#6: Double Standards in the United States Government

In reference to Glenn Greenwald’s article “Terrorism: The Most Meaningless and Manipulated Word,” I agree that the term “Terrorism” has definitely lost its true meaning within the United States and has in a sense become meaningless. Through the media and political publicity concerning “the war on terrorism”, the term terrorism is no longer identified as ANY act of violence or ANY act of intimidation in regards to gaining political aims. Instead the new meaning has become a direct correlation between religious identities, nationalities, and beliefs or opinions that disagree with those of the U.S. The term was not meant to be directly associated with a specific nationality or religious groups, but yet it has been manipulated to do so. The definition should be inclusive of ALL individuals not just the individuals of Muslim descent.

I feel that because the term “Terrorism” has taken on multiple meanings or definitions, it is also responsible for forming a double standard within our judicial system in regards to nationality and religious beliefs. For example, when two airplanes (controlled by Muslim pilots) collided with the World Trade Centers, the incident was deemed as an act of terrorism. Or when Americans and Non-Americans were persecuted in Iraq due to their religious beliefs (Christianity), this incident was also deemed as an act of terrorism. Both of these instances involved acts of violence between two different nationalities and religious identities and both were deemed as acts of terrorism by the U.S. government. Why is that so?  It is because each situation involved an individual who is of Muslim descent or involved a country in which its population’s religious identities are centered on Muslim or Islamic beliefs. Another reason has to do with the term “terrorism” and how its meaning has been manipulated to mean “anyone associated with Muslim/Islamic nationality or religious beliefs.”

 Now let’s analyze two more incidents discussed in Mr. Greenwald’s article on “Terrorism” and decide whether these incidents can be identified as acts of terrorism. The first incident involved an individual named Joseph Stacks who was responsible for piloting an airplane and maneuvering it so that it collided with a building that housed offices for the IRS. The second incident involved the murderous attacks (committed by “Christians”) on doctors and clinicians outside of an abortion clinic. In both of these cases neither act was classified as acts of terrorism by the U.S government even though they were clearly acts of violence in which political issues have been concerned. I must ask, is there a difference in comparison between the previous incidents and the ones just discussed? Not really, other than the differences between the religious beliefs and the nationalities of the individuals.

These examples confirm my theory of a double standard existing within the judicial system of the U.S. government. Both incidents have close to the same motives, the difference is that one incident involves Muslims and the other involves Americans. Any kind of violent acts committed by Muslims in regards to political aims are characterized as terrorism; however when these same violent acts are implemented by Americans their merely classified as heinous crimes. The manipulated term for terrorism paves the way for a double standard in our judicial system. A judicial system that uses the phrase, “with liberty and justice for ALL,” to signify loyalty, faithfulness, and devotion to all individuals. My only question is: “How can our judicial system utilize this concept if it’s not meant for ALL people but only those who are American?”