Skip to main content

Terrorism: They are terrorists, no two ways about it

IN any part of the world, if there is a terrorist attack, suspicion always falls on Muslims first.

And if the terrorists are from another country, the media would label the countries from where the terrorists originate as pro-terrorist regimes.

Two atrocities -- one in Oklahoma City, the United States, in 1995 and the other in Oslo, Norway, last week -- should change these perceptions. These incidents show that one should not rush to label all Muslims as terrorists.


The definition of terrorist is different, depending on which point of view one holds. For the Palestinian people, terrorists mean freedom fighters.

But Timothy McVeigh, the man who carried out the Oaklahoma bombing, and Anders Behring Breivik, the man who killed at least 76 people in Norway, are regarded as mass murderers. They should be treated as terrorists.

Some analysts have been quoted by the foreign media as saying that these two could not be categorised as terrorists because they were locals who killed their own people. Isn't that a double standard?


A terrorist is a terrorist. Forget the fact that he is an outsider or that he belongs to some religious group.

The West should look at those who are right-leaning. Young people in Europe and the US are being influenced by those in the far-right.

Behring Breivik's 1,500-page manifesto indicates the seriousness of the matter and the West needs to give it serious consideration. The advancement of far-right thinking will hamper the advocacy of rule of law and human rights.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Two Tales, Two Leaders - PART 1

Man has dual nature; he is both his own person and a member of his country. On the one hand, the law must protect the individual from the injustices of the multitude.  History has shown how individuals fall prey to mass perversity, their crime being simply a refusal to conform to the beliefs and prejudices of the majority. Anwar Ibrahim, The Asian Renaissance, 1997., Page 63. The value system and ethical code therefore determine the success or failure of corrective measures. If the value system is wrong, corrective measures will not be productive or will be only slightly productive. When the value system motivates, very little corrective measures are needed. Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad, The Malay Dilemma, 1970., Pages 172-173. Introduction Malaysia is our motherland. We love our country. This country has so much of wealth. Even though, Malaysia has agonized considerably in past three decades because of the malpractices of the corrupted characters but she is never fail t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Brexit: A lesson for Malaysians

Yesterday, Britons through a referendum made a decision to leave European Union. The ruling Conservative Party divided on this referendum and David Cameron in favour of ‘Remain’ was defeated outright. Even though he is disagreed with the decision of Britons, he announced that he is resigning from his premiership in respect of people’s decision. We can expect in a mature democracy country like United Kingdom this is vastly anticipated to be transpired.   A few days ago, the current Chief Commissioner of Malaysian Anti-Corruption of Commission made a statement that he is stepping down from his position and there are some rumours indicating that a few prominent officers from the said Commission will either resign or retire. It’s very eccentric news for Malaysians as it will have a profound impact on bribery and corruption issues in Malaysia as a whole. Recently, the results of two by elections were won by Barisan Nasional, the ruling party of Malaysia. Many promises had been...
Post a Comment
Read more

An Open Letter to Ayahanda Tun - PART 3

For me, to say I want to go to sleep and retire and prepare for my afterlife, I think that is very selfish. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, The Straits Times – 22 January 2017. This statement is the reflection of ayahanda Tun’s true character. For many of us, he is father of this nation. His love for this nation is unprecedented. Even though he was retired in 2003 but made a comeback in 2018 as the seventh Prime Minster of Malaysia at the age of 93 years. He made a history. At this twilight age, most people would have a ‘quite’ life but not ayahanda.   The biggest question is why ayahanda had to return to active in politics at this age to ‘save’ Malaysia. What are the factors which have triggered him to take such a drastic decision? At that time, Malaysia’s reputation was at the stake because of the kleptocratic regime. In addition, the economic, social and political factors had triggered him to make a comeback. But, the main focal point of his return is the damaged r...
Post a Comment
Read more