Terrorism and the West

The West contends that this was done to adopt the necessary measures to fight 'terrorism' and to control its spread. However, these anti-terrorist laws are subject to the political bias of the states that enacted them. For example, the US considered the assassination of Indira Gandhi as a 'terrorist act', but neither the assassination of King Faisal nor the murder of Kennedy. Besides, at first, America described the blowing up of the FBI building in Oklahoma city as a 'terrorist act', but when it became clear that those behind the explosion were American militias, they changed their portrayal of it from being an act of terrorism to a simple 'criminal act'. Thus it is clear from the legislation and laws relating to terrorism that they are not accurate.

The US in particular describes certain movements as popular opposition movements like the rebels of Nicaragua and the IRA and others. However, every movement opposing American interests (such as any Islamic movement in Pakistan, Egypt, Palestine etc) is considered a 'terrorist movement'.

In addition, the US regularly stereotypes those countries opposing US interests as 'terrorist states', for example North Korea, China, Iraq and Libya. According to these laws , the US can attack anyone it considers to be a terrorist by using military and political forces.