The Error In Terror!

Terror has been a bit of a buzzword over the last decade or so and the 'War On Terror' is a phrase that has been used by many a politician, prime minister and president alike. Consequently it is a phrase we are all very familiar with. Of course, as of other parts of the globe, we in the U.K. have known of such problems for many years, notably due to the divide in Ireland. Funnily enough, Ireland is another one of those strangely pertinent English linguistic coincidences that appear to tie up in some way with real life happenings. Definition of Ire = Anger; Wrath; a strong emotion; a feeling that is oriented toward some real or supposed grievance. Anyway, Angerland it became, and for many it still is, even now. Just another such manmade problem that has blighted the lives of ordinary people across generations, as all such instances do.

I often look at the rulers and politicians in this world, past and present, and see many of them as self-interested fools unfit to be doing the job they put themselves forward for. Unaware of, or simply not bothered about, the ramifications of many of the decisions they make, they often screw things up for the rest of us, sometimes on a global scale. One of the things that has often irked me over the years is the phrase, "We don't negotiate with terrorists." Why does this irk me? Well, first of all, what is a terrorist? A terrorist is basically a resistance fighter. Somebody fighting to resist something. Such people do this when they have a problem with others doing something they don't agree with. Often this something is orchestrated from a distant land, causing unwanted problems and imposing conditions on them in their own land, and it is usually backed up with an almighty force. We have seen a lot of this in our history and when anyone invades the lands, the space, or the ways of others, takes away their freedom and tries to force them to do things against their wishes, there will be bad feeling and an inevitable backlash. This will often take the form of resistance fighters. Although it sometimes suits the politicians to refer to these people as terrorists, not only because of their cheap, often less than desirable tactics, but also because it makes them look bad in the public eye, giving the politicians, as they would like to think, more just cause.

There is perhaps an air of respectability in the name resistance fighter, fighting for freedom against the tyranny and ruthlessness of an evil empire, such as in Star Wars, or as in the last world war. However, when the politicians use the name terrorist, is doesn't sound quite so respectable. And indeed, when such people target innocent civilians that have nothing to do with initiating the problem, and no ability to affect things, it is indeed wholly unrespectable. Wholly unrespectable because the targets of such futile and barbaric attacks are completely innocent people, just as much under the thumb of the ruthless and tyrannical empire as they are. As we all know, only too well. Nevertheless, we have to look at both sides of the coin. As for the phrase "We don't negotiate with terrorists", well, one could easily substitute the word 'consider' for 'negotiate'. And yet, as we know, negotiation accompanied by a little consideration, is always better that slogging it out on the battlefield. Any battlefield. Wherever it may be.

I for one am a great believer in trying to achieve change for the better in a peaceful, educational and constructive fashion. However, when inconsiderate people are walking all over you, killing and raping as they go, sometimes that is difficult. Of course we have certainly done more than our fair share of invading in the past. Exploiting the lands and resources of others with little or no consideration for the indigenous people. The days of slavery and the British Empire and our domination of other races in their own lands are not so far behind us. Even in recent years we are still guilty it seems, as well as guilty by association.

The formation of the state of Israel in its current location has caused many problems for mankind and I personally think putting it somewhere in America would have been less provocative and a much better idea. America, strongly influenced by its contingent of very wealthy American Jews, wanted to support Israel anyway, and of course America has plenty of room for a state the size of Israel. It also has plenty spare for expansion, without, that is, treading all over other people. Despite this, the state of Israel was formed where it is. In someone else's land, against the will, and regardless of the indigenous population. Funnily enough it seems the British were occupying that location as well at the time and British soldiers were murdered by the likes of the Stern Gang, who wanted to take a slice of the so called Holy Land for the settlement of the Jewish people, and settle they did. The fact that the land occupied by Israel, supported by America, has been stolen from others has created a problem that still reverberates around the world today. It has helped to undermine and divide humanity right across the globe, festering beneath the fabric of our global existence. The land settled on and occupied by the Jewish people at that time around 1948 actually belonged to someone else. What's more, if you look at the size of Israel then, in 1948, to the size of Israel now, there is a massive difference. More and more land has been forcefully swallowed up by the Israelis. Walking over people as if they do not exist. Supported by America and America's state-of-the-art weapons, the Israelis have literally bullied their way in. Stealing more and more of the land that wasn't theirs to begin with.

I wonder what the Whitehouse would say if I pitched my tent on their lawn and said I'm going to live here with all my mates? Not content with that, and because I have a lot of mates, I then started to take over the Whitehouse itself, forcibly shoving everybody else out. I don't think they would like it and I'm sure they would try and resist. However, if my mates were bigger than their mates and I decided to bully my way in, what could they do? They would probably try and hit back in frustration and resist in whatever way they could. To try and justify my actions and to make myself feel better, but also to divert attention and decry their actions, I might call them terrorists for doing so. However, they might call themselves liberators and freedom fighters, trying to get back what had been taken from them. Their liberty and their land. The point is that we cannot just walk all over people and take what belongs to them, as if they don't exist and as if they don't count, because they do. If we don't realise or acknowledge that fact, they will do their utmost to make us and we should not expect otherwise. No one likes to be bullied and we all like to be considered. Everybody counts. Any man that does not recognise that has a lot to learn.

What puzzles me is that we had just fought a war against Hitler and exactly this kind of thing and then a few years later the Jewish people, so horrendously persecuted in WW2, go and behave just like the Nazis did. Taking over other people's land. Pushing them out and walking all over them. Didn't the war teach us anything? Or did it just make us more selfish, heartless and mercenary than ever? It is often true to say that being on the receiving end can make people go one of two ways. Either they become more compassionate and empathetic, avoiding treating others the same way because they know what it feels like, or they become hardened and heartless adopting the attitude well, it was done to us! However, a dog eat dog world is simply that, and nothing to be proud of.

The trouble with us human beings, is that at times we are very small minded. We easily discriminate and fall out over all sorts of stupid things. Such as, what colour we are, what football team we support, our gender preference, what religion we belong to, what country we come from, what political party we vote for. Actually, as we can see when we step back a few feet, or up a few hundred miles, we all look very small and we can see that such discrimination is all very small-minded, silly childish nonsense. The only thing we actually need to discriminate between is good and bad. What is pure and what isn't. And if it isn't, can it be made better. That is ultimately the only thing that matters. We have to realise and understand that. Fighting amongst ourselves, squabbling like children, is a silly waste of time and effort and just takes our quality of being and our quality of life down further towards the depths of Hell. However, Hell on Earth is a manmade phenomena. He will. He'll. Hell. It's all very closely related it seems.

Ever since time began we have seen small-minded, untrustworthy, inconsiderate men, with their compliant armies, walking all over people and their lands. Taking what doesn't belong to them and poking their noses in where they are not wanted and where they have no right to do so. As this is wrong, people will always try and resist such behaviour. Countless skirmishes, battles and wars have been fought because of it, not to mention the countless acts of terrorism, where other want to hit back. If we ever want to live in peace on this planet then all men must realise the error of this way and we must stop doing it. Life ultimately isn't that complicated, especially on a planet where we have been given all. We make it more complicated when we walk all over others without consideration. One thing that politicians and rulers do not seem to realise, appreciate, or care about, is that consideration of people and people's feelings is absolutely crucial if we are going to have a quiet life. Consideration helps guarantee happiness, which helps guarantee contentment, which helps to guarantee peace. Peace means no terror. Or if you like, no error. It's up to us not to make that mistake!
Crosstalk by Taz: June 2014