Post by JP Cusick on Jun 22, 2011 17:05:12 GMT -5
I have done some research on the terminology of "Terrorist and Terrorism" and those terms are severely inaccurate and inappropriate except in regard to a State sponsored action to terrorize civilians into submission.
As like a Country sends air craft over top of civilian targets (especially done against another Country's population) and just bomb any house or car and kills civilians then that is State sponsored terrorism. But for some small group to stage an attack or bombing for their own reasons against a far stronger Country then that is hardly a realistic case of terrorism. THAT would be like calling a mouse a terrorist for scratching the cat's nose - such is not a true nor accurate terminology.
Some people might know that I wrote a small book on "Codependency", so I do claim to know a bit about psychology, and the word "terrorism" and "terrorist" come from the emotion of terror which comes from the feeling of fear, so that means within our US policy terminology we call the defensive mice as terrorist based on the unreasonable emotions of the aggressor cat.
On 9-11-2001 when a certain group of people hijacked airplanes and crashed them into the World Trade Center and into the Pentagon then I myself did not feel any fear nor terror and I surely know better then to believe that those people did that in order to scare (terrorize) us Americans.
I realize that the Bush administration was terrorized by the action, and many Americans were scared by it, but then to define our enemies as people who scare us is not a reflection of my feelings.
If I were to win this 2012 election and become a US Senator then I too will feel a threat, but then that will be a threat based on what I have become and not any fear for who I am, as I do not feel any threat to me personally, and I would expect for myself as a US Senator to start our Country in working for justice and truth worldwide so to build a future of peace without using State sponsored terror.
The claim that we are fighting "terrorist" over in Afghanistan is an utterly absurd claim as they pose no realistic terror to us at all.
As like a Country sends air craft over top of civilian targets (especially done against another Country's population) and just bomb any house or car and kills civilians then that is State sponsored terrorism. But for some small group to stage an attack or bombing for their own reasons against a far stronger Country then that is hardly a realistic case of terrorism. THAT would be like calling a mouse a terrorist for scratching the cat's nose - such is not a true nor accurate terminology.
Some people might know that I wrote a small book on "Codependency", so I do claim to know a bit about psychology, and the word "terrorism" and "terrorist" come from the emotion of terror which comes from the feeling of fear, so that means within our US policy terminology we call the defensive mice as terrorist based on the unreasonable emotions of the aggressor cat.
On 9-11-2001 when a certain group of people hijacked airplanes and crashed them into the World Trade Center and into the Pentagon then I myself did not feel any fear nor terror and I surely know better then to believe that those people did that in order to scare (terrorize) us Americans.
I realize that the Bush administration was terrorized by the action, and many Americans were scared by it, but then to define our enemies as people who scare us is not a reflection of my feelings.
If I were to win this 2012 election and become a US Senator then I too will feel a threat, but then that will be a threat based on what I have become and not any fear for who I am, as I do not feel any threat to me personally, and I would expect for myself as a US Senator to start our Country in working for justice and truth worldwide so to build a future of peace without using State sponsored terror.
The claim that we are fighting "terrorist" over in Afghanistan is an utterly absurd claim as they pose no realistic terror to us at all.
