The intellectual roots of terrorism lie in three philosophical ideas which, ironically, are peculiarly Western: popular sovereignty, self- determination and ethical consequentialism. The diffusion of political responsibility that results from popular sovereignty, the belief that every group has a right to its own state, and the decline in the belief in absolute human rights have together fostered a hospitable intellectual climate for terrorism.
On Aug 7, 10:37 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Principles of TerrorismJohn Glaser, August 07, 2012 > Charles Davisnotedon Sunday PresidentObama’s statementon the act of terrorism > committed by a man shooting up a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. The > President “mourn[ed] this losswhich took place at a house of worship” and > killed six people. By contrast, Davis writes, Obama did not mourn a > similaract of terrorism he committedin a drone strike which “hit a village > mosque” in Pakistan and killed “at least ten people.” Davis sums up the moral > of the story: “Whether or not massacring people in a house of worship as part > of a self-styled ‘war on terror’ is morally right or wrong depends on > geography.” > Today, Glenn Greenwaldnoteda savage suicide bombing in southern Yemen in > which amember of Al Qaedaattacked “a funeral serviceattended by members of > civilian militias,” killing up to 45 people. Those sadistic Islamo-fascists! > Except that, as the Bureau of Investigative Journalism hasdocumented, “The > CIA’s drone campaign in Pakistan haskilled dozens of civilians who had gone > to help rescue victims or were attending funerals.” And as theNew York > Timesreported in June 2009, US airstrikes “killed at least 60 people at a > funeral”and“as many as 45 were civilians, among them reportedly ten > children.” Glenn sums up the moral of the story: “the same act that is the > hallmark of repulsive savagery when done by Al Qaeda, Assad, and the Hutaree > militia is transformed into a moral and noble act when done by the Government > of the United States of America.” > Two principles are evident in almost all discussion of US foreign policy: (1) > acts of violence by people is “terrorism,” while acts of violence by the > state is “foreign policy;” (2) acts of violence by Washington are justified > to keep us safe, while acts of violence by other governments we don’t like > are crimes.http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/08/07/principles-of-terrorism/ -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
