The Web is Underconstruction * We are Going to ahead for your online health services and Telemedicines as early as possible * Know more about Arsenicosis+Other Chemical Poisoning into our body Through Food Drinks-Medicine * Take Health Care from us-For more Benefit * Help ARSENICOSSIS-affected Patient for saving you + next Generation---Everyone may affected by ARSENICOSSIS from Food—Drinks-Natural sources & Medicines. Autism is a Natural CHANGE through Chromosome please take care of your Physical-Mental-Spiritual Health properly before/after Marriage. Then No Autistic Child in the World. We can take care of Autistic Children for cure. Obey Health Guideline—Introduce a Disease risk free + long live active Generation world wide by “Total Health Solution” removing ignorance +evilness.

Mother-- Main part of everyone

Daily Tips Gallery

  • Photo Title 1
  • Photo Title 2
  • Photo Title 3
  • Photo Title 4
  • Photo Title 5

Pay Your Fees First


Fees Amount
 USD

Health slide

Terrorism Treatment PDF Print E-mail
Written by Administrator   
Tuesday, 21 June 2011 03:32

 

 

TERRORISM is a disease of neuro-congenital complexities including allergic disorder in our body +sense.

Congratulations to all of you for rebuilding PEACE +Disease-Free World

 

Come & Share to improve your Physical-Mental+Spiritual Health

including humankind +environment.

Contact & Visit us----

e-mail :  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it WEB : drpareshmajumder.com

Learn advices one day & follow always, you'll be better Life-long with all.

Arsenic +Other Chemical contamination into our all foods are the delivery-room of All diseases in our body+mind+spirit, Take care of triple Health properly.

Women+Girl HealthCare is the most important HealthCare for greater interest of Mankind & their next Generation.

 

Try to improve your Physical, Mental +Spiritual Health;

based on "Total Health Solution" removing all ignorance +evilness

"No Disease shall attack you"

You can adopt one or more therapy/treatment to solve the all sorts of Tooth-Care

1. Conventional or allopathic medicines- such as regular Healthcare +medication with more silent side effects---known +unknown.

2.  Homoeopathic medicines : such as fixed time medication upto 6 months +regular Healthcare with no side effects in future or in the long run.

3. Bio-Chemic Medicines : such as 6 months medication through 6 follow-up +regular Healthcare with no side effects & 99.9% warranty if you follow Health Rules LIFE-long.

4. Homoeopathy+Bio-chemic: Such as 5 months medication +regular Healthcare for life-long warranty if you follow the Health-Consciousness rule always.

5. Potentized-Herbal : Such as 6 months medication +regular Healthcare to meet the same avoiding health-damaging causes regularly, life-long.

6. Food+Nutrient Therapy: Regular Health-Consciousness with balanced food-drinks-medicines to absorbe into your body+mind with regular Personalcare by the advices of DOCTOR.

7. "Health-Membership" for pre-mrriage 'Healthcare-Insurance' at Health-Conscious Society

There is no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition of terrorism.[1][2] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or ideological goal, deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians), and are committed by non-government agencies.[citation needed]

Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war. The use of similar tactics by criminal organizations for protection rackets or to enforce a code of silence is usually not labeled terrorism though these same actions may be labeled terrorism when done by a politically motivated group.

The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged,[3] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”.[4][5] The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[6] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).[6][7]

Terrorism has been practiced by a broad array of political organizations for furthering their objectives. It has been practiced by both right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic groups, religious groups, revolutionaries, and ruling governments.[8] An abiding characteristic is the indiscriminate use of violence against noncombatants for the purpose of gaining publicity for a group, cause, or individual.[9]

 

The definition of terrorism has proved controversial. Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of terrorism in their national legislation. Moreover, the International community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[17] In this regard, Angus Martyn, briefing the Australian Parliament, stated that "The international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term foundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination."[1]

These divergences have made it impossible for the United Nations to conclude a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism that incorporates a single, all-encompassing, legally binding, criminal law definition terrorism.[18] Nonetheless, the international community has adopted a series of sectoral conventions that define and criminalize various types of terrorist activities. Moreover, since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism: "Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them."[19]

Bruce Hoffman, a well-known scholar, has noted that:

It is not only individual agencies within the same governmental apparatus that cannot agree on a single definition of terrorism. Experts and other long-established scholars in the field are equally incapable of reaching a consensus. In the first edition of his magisterial survey, “Political terrorism: A Research Guide,” Alex Schmid devoted more than a hundred pages to examining more than a hundred different definition of terrorism in a effort to discover a broadly acceptable, reasonably comprehensive explication of the word. Four years and a second edition later, Schimd was no closer to the goal of his quest, conceding in the first sentence of the revised volume that the “search for an adequate definition is still on” Walter Laqueur despaired of defining terrorism in both editions of his monumental work on the subject, maintaining that it is neither possible to do so nor worthwhile to make the attempt.”[20]

Nonetheless, Hoffman himself believes it is possible to identify some key characteristics of terrorism. He proposes that:

By distinguishing terrorists from other types of criminals and terrorism from other forms of crime, we come to appreciate that terrorism is :

A definition proposed by Carsten Bockstette at the George C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies, underlines the psychological and tactical aspects of terrorism:

Terrorism is defined as political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols). Such acts are meant to send a message from an illicit clandestine organization. The purpose of terrorism is to exploit the media in order to achieve maximum attainable publicity as an amplifying force multiplier in order to influence the targeted audience(s) in order to reach short- and midterm political goals and/or desired long-term end states."[22]

Walter Laqueur, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that "the only general characteristic of terrorism generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence".[citation needed] This criterion alone does not produce, however, a useful definition, since it includes many violent acts not usually considered terrorism: war, riot, organized crime, or even a simple assault.[citation needed] Property destruction that does not endanger life is not usually considered a violent crime,[according to whom?] but some have described property destruction by the Earth Liberation Front[23] and Animal Liberation Front[24] as violence and terrorism; see eco-terrorism.

Terrorist attacks are usually carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact.[25] Each act of terrorism is a “performance” devised to have an impact on many large audiences. Terrorists also attack national symbols,[26] to show power and to attempt to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government, while increasing the prestige of the given terrorist organization and/or ideology behind a terrorist act.[27]

Terrorist acts frequently have a political purpose.[28] Terrorism is a political tactic, like letter-writing or protesting, which is used by activists when they believe that no other means will effect the kind of change they desire.[according to whom?] The change is desired so badly that failure to achieve change is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians.[citation needed] This is often where the inter-relationship between terrorism and religion occurs. When a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious or "cosmic"[29] struggle, such as over the control of an ancestral homeland or holy site such as Israel and Jerusalem, failing in the political goal (nationalism) becomes equated with spiritual failure, which, for the highly committed, is worse than their own death or the deaths of innocent civilians.[30]

Very often, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings"[citation needed] that tie into a specific view of the world that the terrorists possess. Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists' goals of instilling fear, getting their message out to an audience or otherwise satisfying the demands of their often radical religious and political agendas.[31]

Some official, governmental definitions of terrorism use the criterion of the illegitimacy or unlawfulness of the act.[32][non-primary source needed] to distinguish between actions authorized by a government (and thus "lawful") and those of other actors, including individuals and small groups. Using this criterion, actions that would otherwise qualify as terrorism would not be considered terrorism if they were government sanctioned.[citation needed] For example, firebombing a city, which is designed to affect civilian support for a cause, would not be considered terrorism if it were authorized by a government.[original research?] This criterion is inherently problematic and is not universally accepted,[attribution needed] because: it denies the existence of state terrorism;[33] the same act may or may not be classed as terrorism depending on whether its sponsorship is traced to a "legitimate" government; "legitimacy" and "lawfulness" are subjective, depending on the perspective of one government or another; and it diverges from the historically accepted meaning and origin of the term.[34][35][36][37]

Among the various definitions there are several that do not recognize the possibility of legitimate use of violence by civilians against an invader in an occupied country.[citation needed] Other definitions would label as terrorist groups only the resistance movements that oppose an invader with violent acts that undiscriminately kill or harm civilians and non-combatants, thus making a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence.[citation needed] According to Ali Khan, the distinction lies ultimatedly in a political judgment.[38]

An associated, and arguably more easily definable, but not equivalent term is violent non-state actor.[39] The semantic scope of this term includes not only "terrorists", but while excluding some individuals or groups who have previously been described as "terrorists", and also explicitly excludes state terrorism. According to the FBI terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.[citation needed]

In early 1975, the Law Enforcement Assistant Administration in the United States formed the National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. One of the five volumes that the committee wrote was entitled Disorders and Terrorism, produced by the Task Force on Disorders and Terrorism under the direction of H.H.A. Cooper, Director of the Task Force staff.[69] The Task Force classified terrorism into six categories.

  • Civil disorder – A form of collective violence interfering with the peace, security, and normal functioning of the community.
  • Political terrorism – Violent criminal behaviour designed primarily to generate fear in the community, or substantial segment of it, for political purposes.
  • Non-Political terrorism – Terrorism that is not aimed at political purposes but which exhibits “conscious design to create and maintain a high degree of fear for coercive purposes, but the end is individual or collective gain rather than the achievement of a political objective.”
  • Quasi-terrorism – The activities incidental to the commission of crimes of violence that are similar in form and method to genuine terrorism but which nevertheless lack its essential ingredient. It is not the main purpose of the quasi-terrorists to induce terror in the immediate victim as in the case of genuine terrorism, but the quasi-terrorist uses the modalities and techniques of the genuine terrorist and produces similar consequences and reaction.[70] For example, the fleeing felon who takes hostages is a quasi-terrorist, whose methods are similar to those of the genuine terrorist but whose purposes are quite different.
  • Limited political terrorism – Genuine political terrorism is characterized by a revolutionary approach; limited political terrorism refers to “acts of terrorism which are committed for ideological or political motives but which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture control of the state.
  • Official or state terrorism –"referring to nations whose rule is based upon fear and oppression that reach similar to terrorism or such proportions.” It may also be referred to as Structural Terrorism defined broadly as terrorist acts carried out by governments in pursuit of political objectives, often as part of their foreign policy.
Number of failed, foiled or successful terrorist attacks by year and type within the European Union. Source: Europol.[71][72][73]

Several sources[74][75][76] have further defined the typology of terrorism:

Motivation of terrorists

Attacks on 'collaborators' are used to intimidate people from cooperating with the state in order to undermine state control. This strategy was used in the USA in its War of Independence and in Ireland, in Kenya, in Algeria and in Cyprus in their independence struggles.

Attacks on high profile symbolic targets are used to incite counter-terrorism by the state to polarise the population. This strategy is used by Al Qaeda in its attacks on the USA in September 2001. These attacks are also used to draw international attention to struggles which are otherwise unreported such as the Palestininian airplane hijackings in 1970 and the South Moluccan hostage crises in the Netherlands in 1975.

Abrahm suggests that terrorist organizations do not select terrorism for its political effectiveness.[77] Individual terrorists tend to be motivated more by a desire for social solidarity with other members of their organization than by political platforms or strategic objectives, which are often murky and undefined.[77]

Democracy and domestic terrorism

The relationship between domestic terrorism and democracy is very complex. Terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate political freedom, and is least common in the most democratic nations.[78][79][80][81] However, one study suggests that suicide terrorism may be an exception to this general rule. Evidence regarding this particular method of terrorism reveals that every modern suicide campaign has targeted a democracy–a state with a considerable degree of political freedom.[82] The study suggests that concessions awarded to terrorists during the 1980s and 1990s for suicide attacks increased their frequency.[83]

Some examples of "terrorism" in non-democracies include ETA in Spain under Francisco Franco,[84] the Shining Path in Peru under Alberto Fujimori,[85] the Kurdistan Workers Party when Turkey was ruled by military leaders and the ANC in South Africa.[86] Democracies, such as the United Kingdom, United States, Israel, Indonesia, India, Spain and the Philippines, have also experienced domestic terrorism.

While a democratic nation espousing civil liberties may claim a sense of higher moral ground than other regimes, an act of terrorism within such a state may cause a dilemma: whether to maintain its civil liberties and thus risk being perceived as ineffective in dealing with the problem; or alternatively to restrict its civil liberties and thus risk delegitimizing its claim of supporting civil liberties.[87] For this reason, homegrown terrorism has started to be seen as a greater threat, as stated by former CIA Director Michael Hayden.[88] This dilemma, some social theorists would conclude, may very well play into the initial plans of the acting terrorist(s); namely, to delegitimize the state.[89]

Religious terrorisme: Religious terrorism

Religious terrorism is terrorism performed by groups or individuals, the motivation of which is typically rooted in faith-based tenets. Terrorist acts throughout the centuries have been performed on religious grounds with the hope to either spread or enforce a system of belief, viewpoint or opinion.[90] Religious terrorism does not in itself necessarily define a specific religious standpoint or view, but instead usually defines an individual or a group view or interpretation of that belief system's teachings.

 

This is a list of designated terrorist organizations by national governments, former governments and inter-governmental organizations, where the proscription has a significant impact on the group's activities. Many organizations that are accused of being a terrorist organization deny using terrorism as a military tactic to achieve their goals, and there is no international consensus on the legal definition of terrorism.

This listing does not include states or governmental organizations, which are considered under state terrorism, or unaffiliated individuals accused of terrorism, which are considered under lone wolf terrorism. This list also excludes groups that might be widely considered terrorist, but who are not officially so designated according to the criteria specified above.

 

Followings are the listed Terrorist according to wikipedia list given below : To evaluate them & their activities we want to make a research paper in future.

 

 

 

Last Updated on Sunday, 14 August 2011 12:18