LEGAL DEFINITION OF TERRORISM
The United Kingdom set forth the definition of terrorism in the act of 2000. Since the evolvement of computerised communications, terrorists have used electronic communications as a prominent tool in their terrorism.
Computer hacking which previously was a crime but not considered under terrorism, became part of the UK terrorism law, and is a departure from what is usually considered terror according to violence.
The UK the Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism as:
The use or threat of action designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public, or a section of the public; made for the purposes of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause; and it involves or causes:
serious violence against a person-
serious damage to a property-
a threat to a person’s life-
a serious risk to the health and safety of the public -
serious interference with or disruption to an electronic system.
Terrorism exists around the world, be it the FARC rebels in Columbia or the Animal Liberation Front in the USA. However, these are either political, which is extremly common globally, or project specific, such as Anti-
Without excusing these actions, they seldom go beyond their region of conflict or outisde of the spectrum of their campaign as with animal activists who have been known to attack businesses and individuals with the smallest of links to the organisation or individual of their focus. As such, we have seen attacks on dealers of office supplies and even water cooler bottles.
Where Islamic terror becomes completely incomparable to all of these, is that Muslims consider 3 specifics before isuing confirmation that the killing is justified under the Quran, Islam, Muhammed and Allah.
1. Are they muslim?
If not, then THEY CAN be killed and even more than that, the Quran demands that they do kill all non Muslims according to them.
2. Are they the same Muslim following?
If they are not of the same following, i.e Sunni, Shia etc, they can be killed they will be considered the ‘non Muslims’ for being the wrong sect.
Regardless, being the not of the EXACT same following will be grounds for justifiable killings, torture and slavery.
3. If they are of the same sect and cannot be justifiably killed, are they of the same specific following?
Being for example a Sunni Muslim is not enough for the Saudi created Islamic State terror group. They will subject victims who are of the same sect to a further simple examinations of just how good a Muslim they are. The deepened beyond what is considered sectarianism acts, such as the Saudi Wahhabism used by the ISIL / ISIS group, which many scholars and leaders consider a puritanical form of Islam which has nothing or little to do with true Islam in fact, allows them to kill and do all manner of barbaric acts in the name of Islam, Muhammed and Allah, for which they never cease to remmind the world.
Given that few Muslims will meet these examinations by ISIS / DAESH, Boko Haram, Ansar al-
NOT the West -
The ‘blame’ of the west and media, comes from the simple fact that all governments will funds and arm selected governments. At the same time, government will naturaly fund and even arm opposition groups. Depending on which side is winning or causing mass damage to their own people, will usually set the hostilities against certain nations that supported one or the other. If however NO support was given either to the ruling power or the opposition, other governments would still be considered guilty for not taking ‘THEIR’ side. It is a no win situation exploited to the fullest by countries such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia in the middle of 2016.
In addition, any comment made against the barbarity of these terror acts outside of what is considered Muslim states of the Middle East, especially when it has NOTHING whatsoever to do with western governments and society, is automatically considered Islamophoebic and anti-
Any Muslim living in the West, multiple generations, will align themselves with the anti-
ISLAM IS NO LONGER A ‘RELIGION’ OF PEACE
IT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED BY OIL POWERS THROUGH TERRORISM INTO A MOVEMENT OF FEAR, THREATS AND INTIMIDATION and MURDER.
Western Governments are so quick to apologise for critics of Islamic barbarity just to maintain their oil markets and arms sales (the UK is the worlds largest supplier of armaments to KSA), that they are guilty for the terror attacks in the West themselves. This cannot be doubted when the citizens, those to whom their countries belong, are ignored and sidelined whilst foreign Islamists are forced upon them!
They seem to forget that the country is not theirs (German MERKEL) but the peoples’.
They MUST do as the people wish, not as they themselves wish by preference (UK conseccutive Prime Ministers), as BREXIT showed.
“IGNORE THE PEOPLE AND YOU WILL HAVE AN UPRISING SHARED ACROSS EUROPE WHICH WILL EVOLVE INTO A UNITED WAR AGAINST THOSE WHO SEEM TO BLAME EVERYONE BUT THE GUIILTY FOR THEIR ACTIONS” ‘TJS 2014’
Yet Terrorist leaders will usually use the child-
AND THEY BELIEVE IT
ONE rule for the common man. Sharia -
ONE rule for the Royals and Rulers. Sex Parties -