As news comes from France of possible terrorist attacks being planned for Australia, Australia itself is more concerned not to offend PC sensibilities. Broadcasters there can't refer to Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups, even though the Australian government lists Hizballah as a terrorist group and is likely to add Hamas soon. From CNSNews.com, with thanks to Jean-Luc:
Australia's national broadcaster has instructed its staff not to identify Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizballah as terrorist organizations, because they have not been designated as such by the United Nations.The instruction comes despite the fact the Australian government has listed Hizballah as a terrorist group, and is likely to add Hamas and Islamic Jihad to the list soon.
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation's head of international operations, John Tulloh, confirmed the policy Friday, in response to emailed queries.
An internal memo to ABC staff reportedly reads: "Please be careful with Middle Eastern references. Several recent slip-ups have attracted justified complaints. The ABC follows U.N. guidelines on proscribed groups: Hamas, Hizballah, and Islamic Jihad are not included in the U.N.'s list of terrorist organizations and therefore must not be described as such."
Tulloh declined to elaborate on the "justified complaints," saying that correspondence from ABC listeners and viewers was private.
Tulloh's memo reportedly continues to say that while the groups shouldn't be called terrorist, it is appropriate for the ABC to describe "a suicide bombing or similar outrage" as an act of terrorism, and to call a suicide bomber a terrorist.
Last year, Australia's federal parliament passed a law specifically listing Hizballah as a terrorist group.
Tulloh confirmed on Friday, however, that the ABC policy regarding Hizballah stood despite that law. . . .
After the Oct. 2002 bombings in Bali, in which 88 Australians were killed, parliament passed a law enabling the government to ban terrorist organizations.
But a civil liberty safeguard, incorporated into that law at the opposition's insistence, prevented the government from listing as a terrorist group any organization not on the U.N.'s terrorist list.
The U.N. list, which was drawn up by a committee set up prior to the 9/11 attacks to monitor sanctions against al-Qaeda and the Taliban, is restricted to "individuals and entities" linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
This has left Australia in the position of not being able to outlaw organizations that are not affiliated to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, despite serious concerns about other groups' activities. Hizballah is an exception, because of the specific legislation passed last year. . . .
Asked whether any future designation of Hamas and Islamic Jihad as terrorist groups would change the ABC's policy with respect to the two organizations, Tulloh replied: "not at this stage."
Terrorist criteria
Invited to comment, Tzvi Fleischer of the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) said Friday the identification of terrorist organizations was not the problem the ABC claimed it was.
"Terrorist attacks are attacks directed primarily at civilians, and are generally readily identifiable, as even the ABC's own memo concedes," he said.
"A terrorist organization is one whose leadership espouses or claims credit for such attacks, or which has been identified by a legitimate court of law as having carried out such an attack, regardless of the cause in which the attacks was carried out. By this criteria, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizballah are unequivocally terrorist organizations."
Fleischer also questioned the policy of a taxpayer-funded Australian broadcaster to appeal to the U.N. as the "ultimate authority" when it came to designating organizations as terrorist.
"The U.N. is neither a judicial body, nor a world parliament, and the ABC was established to represent an Australian point of view, and not that of a political multinational organization in New York," he said. . . .
Critics have frequently accused the taxpayer-funded ABC of anti-establishment and left wing bias, and last year its coverage of the Iraq war came under fire from the minister responsible for communications.
Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, both Palestinian groups, have claimed responsibility for scores of suicide bombings and other attacks, costing hundreds of Israeli lives.
It is touching to see the ABC bending over and lowering its trousers for the UN. How to explain it? I cannot.
"The ABC follows U.N. guidelines on proscribed groups: Hamas, Hizballah, and Islamic Jihad are not included in the U.N.'s list of terrorist organizations and therefore must not be described as such."
Unfortunately the UN has been unable to even define terrorism. The difficulty is in distinguishing between legitimate resistance groups who blow innocent civilians to smithereens and "terrorists" who do the same.
A terrorist by any other name is still a terrorist, even when politically correct media outlets refuse to call them such under claims of maintaining the standards of objectivity.
"One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter " is a cop out for those who are unwilling to recognize that just because every side of a story must be told that doesn't mean all sides must come off as equals.
Some groups just don't deserve to have their actions glossed over or the horrors they commit diminished in order for media to claim they are fair and balanced.
Take the terrorist attack on a bus in Jerusalem Aug. 19. At least 21 people died who were returning with their families from praying at the Western Wall , the holiest of Jewish shrines.
Hamas , whose sole purpose is the destruction of Israel, claimed responsibility for the attacks.
The Associated Press and Reuters, among many other news outlets in the United States, refer to Hamas, designated by the State Department as one of 36 foreign terrorist organizations and responsible for over 50 terrorist attacks on Israel in 2002, as "Palestinian militants."
A militant, according to Merriam-Webster, is one who is combative, or "engaged in warfare or combat." But to be in warfare or combat, don't at least two parties need to be involved? That said, is it really a fair fight when a bomber loaded down with 12 pounds of explosives boards a bus full of families returning from prayers?
The New York Times rightly referred to Hamas as a terrorist group. USA Today, like the wire services, referred to them as militants , but only in passing. On first reference, the group was not even identified, as if everyone knows what it is, which is clearly not the case.
On the flip side, AP wrote a story on the news coverage of the bombing, quoting a source who seemingly criticized the cable news networks for showing footage from the bomb blast in Israel and another one in Iraq the same day that killed 35 U.N. workers. Would it be that AP was trying to suggest that the news channels are insensitive? AP perhaps would rather sanitize the news and avoid the grotesque nature of terrorists, lest they be forced to refer to them as such.
And if those Hamas terrorists aren't bad enough, how about Al Qaeda ? Not only did their leader Usama bin Laden take credit for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, but bin Laden and his cronies were videotaped rejoicing that the damages inflicted on the U.S. from a hijacked airliner hitting the World Trade Center was more than they could have wished for.
Yet, Reuters continues to wonder whether the group is actually guilty. As recently as this week, they wrote -- in a story on Al Qaeda claiming responsibility for the U.N. headquarters bombing in Iraq -- that "Washington accused Al Qaeda of carrying out the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001."
Al Qaeda is linked to no fewer than eight foreign terrorist organizations listed in the State Department's Patterns of Global Terrorism. Their Southeast Asian offshoot Jemaah Islamiya took credit for a bombing in Bali last year that killed 200 people. Yet, to Reuters, it's still up in the air whether they are terrorists.
While the duty of the Fourth Estate is to keep the powers that be honest, the Bush administration is in part to blame for mistaken language used by the news. The media frequently rely on official sources to get the information it needs, often using the very language that is handed to it. When the Bush administration meekly uses phrases that don't depict reality, it's no wonder that inaccurate language is repeated.
For instance, the FBI sent out its weekly police bulletin on Wednesday describing recent activities by sister outlaws the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front, groups that the FBI has called domestic terrorists responsible for 600 acts of violence since 1996. In the bulletin delivered to 18,000 law enforcement authorities, the FBI referred to ALF as "animal rights activists."
Among the crimes ALF has laid claim to -- torching a barn on an Erie, Pa., fur farm, setting fire to a Chicago storefront accused of selling exotic animal hides and spray-painting the home of a trader who sells stocks for a holding company that owns an animal testing lab.
No matter how disgusted one is by animal testing, in what can only be a bad joke, the animalliberationfront.com provides readers a how-to lesson on becoming a "cell" and committing violent acts on one's own. The author says keeping down expenses is first priority in order to raise funds for supplies, and boasts "my only expense is gas money."
That should shock ELF, whose eco-terrorism includes the 1998 firebombing of a building at a Vail ski resort in Colorado and this month's burning of a San Diego apartment building said to have caused $50 million in damage. Last week, the ELF ravaged vehicles at four car dealerships in San Gabriel Valley, Calif., setting fire to many of them and defacing others.
Curious how environmentalists define pollution, yet the Los Angeles Times defined ELF's actions as the work of "vandals" and "radical environmentalists."
The San Francisco Chronicle picked up AP, which rehabilitated that word again, calling ELF "a loose organization of militant environmentalists." The San Diego Union Tribune borrowed heavily from other reports, coming up with similar language.
Yes, the media are often preoccupied with saying the right thing in order to gain access to sources on all sides, and yes, it is equally abhorrent to make a crisis out of a problem that does not rise to the level. But trying to play down the dirtiest of deeds with neutralizing language is an injustice to those victimized by the deeds.
Example: Israeli forces lobbed a missile at Hamas terrorist Hamdi Kabach, an operative in the Izz al-Deen al-Qassam Brigades "the military wing" -- AP's description -- of the terrorist group. Three other Palestinians nearby were wounded.
Israel radio said Kabach was responsible for rocket attacks on Israeli settlements nearby. Kabach apparently was riding around the Gaza Strip on a donkey cart. Though AP didn't bother to report it, Reuters did: "The donkey lay dead on the ground next to the smashed cart."
J RICHARD...20 YEAR VETERAN COUNTER TERRORIST INVESTIGATOR, SO CALIFORNIA, USA
Being this is my business for roughly 20 years,perhaps I can be of help in defining what is and isnt a terrorist.Dont thank me...I'm a giver... here we go>>>
DEFINITION OF TERRORISM
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1795
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
- ter·ror·ist /-&r-ist/ adjective or noun
- ter·ror·is·tic /"ter-&r-'is-tik/ adjective
terrorism:the systematic use of terror or unpredictable violence against governments, publics, or individuals to attain a political objective.
Terrorism has been used by political organizations with both rightist and leftist objectives, by nationalistic and ethnic groups, by revolutionaries, and by the armies and secret police of governments themselves.
Terrorism as defined in the U.S. by the Code of Federal Regulations as:
"..the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)
The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorists:
• Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or its territories without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government,
the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
• International terrorism involves violent acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state.
These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping.
International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which the perpetrations operate or seek asylum.
according to the definition of terrorism by the US Federal Bureau of Investigations, "Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civil population, or any segment thereof, in futherance of political or social objectives."
"Terrorism by its very design and purpose is a violation of ALL norms of human behavior,Law,ethics,morals and armed conflict. Its objective is to demoralize, dehumanize, humiliate, and horrify through acts of random demonstrative viciousness."~J Richard
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not, no explanation will be good enough.~J Richard
“terrorist activity” means any activity that is unlawful under U.S. law or the laws of the place where it was committed and involves: hijacking or sabotage of an aircraft, vessel, vehicle or other conveyance; hostage taking; a violent attack on an internationally protected person; assassination; or the use of any biological agent, chemical agent, nuclear weapon or device, or explosive, firearm, or other weapon or dangerous device (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property. The definition also captures any threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of these activities.
Terrorism is the unlawful use or threat of violence against persons or property to further political or social objectives. It is usually intended to intimidate or coerce a government, individuals or groups, or to modify their behavior or politics. --Vice Pres
Terrorism is the premeditated, deliberate, systematic murder, mayhem, and threatening of the innocent to create fear and intimidation in order to gain a political or tactical advantage, usually to influence an audience. --James M. Poland
Terrorism consitutes the illegitimate use of force to achieve a political objective when innocent people are targeted. --Walter Laqueur
Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. --FBI Definition
"Terrorism by its very design and purpose is a violation of ALL norms of human behavior,Law,ethics,morals and armed conflict. Its objective is to demoralize, dehumanize, humiliate, and horrify through acts of random demonstrative viciousness." ~J. Richard
FACT: 90%-95% OF ALL THE CONFLICTS ON THIS PLANET TODAY INVOLVE MUSLIMS FIGHTING NON-MUSLIMS OR EACH OTHER! Algeria-Nigeria-Kenya-Turkey-Lebanon-Sudan-Eritrea-Etheopia-Azerbaijan-Albania-Bosnia-Chechneya-Daghestan-Tajikstan-
This list has fourteen more countries on it...Xinjiang Province of China-Philipines,Cyprus,Israel,India, Ivory Coast,Bali,Pakistan,Russia,Somalia,Indonesia,West Bank and Gaza,Saudi Arabia,Iraq,Morrocco....etc etc
...but you get the idea...welcome to islamic hell! With your host,Mohammed
From 1970-2000, there were 43,721 terrorist attacks worldwide. 113,425 died. Over 82,126 injured. Over 90% of these acts were committed by Muslims.
Bin Laden heads al Qaeda, which has forged alliances with like-minded fundamentalist groups such as Egypt's Al Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah, Sudan's National Islamic Front, and jihad groups in Yemen,Lebanon,West Bank/Gaza,Chechens, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Somalia.
On the aL QAEDA tapes CNN has, on Tape C205,It shows jihadi fighters in 1990 in the south Asian country of Burma, training with an Arabic-speaking instructor, who tells them, "We are fighting this fight because it is an Islamic fight."
And a tape from the east African nation of Eritrea shows fighters there proclaiming an Islamic battle to drive infidels out of the country.
Other videos from Uzbekistan, Algeria,Chechnia, Bosnia and many other countries show similar scenes. al Qaeda has links to terrorist organizations in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Kashmir, Uzbekistan and Algeria, among other places.
Al Qaeda suspects have been arrested in European countries including Italy,Netherlands,Belgium Spain and Germany.(and many others!)
The events of September 11, 2001 (9/11) will forever be etched in our memories. But the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon were not alone.
There are millions of Islamic fundamentalists, terrorists, extremists, radicals and militants - around the world and at home who would like nothing better than to destroy those they consider infidels. Whether it be in the United States, Israel, India, Russia, the Philipines etc
- these terrorists will NOT rest until they have accomplished their sinister goal of converting the world to Islam. Whether it be Yasser Arafat, Osama Bin Laden, Mullah Omar, General Pervez Musharraf, or Khattab -
The goal of these terrorists is to forward their terrorism agenda by destroying the infidels (the non-believers, ie: the non-muslims).
Today, the source of money and teachings of this fanatical and fascist Wahabbi form of Islamic terrorism is Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab(oil producing) Nations .
The main source of recruits, training, planning, logistics and the Islamic bomb is Pakistan.
The other middle east players like Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran and countries like Bosnia, Bangladesh, China, North Korea, Indonesia and Myanmar (Burma) are also involved with Pakistan and the Saudis in using terrorism as a form of state policy.
AlQaeda (meaning "base" in arabic) is nothing more then groups of islamic terrorist groups aligned together by Usama Bin Laden to continue the Islamic struggle against the ENTIRE West. It includes ALL islamic terror groups, including HAMAS and Hizballah.
In Egypt, 52% of young Muslim men said they would willingly martyr themselves to kill Americans. Similar sentiments can now be found throughout the Arab world.This is the kicker, my friends!Thats what western apologists for Islam dont understand about Radical Islam,in the quran, Muhammad only called for peace until he was strong enough to kill everyone.
Even multi-culturalists who try to browbeat us into believing that all cultures are equally deserving of respect have trouble explaining the past 500 years of Islam.
As an Investigator and Counter Terrorist consultant and analyst I am often asked what we in the West can do to fight and end the scourge of Islamic/fundamentalist/Islamist/Narco.
There's only one way to deal with those who find glory in slaughtering children and innocents:You
Kill them.
Thanks for taking the time to read my writings,
J Richard, International Investigator and Counter Terrorism consultant.I can be reached at detective377@msn.com
J.R., why does President Bush tell us repeatedly that Islam is a Religion of Peace and tolerance? I know who the enemy is (more or less), why do you think our government is clouding the issue?
The Australian Taxpayer funded ABC
You could not find a more loyal servant of international Terrorism along with it's "Multicultural" cousin SBS also funded by the very people they both so hate and ridicule, the average Australian at every opportunity possible, it is like watching Comical Ali telling us how well things are going for those brave sons of allah as we watch those same brave sons of allah running along the banks of the Tigress in their underpants on the TV monitor directly behind him as he speaks.
Saddam should at least know that these two loyal servants (ABC/SBS and the Australian Labor Party) did their best at every opportunity during the liberation of Iraq and are still fighting the good fight for Saddam and his Socialist Party in accordance with the UN's guidelines.
These two organizations greatest disappointment is the fact that so far (thank God) No Australian's in the Co alit ion forces have been killed,(in Iraq) however they are unable to contain their joy as their "news persons" read out the weekly US & British causalities.
If any one reading this post is not sure what the ABC/SBS is all about simply put they are all the people who's abilities were not up to a sufficient standard so as to enable them to be employed in commercial media networks in Australia unfortunately this by definition means that 90% of it's staff are of the loony left the other 10% are computers that so far are unable to express their political leanings.
I would never in my wildest dreams advocate the dismantling of these two totally discredited and disgraceful organizations, regardless of their hourly, daily, deliberately calculated misrepresentations of and omission’s of, facts, so as to serve their masters, the Australian Labor Party who’s only hope of having their UN approved position on the “coalition of the willing “ to be vindicated was for thousands of Australian service personnel to be coming home in body bag’s, I am sure they have their fingers crossed and I hear some of their members have even crossed over from agnosticism so as to “prey” for the “tragedy “ and “futility” of war ,unless of course THEIR TEAM is winning and then it becomes the “vindication of the righteousness of the International Socialist Cause and it’s proud muslim warriors”
Let em say any thing they want however let the ACTU/alp UN pay for their public relations division and NOT the Australian Taxpayer.