Techno-terrorism and the Future of Civilization
"Modern terrorism, with sophisticated technological means at its disposal and the future possibility of access to biological and nuclear weapons, presents a clear and present danger to the very existence of civilization itself"--Justice Arthur J. Goldberg.
Mr. Goldberg's statement expresses a valid concern that has become an alarming reality. As terrorists trade pistols for airplanes and pipe bombs for nuclear explosives, technology is rapidly increasing the power, range, and effectiveness of attacks that terrorists are able to execute.
We should expect that terrorist attacks will become even more lethal for a few reasons. First, the terrorists themselves are becoming more technologically adept. Second, governments such as Iraq and Syria are providing the wherewithal for attacks against new and more sophisticated targets. Third, religious radicals are establishing new boundaries for mass violence beyond what had been previously anticipated. Finally, the threshold for new forms of attack has already been breached--such as the attacks on technological infrastructure and poisonings of municipal water supplies. Techno-terrorism is the topic of discussion for this paper, however, it is also a topic for legislators, governments, communities, and families to evaluate when molding the world of tomorrow. The purpose of this paper is to examine terrorist ideology and to explore the technology of terrorism and what impact it may have for the future of civilization.
In order to better understand terrorism and the effect that technology may have, one needs to be cognizant of the different elements of terrorism. One dimension to start with is the general strategies of terrorism--how are terrorists trying to accomplish their goals. Tactics--a related component to strategies--stands out as the essence to terrorism. Other elements that will be covered include personal weapons and technological improvements that serve as an added bonus to personal weapons. Lastly, the latest, and most noxious, phenomenon of terrorism is mass destruction--the use of explosives and nuclear warfare.
When I mentioned general strategies of terrorism, I mean that general themes and patterns or lack thereof will be discussed. The summation of the following points explain the focus of terrorism on a unbiased scale. The first of five major themes is the idea that the terrorist act must always have a victim--someone or something harmed by the act--in order for the act to be utilitarian. Second, there are no real targets in which an enemy or adversary is terminated, only symbolic targets.
Clay Dillow’s “To Catch a Bombmaker” was published by Popular Science in October 2015. This article educated the reader about the FBI’s Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center— a key aspect in the fight against terrorism. Dillow focused on ethos and logos to strengthen the validation of his claim concerning the importance of the TEDAC and was successful in persuading the reader to believe in its significance as well. He used expert quotes from FBI agents to give the article credibility; In addition, he presented statistical data in a clear and concise manner and gave many factual cases in which the TEDAC facilitated the government in their pursuit of terrorist and bomb makers. As proven by Dillow in “How to Catch a Bombmaker,” the Terrorist
II. Trial Court Ruling. The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim. The plaintiff’s retaliation claim went to trial, but the court excluded evidence regarding the alleged sexual harassment. The court refused to grant the plaintiff a new trial. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s ruling.
Michael Walzer is an esteemed retired professor from the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. Walzer has written many books, essays, and articles. His essay, Excusing Terror, is one that best relates to the current events happening around the world. In this essay, Walzer talks about different reasons that people would want to resort to terrorism. In this essay I will argue Walzers view on Terrorism is correct in that terrorism is wrong because it is akin to murder, it is random in who it targets, and no one has immunity. I will also offer an objection to Walzer’s theory and explain why it is not a valid one.
In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.
This institute did not receive all of the money it was supposed to get. “Mortenson was supposed to provide a contribution to CAI equal to the amount of royalty payments he received from the book purchases, but failed to do so, investigators concluded” (“Three Cups of Tea” author Greg Mortenson must pay $1 million to charity”). The charity program spent over three million dollars to buy copies of Mortenson’s books. In return, they didn’t receive anything back financially. Advancing on to a similar topic, Mortenson also used the money to purchase personal things. “These include expenses for such things as LL Bean clothing, iTunes, luggage, luxurious accommodations, and even vacations"(“Three Cups of Tea” author Greg Mortenson must pay $1 million to charity”). He used the money from the CAI for these purchases and spent about one million dollars. This money was supposed to go the materials needed for building schools. Although he did pay back some of the debt, he may not have if he was not forced to (“Three Cups of Tea” author Greg Mortenson must pay $1 million to charity”). The response Mortenson gave was another
But still, will the world ever be free of terrorism? Works Cited O'Conner 2011 James 2005
Herman, E. & Sullivan, G. O.1989. The Terrorism Industry: The Experts and Institutions That Shape Our View of Terror. New York: Pantheon.
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
Courts, 94). This is why inferior courts are there to take care of all the little cases. While the
the front page, it also has 1 or 2 images on the front page and
The word terror dates back to the French Revolution. “A terrorist was, in its original meaning, a Jacobin who ruled France during la Terruer” (Moeller 20). Terrorism has clearly become much broader in the years since its origination. Since the concept was first birthed in France it has been used for separatist, nationalistic, political and religious ends, etc. In the book “Packaging Terrorism”, author Susan Moeller states that, “the goal of terrorism is to send a message, not to defeat the enemy”.
Terrorism and Technology It wasn’t until the morning of September 11th that America began to question just how safe we really are. As the world watched the devastation on the news, everyone was looking for comfort. However, often times when something as horrific as this happens, the ones you look to for comfort are looking back at you for comfort. Many people found what piece of mind they could, through technology, during this horrible time. The September 11 terrorist attacks have had both positive and negative impacts on the use of computers and technology.
Terrorism has been around for centuries and religion-based violence has been around just as long. (Hoffman, 2). The violence was never referred to as terrorism though. Only up to the nineteenth century has religion been able to justify terrorism (Hoffman, 2). Since then, religious terrorism became motivated and inspired by the ideological view (Hoffman, 3). Therefore, it has turned against the main focus of religion and more towards the views of the extremist and what is happening politically (Winchester, 4).
Terrorism is one of the most extensively discussed issues of our time and at the same time it is also one of the least understood. The term itself “terrorism” means many different things to different people, cultures, and races. As a result, trying to define or classify terrorism with one universal definition is nearly impossible. The definition of terrorism used in this research is a reflection of much of the Western and American way of defining it. The definition of terrorism is,
the case. The ratio of a case is binding on lower courts but may not