[SobiquYo]

In the beginning terror, as defined by the US government as, "[An] act of terrorism, means any activity that (A) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life that is 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 of any State; and (B) appears to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping." This definition of Terror was published in 1984 by the Congress, and fully covered what was considered terror within the United States for many years. But this definition changed in the minds of governmental officials when al-Qaeda became an international threat in 2001.

The war we have waged on terror in this century is a direct reaction to terrorist actions in the United States instituting a ‘new’ ideology of thinking from government officials. The United States has changed its thoughts on terror to help give meaning to a now seven year old long war. Though terror was inflicted on the US the war is not waged on US soil, nor on the soil of the leaders of the terrorist cell. It is waged in a place where President Bush Sr. failed at capturing an old terrorist, and where his son decided he needed to finish the job. Bush Jr. uses the excuse of terror to wage war on a country that did not produce the terrorists who have acted against the US.

The terror enacted on the US was, and could have been taken care of with a series of military strikes but is now a drawn out war thanks to a new warped sense of the definition of terrorist. The US has the thinking that they are the ‘world police’. We are not them, we are simply the country that the terrorists aimed the biggest gun at and took pot shots at. These terrorists were not put there to bring down the US or to disrupt New York’s infrastructure, but to show their dislike of Western culture. The essence of our culture as a whole infuriates the Terrorists and the culture is what they are striking against, not us, not our people, economy or building styles, but our culture. The non-traditional, non-religious culture perpetrated the worst in the United States.

As per Mr. Rodenbeck’s review he states that “pulling the rug from under al-Qaeda and related terrorist organizations by removing at least some of their causes for violence…” This as a whole is a foolish statement. Giving a terrorist organization money and weapons so it won’t attack makes about as much sense as giving a rapist women and children so they won’t attack the populous. Although bin Laden’s group started as ‘rag tag’ it has grown into one of the most complex and strongest terrorist organizations in history thanks to American money. We, the US, are fighting against people we, at one time, were paying and arming. So this ‘rag tag’ group is no longer rag tag but a strong fighting force dedicated to the destruction of Western values and nothing we can give them will change their thirst for the next jihad. Terrorists of this kind use a kind of military training for their members. Thus changing their brain patterns, successfully making them forever a damaged people intent on destruction and murder. This theory of treatment is called Behavior Modification. During Behavior Modification undesirable behaviors are identified and corrected. This correction is through a series of training, belittling, and emotional impact. These corrections then seemingly create a ‘new person’ intent on terroristic thought and processes.

Terrorism, although based on religion is not completely about religion. Terrorist leaders use extreamist religion to further control and suck in more and more members. But Terrorism is simply criminal behavior exhibited on a large scale. Terrorists begin to believe, thanks to the religious extremism, that they have the right to violate natural law to expound their belief system.

As someone once stated “you can’t address the unreasonable with reason-that in its self is unreasonable.

Thanks for all your help Mel