The Myths Surrounding Terrorism


Leaders across the world react to terror strikes in a very predictable manner .They use slick words and clichéd phrases to express their horror and dismay at the strikes.i would not stoop so low as to even discuss the most common myth,”terrorism has no religion.”For whatever reasons,politicians across the world have decided that atleast terrorism is a secular activity.Well,so be it.

But there are some other glaring misstatements and  trickery of words that goes around as well.

The most common one being,”This is an attack on DEMOCRACY.”

Who cares for your democracy ?Nothing can be further from the truth.Radical islam understands that weakness of Europe comes from democracy at both the national as well as EU platforms.A non democratic Europe could catapult ‘far-right’ into power which would take strong action against immigration and radicalization,as also put restrictions on free doles being given to immigrants.It is  democracy ,free media(supposedly) and importance of minority vote that prevents NLF (marie le pen),or greet wilders (in netherlands) from ascending to power.It is liberal democracy that allows an unholy alliance of politicians,media and academia ,together termed as Establishment that acts as a bulwark against the  Far-right.Radical islam wants democracy to remain strongly entrenched as it makes  change  impossible in the existing   policies on doles,immigration and national security (that serve the cause of mullahs).At the EU level too,too much of democracy ensures countries like Poland which want a curb on immigration are outvoted ,as well as UK which wants to restrict benefits of welfare ,play along for fear of being ostracized.

Democratic government are  fundamentally  peace-time systems which cannot serve the cause of war.Why else would so  many nations resort to formation of National Governments during crises and emergencies ?


Another myth that is being perpetuated with impunity is that the actions of the terrorists are ,”SENSELESS and COWARDLY.”

A terrorist is someone who uses violence, or threatens the  use of violence, in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim.He carries out bombings,kidnappings,hijackings or gun attacks,not because he is disturbed mentally,rather in persuit of some aim.That aim can be to terrorise general population,send a message to a particular  nation or the world,propagandise,enlist recruits ,or persue some political or ideological objectives.The terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo because they wanted to send a very specific message that any insult to the Holy Prophet wont go unpunished.Terrorists strike in Mumbai and kill hundreds because they believe its ‘our’ govt that keeps Kashmir under subjugation.They bomb civilians in brussels or paris because they believe in a democracy,general populations are responsible for the actions of their respective governments that attack and kill civilians in middle east.I wonder how do we call these strikes as “senseless”,then.They do make sense to European leaders who accept some guilt anyways.Obama ,in his Cairo speech 2009,admitted so himself.

Besides,IS has taken responsibility for the march 22nd brussels attacks,as well as for  November 2015 paris attacks.They have borne the brunt of the allied coalition in Syria as well.LeT took responsibility for  Mumbai 26/11.Obviously they were prepared for any retaliation by India.I dunt understand how this can be dubbed as “cowardly.”These are open challenges thrown by these terrorist groups,and there is nothing timid or meaningless about them.Far from it.

Obviously it’s a  fact that a terroist doesn’t announce his or her intentions to bomb a site ,or open a gunfire,but then such are the rules of the game.This is proxy war.Even otherwise,do we call the actions of individual militarymen cowardly ! Which soldier drops his identity card alsong with bombs in Syria ? They represent a state,the same way terrorists represent non-state players.


One can sense a  lot of heartburn over the supposedly unequal importance given to terroist causalties in the developed world on one hand and the Middle east or Africa on the other.Well,the killings in Afganistan and Syria, Iraq or Yemen is a battle between two sects of the same religion.If shias and sunnis are hell bent on killing each other,as also the kurds,its basically an internal problem of the Islamic world.As for Africa,ethnic wars have been fought inconclusively for ages.The bombings and killings in internecine conflicts cant be put on the same pedestal as an attack on Charlie Hebdo or Battaclays theatre.These are attacks on democratic,peace-loving people who have welcomed Islamic refugees with open arms ,sheltered them and fattened them on welfare doles.In the same light,its not fair to even compare cross-border terrorism practiced by Pakistan in india (except in Kashmir) with bombings in Pakistan and middle east.Its naïve and hypocritical to argue that a bomb blasted by a Sunni extremist  in a Kurdish ghetto in Ankara has the same political overtones  as a blast in the London tube,or a Spanish train.


It’s the business of political leaders to keep people ill-informed,and maintain a level of hypocricy.What else do we expect the PM of Pakistan ,or President or Turkey to say except ,well, ‘’ terrorism has no religion.This senseless and cowardly act should be condemned by one and all.’’

The joke is on us.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s