The tussle to reformulate the term "terrorism"

February 14 .. two civilians were allegedly killed by a gunman in Denmark after reports of attacks on a cafe and a synagogue during an event promoting ""free speech.""  Wowie! ...  and the world starts playing the CHaRlieee HeBdooo tune again.  Danish PM Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt said "When you mercilessly fire deadly bullets at innocent people taking part in a debate, when you attack the Jewish community, you attack our democracy."   But that must apply just as much for Deah, Yusor, Razan and Mostafa murdered three days earlier by similar merciless and deadly bullets .... or no?

Take a look at another reckless 'debate.'  After the North Carolina murders, certain segments on networking sites have been wrangling, "shouldn't religion be abolished?"  When they mention "religion" they mean only Islam. The murders were carried out by a hardline atheist.  Craig Stephen Hicks is an ardent fan of the New Atheist group.  He has been notorious for posting anti-religion comments on the internet. His Facebook page is filled with images and quotes from Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher whom Hicks deeply admires. But the world is interested in abolishing Faith rather than abolishing intolerance.

February 15 ...  an alleged plot was foiled to attack a Halifax shopping mall in Canada by two (or three) white men.  'Justice' Minister, Peter MacKay, insisted it was not a terrorist plot .. that the alleged plotters seemed to be a “group of murderous misfits” intending to “wreak havoc and mayhem on our community.”  According to MacKay, Halifax plot was not "culturally motivated" and thus not linked to terrorism.  That was straight from the old horse's mouth.  Canada's "Injustice" Minister acknowledges in his own way that the involvement of a Muslim is an essential prerequisite for using "terrorism" as a logo. 

Tinkering with the same issue, some mealy-mouthed "terrorism expert" claims "The problem of defining terrorism has been a thorny one from the get-go."  Not really; there's nothing 'thorny' about it.  It's a uncomplicated term of the English vocabulary expressing the concept of intimidation through violence by anyone indulging in such an act.  The term is tagged with no grammatical rules suggesting race, color or gender.  What makes it 'thorny' is the attempt to classify it with a twist so that it can be reserved to describe a single ethnic community only, excluding all others.

The manipulation is still more outrageous than what it appears on the cover.  The manipulators aren't genuinely eager branding Al Qaeda franchises in Syria and Iraq as "terrorists."  Don't fall for that.  Until mid 2014 (including ISIL) they were all called "rebels" democratizing Syria by North American and European leaders.  Most of them are still addressed as "rebels."  According to Harper and MacKay and their counterparts in the U.S. and Western Europe, the real "Muslim terrorists" are the beleaguered sufferers and the bullied who are struggling to salvage their sovereignty and raising their voices for justice against the oppression by multinational mercenaries (who are just as nihilistic as swines like Craig Hicks) and the imperial forces who hire them.  A serial killer in USA or Canada who may have terrorized entire communities by their grisly killings cannot be categorized as a  "terrorist" according to its revised definition.  But a Syrian soldier or a Hezbollah fighter or a Hamas volunteer who desire to keep their borders free from occupiers will be dubbed as "terrorists."

For Western neocons, terrorism (like beauty) lies in the eyes of the beholder. No extent of killings is 'terrorism' as long as the killers cannot be categorized as Muslims. The situation gets particularly embarrassing when the ones killed are Muslims but the killer (or killers) isn't. The half-brained U.S. cops are struggling to defend the audacious atheist terrorist, Craig Hicks, from that label by claiming his motive of the triple murder to be "parking dispute" (as if that makes Hicks appear any better) without even the slightest awareness of the transparency of such misinformation.  The mainstream media had resolved not to call Hicks a terrorist but it couldn't fathom how to go about with such wily idiocy. So it opted for total silence, not even whisper, to avoid ignominy.  The North American and European leaders reached the zenith of callousness.  They never even uttered a single word of sympathy for the bereaved families of the terror victims.

The mad struggle to reinvent "terrorism" has turned into a brain teaser that's going completely helter-skelter by vigilante grammarians.

Considering the calculated, long term, and officially sanctioned demonization of Muslims in the United Sates, at a moral level, America's media, its security agencies and political apparatus have the blood of these victims on their hands,” Barry Grossman, international lawyer in Indonesia.

Actually it was the governments and their media that brazenly displayed the abundance of insensitivity that dwells in their sick hearts.  Many of the American people reacted differently.  They were moved and stunned.  This image shows Americans participating in a vigil for Deah, Yusor and Razan in Washington DC, Feb.12.

Read the article "American Sniper behind rise of Islamophobia in U.S." at Press TV

All images taken from Press TV, link above.

Father of late Deah Shaddy Barakat cries as a video is played at a vigil on the campus of North Carolina University in Chapel Hill.  Source:
Namee Barakat, father of shooting victim Deah Shaddy Barakat, cries as a video is played during a vigil in Chapel Hill

Deah Shaddy Barakat's 10-year-old cousin cries for him.

A Facebook page mentions in Arabic (translation): "Autopsy revealed that Deah Barakat was beaten badly prior to his murder. He was kicked and pistol whipped on the mouth which caused breaking several of his teeth then shot 3 times on the upper torso."