Terrorists and criminals

Terrorists are persons who use unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. So says the Oxford dictionary, whose definitions I use in this essay. Terrorists lie when they say they have “political aims”. Their claim to such aims is just a smoke screen to hide their criminal intentions. Terrorist acts are therefore just serious criminal acts on a much larger scale. I mention several terrorist acts below as examples.

Spanish terror attacks: Thursday August 17 2017

  • A terrorist ploughed a van into crowds, killing 13 people and injuring more than a hundred, in Barcelona’s Las Ramblas in the afternoon.
  • Hours later, police shot dead five attackers wearing fake suicide vests after a second attack in Cambrils, a coastal town south of Barcelona.

London Bridge terror attack: June 3 2017

  • The London terror attack killed eight people and injured many others on London Bridge and in nearby Borough Market on Saturday June 3.
  • Three knifemen were shot dead by police after mowing down pedestrians on the bridge and going on a killing spree at pubs and restaurants at 10pm.

We know for sure that those acts mentioned above are criminal acts. Crime is: an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. Treason is: the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government. A criminal, similarly: is a person who has committed a crime.

Please see the following post in this blog:

Refugee Crisis Causing Other Countries Problems

Like Edward Fagan Blog On Facebook:

Edward Fagan Blog On Facebook

Terrorists, remove the myth

From the above definitions, these people are criminals who may also be guilty of treason. Even if they have “political aims” and are guilty of treason, they are still criminals. Treason is a crime as shown above. They are not political figures. They are not religious figures. Plain and simple, they are criminals.

This is the myth of these people: we choose to associate them and or their actions with political aims. Then we refuse to brand them as criminals. We choose instead to give them the glamorous title of terrorists. This is a prestigious award to them. They wear it with pride rather than shame. They flaunt it to recruit new followers of their evil way. We’re only aiding their effort when we do this.

We are associating these people with freedom fighters. They are not freedom fighters.┬áThese groups are not National Liberation Movements. There’s a big difference between these two types of group.

In our fight against this evil we must destroy the myth of these people. Authorities must stop treating them as prisoners of war. Governments, the media, organizations and individuals must stop referring to these people as terrorists. We must refer to them as criminals and treat them as such.

The law courts must try them as dangerous criminals; and the state must execute them if the courts order this. If the courts sentence them to imprisonment they should go to prison. Prison authorities should treat them like other dangerous prisoners.

An Original Essay
By Edward Fagan

 

Nano Poblano 2017

An original essay

by Edward Fagan

Crime, the beginning

Crime seems to be as old as mankind himself. We might thus gain greater understanding of it and its origin, if we learn about the character of early mankind. Hopefully, when we understand crime and its origin, this will help us to greatly reduce incidences of criminal acts.

Did we have criminal thought in our character from our very beginning? Or did it enter our character at a later stage? If we had it in our character from our very beginning, then its presence might be necessary. It might be a permanent part of our character. It might serve an important function and be acceptable.

Criminal thought is not and never will be a necessary and permanent part of our character. It does not serve any important function. It is not and never shall be acceptable.

So then, criminal thought entered our character at a later stage. It is alien to our character. It does not belong in us. How did it get into our character? We used our own individual free will to incorporate it there. Yes, we brought it in ourselves, and still do. We chose it instead of choosing to keep what we had, its absence.

Fortunately, we can remove it from our character. Using our own individual free will, we can remove it. We can thus return our character back to its crime-free state. (What we say here about criminal thought also applies to criminal action.)

Some individuals refuse to remove it from their character. What should we do when this happens? Should we ask the state to punish those individuals?

Please also see the following post in this blog:

They Need Help Sometimes Following Incarceration

Like Edward Fagan Blog on Facebook:

Edward Fagan Blog On Facebook

Crime, What about punishment?

There are the old and new schools on criminal punishment. Did the old school method work? It had some flaws, but yes it worked. Why then are we using the new method? They said the new method was better. They asked us to try it and we agreed. Is the new method working? No, it never works. It is producing more criminals.

I’m for the old school method. Let’s keep the old punishments. We’ll keep capital punishment. We’ll also keep corporal punishment. Let’s execute only guilty men based on evidence. Execute them in public as an example to others. We’ll also not abuse our children.

Crime, reforming criminals

Earlier I said we can remove criminal thought from our character. I also said we can do this using our own individual free will. Criminals should do this. They should also receive help from others in their effort to reform. They, fortunately, receive such help. The helpers, however, are not coordinating their efforts. The various groups who offer this help should coordinate their efforts. They did it in the old days.

The family, church, school, the media, law courts and prisons offer help to criminals who want to reform. Let us hope these bodies coordinate their efforts as time passes.

By Edward Fagan