vergiss said:
What about those Christian fundamentalist psychopaths who blow up abortion clinics and gay bars, or murder abortion doctors and their families?
"Practical" terrorists. Their deeds were fixed on single targets. Not indiscriminate masses of people not even involved. I'll re-post from an earlier discussion about terrorism we had.....
There are two types of terrorists - practical (or
traditional) and apocalyptic. Both are equally despicable, but both are distinct.
"Practical" = Unabomber, Stern Gang, IRA, last generation Palestinian, McVeigh, abortion clinic bomber, etc.
"Apocalyptic" = Bin Laden, Zarqawi, today's generation of Palestinians, Japanese religious sect Aum Shinrikyo that released the nerve gas sarin in the Tokyo subway, etc.
1) A "pure"
Practical terrorist is an idealist (historically, secular universities have been excellent recruiting grounds for terrorists who want to force improvement upon the world). We have long struggled with this type in history and they have tangible goals and a logical approach to achieving them. Their logic may be cruel or cynical, but there is a rational relationship between their long-term goals, means, risks, assets and interim objectives. Ideology can dominate their thinking, bit it does not break loose entirely from mundane reality. Even when championing a particular religious minority, practical terrorists are concerned with rights, status and apportionment in the here and now, not beyond the grave (the IRA or the Stern Gang). The practical terrorist may have ambitious dreams - the overthrow of a state or the institution of a radically-new political system - and may be willing to undergo great hardship and sacrifice to pursue those dreams, but he is rarely suicidal and does not view death and destruction as goals unto themselves (The Unabomber targetted specific individuals in his attempts to "alert" the American society and did not use his abilities to attack undifferentiated citizens in a broad manner.) He may be convinced of his beliefs and embittered from society and the "system", but his goals are always the re-creation of the society or state, not its total annihilation. In other words, he wishes to "improve" society...not destroy it. When a terrorist sets off a car bomb or assassinates a public figure, he does harm to a person or facility valued by his
intended target. He does not simply do damage.
2) The hellish counterpart, the
Apocalyptic terrorist, are a far more serious matter than even the deadliest practical terrorist. They are mentally divorced from our world and its values, and from any respect for flesh and blood. The practical terrorist has dreams, but the apocalyptic terrorist is lost in a nightmare. Jealous of our success and our power in the western world, terrified and threatened by the free, unstructured nature of our societies, and incapable of performing competitively in the 21st century, they have convinced themselves that our way of life is satanic and that we are the enemies of their god. Nothing we can do will persuade them otherwise (it is a dangerous peculiarity of Americans that we can "explain everything" satisfactorily to those who hate us - apocalyptic terrorists and their masses of sympathizers don't want explanations, they want revenge.) They can live among us and see only evil, even as they hypocritically enjoy video games and prostitues. Their extreme vision of the world constructs evil even from good, and easily rationalizes away the virtues of other societies and civilizations. They cannot be reasoned with, appeased, or even intimidated. No human voice can persuade the man who believes that God is speaking in his other ear. The apocalyptic terrorist may seem to have explanations, even justifications, for his attacks. He "wants the U.S. and Zions out of all Islamic countries," or reviles the invasive corruption of the West, or desires the establishment of a Palestinian state. But upon closer inspection, all these relatively rational purposes begin to blur and dissolve (Zarqawi slaughters secular Muslims.) The apocalyptic terrorist is also a coward (Study Bin Laden). Most are not suicidal and are not so eager to blow himself up, yet cheer for those who are. It is impossible to content the apocalyptic terrorist. His agenda is against the world, not of it. Viewed closely, his vision is incohate, intuitive and destructive without limit. It is reality that has not pleased him, and he wants to destroy it. There is no greater blasphemer in any religion than the killer who appoints himself as "God's" agent, or assumes a godlike right to judge entire populations for himself. Pretending to defend his religion, he creates a vengeful splinter religion of his own.
For all his violence, the practical -political- terrorist is a man of hope. The religious, apocalyptic terrorist is a captive of his own rage, dissapointments and fantasies. One may be controlled. The other must be killed.
vergiss said:
The Army of God definitely evokes the name of God whilst encouraging that sort of evil... their website is plain scary.
You are correct. "Practical" terrorists that hide their violence behind religion always dance amongst the definitions, but the general definitions stand. With the overwhelming increase in Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel over the last 15 years, The Radical element of "Palestine" has steadily crossed over to the "Apocalyptic." What I mean by this is that they no longer wish for land back (that they never owned) or wish to live in co-existence - they wish to destroy, period. They are gradually losing their earthly goals and seeking slavation. Drawing upon sacred texts and divine mandate, religion can motivate terrorists to feats of violence which are unconscionable or impractical by traditional terrorists. This would be the graduation into the "Apocalyptic."