When is something Terrorism, and when is it just crime? It's time to start dissipating the cloud of fear
When is deadly violence terrorism, and when is it murder? In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings
there seems to be a universal outcry to catch and punish the “terrorists” who
are responsible. I put that word in
quotes because I question whether that’s the right thing to call them, in light
of what we know.
Over the years, Americans have seen many killings, and even
more malicious injuries. Until very
recently, those events were called what they are: violent crimes. Sometimes one person was killed
or injured, other times it was many.
The chronicle of American history includes all sorts of horrific
actions:
- - Shooting people from a rooftop;
- - Throwing grenades or explosives into crowds
- - Driving a vehicle into a crowd, crushing, maiming and killing;
- - Blowing up cars, trucks, and buses, occupants and all;
- - Deliberately wrecking a bus or train;
- - Burning people alive in homes and even churches;
- - Hunting down and killing people, one after another.
When the perpetrators were caught, all sorts of explanations
were offered:
- - God made me do it;
- - The voices in my head said “kill;”
- - I hate (fill in the name of religion/ethnic/racial group);
- - They owed me money;
- - They did me wrong;
- - I’ll teach them to disrespect me!
Other times, no explanation was offered. Some perpetrators were killed, or killed
themselves. Others simply remained
silent. People were left to wonder. Thousands and thousands have died.
Often there was one perpetrator, acting alone. Sometimes bad guys teamed up, for a variety
of reasons. Some were members of gangs,
or clubs. Sometimes one person was
killed; other times twenty, fifty, or even more lay dead.
Judged by the standard of our violent history, the Boston
Bombings are far from being our most horrific.
What the bombing was, was visible. The world was watching the Marathon, and many
television cameras caught the attack and its aftermath. That’s not to dismiss what happened; I simply
want to put the crime in perspective.
With this background, I ask you: Why was this event called terrorism, and not
murder and mayhem?
The common explanation seems to be this: The bombers were Muslims who believed in
violent jihad. That makes them
terrorists.
I think that’s wrong.
I say they are common criminals, and the fact that they killed in the
imagined name of Allah is no different from the many other criminals who have
killed because their God told them to do it.
Crime in the supposed name of God has a long, long history.
Terrorism is defined as the use of terror as a means of
coercion. What exactly was being coerced
here? The attackers made no
statement. They simply attacked, as most
criminals do.
When a recognized terrorist group stages and attack, and
then claims credit, that is terrorism.
That didn’t happen in Boston.
We have a choice, folks, in how we want to live.
If we choose to define domestic crime as terrorism, we give
in to fear. That is already a huge
problem in America. Right now, parents
refuse to let their kids walk to school.
Adults in cities put three locks on their doors and use them all. Small-town police departments wall themselves
off from the public behind inch-thick bulletproof glass. And of course you
can’t enter most government buildings or any airport without going through a
security screening.
All those things are expressions of fear. When we compare our life today with the life
of our parents, none of those worries are founded in reality. Yet our lives are significantly complicated
and compromised by the things we do to “protect ourselves from unseen
terrors. The chances of any one of us
suffering an attack are no greater than they were for our grandparents,
assuming they too were here in America.
It’s only our belief that we are in danger. It’s not real. When we give in to that belief, we give away
our freedom. We live in fear.
If we go back fifteen years – to before the events of
September 11 – and add up all the people killed by acts of terrorism on
American soil, and compare that number to the number of Americans murdered, or
the number who took their own lives . . . terrorism simply is not a real threat
to us.
It’s only a threat because its visible, and we give in to
fear.
In that period of time, over 175,000 Americans were
murdered. Just over 3,000 of us died
from terrorism; most in one attack. In that
same time frame, millions died of various natural causes. Few people fear death by murder. Many people fear death from cancer or heart
disease. However, I’ll bet just as many fear terrorism. Given the numbers, it doesn’t make sense.
I say its time to call this crime what it is – ugly murder
and violence. Try the accused for
murder, put them in prison, and put it behind us. Stop the talk of terror, and go on with our
lives.
We need to dissipate this ugly climate of fear. It’s like an invisible corrosive gas, eating
away at our liberty and happiness.
If al-Qaida stages and attack on our soil and claims public
credit, call it terrorism, and fight back.
If North Korea or some other government launches a missile at America,
call it an act of war and respond.
Otherwise, call criminal violence in our country what it is: Crime.
Stop giving in to terror.
Stop living in fear.
Comments
More and more, terrorism (as a word) is being identified with ethnicity and religion. If the boys had been Caucasian Americans (Columbine, for example) they probably wouldn't be labeled terrorists. If they were Caucasian-American Muslims, there's a higher likelihood they would be. And being of another ethnicity and Muslim pretty much guarantees it.
(It occurs to me that I should clarify that I'm not the same JR as the blog post author)