Parry writes: "The classic definition of terrorism is the intentional
killing of civilians to make a political point, as in planting bombs near
the finish line of a marathon or crashing commercial jetliners into
buildings filled with office workers. Yet, the mainstream U.S. media has
broadened the definition to include killing U.S. soldiers or allied troops
even those operating in foreign lands."
Thomas Friedman. (photo: Showtime)
A Dangerous Redefinition of 'Terrorism'
By Robert Parry, Consortium News
04 September 15
"Terrorism" is a word of condemnation, referring to the coldblooded killing
of civilians to advance a political cause. But U.S. pundits and officials
have blurred its meaning to cover attacks on American soldiers in foreign
lands, a word game that can contribute to more wars, writes Robert Parry.
The classic definition of terrorism is the intentional killing of civilians
to make a political point, as in planting bombs near the finish line of a
marathon or crashing commercial jetliners into buildings filled with office
workers. Yet, the mainstream U.S. media has broadened the definition to
include killing U.S. soldiers or allied troops even those operating in
foreign lands.
For instance, New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman on Wednesday cited
as a supposed example of "Iran's terrorism" the bombing of the Marine base
in Beirut in 1983, "believed to be the handiwork of Iran's cat's paw,
Hezbollah." And Friedman is hardly alone in citing the Marine bombing in
1983 as "terrorism" along with Iran's support for Shiite militias who fought
the American occupying army in Iraq last decade.
The U.S. media routinely treats such cases as deserving of the unqualified
condemnation that the word "terrorism" implies. Similarly, that attitude is
extended to Hezbollah attacks on Israeli military forces even in the 1980s
when Israel was occupying southern Lebanon.
But attacks aimed at military forces - not civilians - are not "terrorism"
in the classic definition. And this is an important distinction because the
word carries deservedly negative moral and legal implications that can put
those nations accused of "terrorism" in the cross-hairs of economic
sanctions and military attacks that can kill hundreds of thousands and even
millions of civilians.
In other words, abuse of the word "terrorism" can have similar consequences
as terrorism itself, the indiscriminate deaths of innocent people - men,
women and children. Much of the case for sanctions and war against Iraq in
the 1990s and 2000s was based on dubious and even false claims about Iraq's
alleged support for Al Qaeda and other terrorists.
And, the 1983 case is especially significant because it is a go-to emotional
argument in accusing Iran of having "American blood on its hands" and thus
unworthy of any normal diplomatic relations. However, when examining the
real history behind the Marine barracks bombing, a much more complex and
nuanced story unfolds with blame to be apportioned to all sides.
The immediate context for the tragedy was Israel's invasion of Lebanon in
1982 and the multi-sided civil war raging among Lebanese factions. Israeli
invaders reached the Lebanese capital of Beirut in a matter of days as part
of a campaign to crush the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Then, after more fighting and protracted negotiations, Israel forced the
P.L.O. to leave Lebanon, departing for Tunisia. But the P.L.O. left behind
women and children in refugee camps at Sabra and Shatila, where Israeli
officers allowed Israeli-supported Christian militia forces to massacre more
than 700 and possibly thousands of Palestinian and Shiite civilians, one of
the most shocking atrocities of the war.
Into this chaos, President Ronald Reagan dispatched a force of Marines as
peacekeepers, but they gradually were pulled into the fighting on the side
of Israel and its militia allies.
National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, who often represented Israel's
interests in the upper echelons of the Reagan administration, convinced the
President to authorize the USS New Jersey to fire long-distance shells into
Muslim villages, killing civilians and convincing Shiite militants that the
United States had joined the conflict.
On Oct. 23, 1983, Shiite militants struck back, sending a suicide truck
bomber through U.S. security positions, demolishing the high-rise Marine
barracks in Beirut and killing 241 American servicemen. Reagan soon
repositioned the surviving U.S. forces offshore.
Though the U.S. news media immediately labeled the Marine barracks bombing
an act of "terrorism," Reagan administration insiders knew better,
recognizing that McFarlane's "mission creep" had made the U.S. troops
vulnerable to retaliation.
"When the shells started falling on the Shiites, they assumed the American
'referee' had taken sides," Gen. Colin Powell wrote in his memoir, My
American Journey. In other words, Powell, who was then military adviser to
Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, recognized that the actions of the U.S.
military had altered the status of the Marines in the eyes of the Shiites.
Reagan's redeployment of the Marines offshore also didn't end U.S.
intervention in Lebanon. The tit-for-tat violence in Beirut continued. CIA
Director William Casey ordered secret counterterrorism operations against
Islamic radicals and dispatched veteran CIA officer William Buckley. But on
March 14, 1984, Buckley was spirited off the streets of Beirut to face
torture and death.
In 1985, Casey targeted Hezbollah leader Sheikh Fadlallah in an operation
that included hiring operatives who detonated a car bomb outside the Beirut
apartment building where Fadlallah lived.
As described by Bob Woodward in Veil, "the car exploded, killing 80 people
and wounding 200, leaving devastation, fires and collapsed buildings. Anyone
who had happened to be in the immediate neighborhood was killed, hurt or
terrorized, but Fadlallah escaped without injury. His followers strung a
huge 'Made in the USA' banner in front of a building that had been blown
out."
In other words, the U.S. government dove into the bloody swamp of terrorism
even as it was condemning other parties of engaging in terrorism. But the
moral morass that was Lebanon, circa 1982-85, is not what Friedman and other
U.S. propagandists describe when they smear Iran as some particularly evil
force. Nor does Friedman operate with an objective definition of terrorism.
As Colin Powell recognized, once the United States joined the Lebanese civil
war as a belligerent, U.S. troops became legitimate targets for retaliation.
As much as one may lament the deaths of 241 U.S. personnel (or any deaths
for that matter), it was not an act of "terrorism."
________________________________________
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories
for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest
book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from
Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry's trilogy on
the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for
only $34. The trilogy includes America's Stolen Narrative. For details on
this offer, click here.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Thomas Friedman. (photo: Showtime)
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/09/03/dangerous-redefinition-of-terrorism/ht
tps://consortiumnews.com/2015/09/03/dangerous-redefinition-of-terrorism/
A Dangerous Redefinition of 'Terrorism'
By Robert Parry, Consortium News
04 September 15
"Terrorism" is a word of condemnation, referring to the coldblooded killing
of civilians to advance a political cause. But U.S. pundits and officials
have blurred its meaning to cover attacks on American soldiers in foreign
lands, a word game that can contribute to more wars, writes Robert Parry.
he classic definition of terrorism is the intentional killing of civilians
to make a political point, as in planting bombs near the finish line of a
marathon or crashing commercial jetliners into buildings filled with office
workers. Yet, the mainstream U.S. media has broadened the definition to
include killing U.S. soldiers or allied troops even those operating in
foreign lands.
For instance, New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman on Wednesday cited
as a supposed example of "Iran's terrorism" the bombing of the Marine base
in Beirut in 1983, "believed to be the handiwork of Iran's cat's paw,
Hezbollah." And Friedman is hardly alone in citing the Marine bombing in
1983 as "terrorism" along with Iran's support for Shiite militias who fought
the American occupying army in Iraq last decade.
The U.S. media routinely treats such cases as deserving of the unqualified
condemnation that the word "terrorism" implies. Similarly, that attitude is
extended to Hezbollah attacks on Israeli military forces even in the 1980s
when Israel was occupying southern Lebanon.
But attacks aimed at military forces - not civilians - are not "terrorism"
in the classic definition. And this is an important distinction because the
word carries deservedly negative moral and legal implications that can put
those nations accused of "terrorism" in the cross-hairs of economic
sanctions and military attacks that can kill hundreds of thousands and even
millions of civilians.
In other words, abuse of the word "terrorism" can have similar consequences
as terrorism itself, the indiscriminate deaths of innocent people - men,
women and children. Much of the case for sanctions and war against Iraq in
the 1990s and 2000s was based on dubious and even false claims about Iraq's
alleged support for Al Qaeda and other terrorists.
And, the 1983 case is especially significant because it is a go-to emotional
argument in accusing Iran of having "American blood on its hands" and thus
unworthy of any normal diplomatic relations. However, when examining the
real history behind the Marine barracks bombing, a much more complex and
nuanced story unfolds with blame to be apportioned to all sides.
The immediate context for the tragedy was Israel's invasion of Lebanon in
1982 and the multi-sided civil war raging among Lebanese factions. Israeli
invaders reached the Lebanese capital of Beirut in a matter of days as part
of a campaign to crush the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Then, after more fighting and protracted negotiations, Israel forced the
P.L.O. to leave Lebanon, departing for Tunisia. But the P.L.O. left behind
women and children in refugee camps at Sabra and Shatila, where Israeli
officers allowed Israeli-supported Christian militia forces to massacre more
than 700 and possibly thousands of Palestinian and Shiite civilians, one of
the most shocking atrocities of the war.
Into this chaos, President Ronald Reagan dispatched a force of Marines as
peacekeepers, but they gradually were pulled into the fighting on the side
of Israel and its militia allies.
National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, who often represented Israel's
interests in the upper echelons of the Reagan administration, convinced the
President to authorize the USS New Jersey to fire long-distance shells into
Muslim villages, killing civilians and convincing Shiite militants that the
United States had joined the conflict.
On Oct. 23, 1983, Shiite militants struck back, sending a suicide truck
bomber through U.S. security positions, demolishing the high-rise Marine
barracks in Beirut and killing 241 American servicemen. Reagan soon
repositioned the surviving U.S. forces offshore.
Though the U.S. news media immediately labeled the Marine barracks bombing
an act of "terrorism," Reagan administration insiders knew better,
recognizing that McFarlane's "mission creep" had made the U.S. troops
vulnerable to retaliation.
"When the shells started falling on the Shiites, they assumed the American
'referee' had taken sides," Gen. Colin Powell wrote in his memoir, My
American Journey. In other words, Powell, who was then military adviser to
Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, recognized that the actions of the U.S.
military had altered the status of the Marines in the eyes of the Shiites.
Reagan's redeployment of the Marines offshore also didn't end U.S.
intervention in Lebanon. The tit-for-tat violence in Beirut continued. CIA
Director William Casey ordered secret counterterrorism operations against
Islamic radicals and dispatched veteran CIA officer William Buckley. But on
March 14, 1984, Buckley was spirited off the streets of Beirut to face
torture and death.
In 1985, Casey targeted Hezbollah leader Sheikh Fadlallah in an operation
that included hiring operatives who detonated a car bomb outside the Beirut
apartment building where Fadlallah lived.
As described by Bob Woodward in Veil, "the car exploded, killing 80 people
and wounding 200, leaving devastation, fires and collapsed buildings. Anyone
who had happened to be in the immediate neighborhood was killed, hurt or
terrorized, but Fadlallah escaped without injury. His followers strung a
huge 'Made in the USA' banner in front of a building that had been blown
out."
In other words, the U.S. government dove into the bloody swamp of terrorism
even as it was condemning other parties of engaging in terrorism. But the
moral morass that was Lebanon, circa 1982-85, is not what Friedman and other
U.S. propagandists describe when they smear Iran as some particularly evil
force. Nor does Friedman operate with an objective definition of terrorism.
As Colin Powell recognized, once the United States joined the Lebanese civil
war as a belligerent, U.S. troops became legitimate targets for retaliation.
As much as one may lament the deaths of 241 U.S. personnel (or any deaths
for that matter), it was not an act of "terrorism."
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories
for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest
book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from
Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry's trilogy on
the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for
only $34. The trilogy includes America's Stolen Narrative. For details on
this offer, click here.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
