency. Both are similiar, but are separate, per se', in motivation.

These may be of interest to you, or anyone else interseted in what 'Terrorism' and a 'terrorist' (based on acts) is:
History of Terrorism
Terrorism: Can You Decide?
Terrorism: Brief Historical Perspective.
Terrorism: Western Perspective
Terrorism: Islamic Perspective

The above links include or have a excellent variety of links given with each article.



seekerof

Originally posted by TheCatalyst
There has to be something we are missing here, because to hate the natural rights given to man, means you are not human.

You need to learn more about the real world.

I'll give you the names of some other terrorists who by your logic are "missing something" because surely they can't not hate the natural rights of man!

Totenkopfverbanden
Gestapo
Glavnoye Razvedovatel'noye Upravlenie (GRU)

Some events:

Apartheid
Final Solution
Cultural Revolution
Worker's Revolution
People's Revolution

So on and so forth.

The ideals of Liberty Equality and Justice are unique to America and semi-traditional to the British. But beyond that, they are not even conceivable.

The Al Qaeda are terrorists, who want to convert all of Islam to their interpretation of that religion, and to hell with everyone else.

They are terrorists because they don't fight with honor or dignity, they give "dead-lines" to beheading prisoners.

I say we enslave every last of their kind, put them in Prison Camps, capture their wives and children and force them to have "conjugal" visists every month to keep our terrorist prison population up.

And force them to manufacture industrial goods and raw materials. Until the fall of our Empire.

It is time we show them the compassion they have so richly earned.

Originally posted by FreeMason
[

I say we enslave every last of their kind, put them in Prison Camps, capture their wives and children and force them to have "conjugal" visists every month to keep our terrorist prison population up.

And force them to manufacture industrial goods and raw materials. Until the fall of our Empire.

It is time we show them the compassion they have so richly earned.

I'm all for catching/killing the terrorists but unless their familes are inovled too you can't enslave them as well. I mean if that's the case then I guess I can go around and round up some white famlies since they may have had a grandpa, uncle etc. who hanged a black man in 1930!? I don't condone terrorism and I hate it but again you can only go after those responsible and by that I mean those obviously who've done the crimes, those who've helped finance it and give safe housing, transportation logistics etc.

If the terrorists say had a family or group from their family who did any of this then they're guilty too but if the family wasn't involved (for example had no contact with this relative at all and didn't know whereabouts etc.) you can't hold them guilty as well.

trueseeker, the Arabs don't seem to care about your concepts of "humanism"...I'm just following the golden rule. And yes their families are involved, it's like your dad goes to work everyday raping women because the Sudan government pays you to and you cut them across the legs to mark them as "yours". What do you do? They don't seem to stop their daddies...blah blah blah.

"Do unto others as you wish them to do unto you", they are wishing for enslavement.

Besides, if we don't enslave their women, then how would we maintain our prison-manufacturing population?

*meh don't take all this too seriously, this is just concepts for "worst possible retaliation...the entire conquest of the arab//muslim world establishing an Apartheid-like state*.

It's not like I'm really advocating it or such ... though... it is sometimes intruiging.