Terrorism is described by various sources and groups as both a strategy and a tactic; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. A lot depends on whose point of view is being considered, though I’m sure many can agree that terrorism is a criminal act of those whose intentions are to influence an audience beyond the immediate victim. The phrase “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” is a view that the terrorist groups themselves would likely be keen on accepting. These organisations who see themselves as fighting for good, a legitimate cause, and taking on a “Robin Hood” image.
However, many citizens of the West do not see these groups in this way. We are conditioned to see the …show more content…
Global solidarity against terrorism was claimed after the Paris attacks, but where was this when al-Shabaab killed 147 Kenyan students in April? When nearly 7000 people died at the hands of Boko Haram, a militant Islamist group in Nigeria? Out of sight and out of mind seems to be the motto of the media in the West, where spreading fear is leading to more and more prejudice against victims of terrorism calling themselves refugees, or even the Canadian citizens simply practicing their Muslim faith in a supposed free country. Even Facebook, a claimed ‘global’ social media, ignores the atrocities of the world unless they happen to take place in a major …show more content…
The leaders in Hungary are refusing to accept Syrian refugees, as well as leaders in the United States and some of the wealthiest Gulf States such as Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. Other countries in Europe like Denmark and Slovakia are making immigration policies harsher to discourage a heavy influx of refugees, publicly stating that it would be difficult to assimilate into their states. This refusal to aid refugees leads citizens of these countries to believe that there is something negative in helping those in such dire trouble, and that there must be something wrong with the people seeking help. Surely if these people were not dangerous, truly in need, their governments would
However, many citizens of the West do not see these groups in this way. We are conditioned to see the …show more content…
Global solidarity against terrorism was claimed after the Paris attacks, but where was this when al-Shabaab killed 147 Kenyan students in April? When nearly 7000 people died at the hands of Boko Haram, a militant Islamist group in Nigeria? Out of sight and out of mind seems to be the motto of the media in the West, where spreading fear is leading to more and more prejudice against victims of terrorism calling themselves refugees, or even the Canadian citizens simply practicing their Muslim faith in a supposed free country. Even Facebook, a claimed ‘global’ social media, ignores the atrocities of the world unless they happen to take place in a major …show more content…
The leaders in Hungary are refusing to accept Syrian refugees, as well as leaders in the United States and some of the wealthiest Gulf States such as Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. Other countries in Europe like Denmark and Slovakia are making immigration policies harsher to discourage a heavy influx of refugees, publicly stating that it would be difficult to assimilate into their states. This refusal to aid refugees leads citizens of these countries to believe that there is something negative in helping those in such dire trouble, and that there must be something wrong with the people seeking help. Surely if these people were not dangerous, truly in need, their governments would