Thursday, September 07, 2006

"Terrorism" Defined

The latest manifestation of the Leftist doctrine of "moral equivalence" (which flows from their belief that "There is no such thing as right and wrong") is their refusal to recognize terrorism. Only very recently has Australia's major public broadcaster removed from its guide for reporters the advice that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" and, as far as I know, Reuters, the BBC and others still proclaim that.

So the Leftist claim is essentially that you cannot define terrorism. And if you cannot define it you cannot reasonably talk about it. But some people HAVE to define terrorism -- in particular the lawyers who work for insurance companies. Insurance companies need to say whether or not they cover losses arising from terrorism. Below is therefore a lawyer's definition of terrorism taken from an Australian insurance policy:

"For the purpose of this endorsement an act of terrorism means an act, including but not limited to the use of force or violence and/or the threat thereof, of any person or group(s) of persons, whether acting alone or on behalf of or in connection with any organisation(s) or government(s), committed for political, religious, ideological, ethnic or similar purposes including the intention to influence any government and/or to put the public or any section of the public, in fear".


So don't let anyone tell you that terrorism cannot be defined.

No comments: