Terrorism Between Terrorism And Terrorism

Australia’s first anti-terror laws were enacted in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11 (Prof Andrew Lynch 2010). In recent years, increasing Australian involvement in international conflict has seen these laws shift to accommodate alarming trends in home grown terrorism (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation 2014). Sydney’s 2014 terror raids prompted the most significant changes to Australia’s counter terrorism legislation in the last decade (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Defence 2015). Amendments granted law enforcement and intelligence agencies new and somewhat controversial powers, in the name of national security.

Law enforcement response to counter-terrorism fundamentally changed as a result of the unprecedented events of September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington (Kaldas, 2002, p61-62). This essay will examine how law enforcement has evolved in response to the changing nature of terrorism, with an emphasis on how this has impacted Australia. An analysis of arrests and subsequent

Terrorism can be defined by Involvement of violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law. Australia is

Since 9/11, the Australian government has enacted over 60 counter-terrorism laws to assist in the fight against the rising threat of terrorism in Australia. This legislation has recently been brought into question given the rise of extremist groups such as Islamic State and the lifting of Australia’s terror level to “High”. Prior to 9/11 there were no specific laws in order to combat terrorism specifically in the Criminal Code. Australia’s national anti-terror laws are alarming not just in their volume, but also in their widespread scope. They include powers for warrantless searches, the banning of organisations, preventive detention, and the undisclosed detention and interrogation of non-suspect citizens by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). The progress of these laws though parliament was eased by Australia’s absence of a national bill or charter of rights. The fast enactment of the laws was also aided by an apprehensive atmosphere and a feeling of urgency. This quick enactment has raised concerns over the many years since the legislation passed regarding the facilitation of the rule of law given the extensive powers that the Commonwealth has in regards to national defence and security. One such example of legislation that has proven to be controversial and has drawn supporters and critics alike are control orders under Division 104 of the Criminal Code. The paper will assess whether or not

Terrorism, a word most people fear, but so often misinterpret. The textbook definition of terrorism is “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims”. But how does that compare to domestic terrorism? Domestic terrorism or “homegrown terrorism” can be defined as “the committing of terrorist acts in the perpetrator’s own country against their fellow citizens”. Throughout the years, America as a nation has experienced quite a few occurrences of both types. An early example of homegrown terrorism would be the Haymarket Affair which occurred May 4, 1886 where in Chicago’s Haymarket Square, labor protesters detonated a bomb during a rally. Chicago police then responded by firing

“Terrorism is a criminal act that influences an audience beyond the immediate victim”. A lot of the time when someone commits an act of terrorism, it is because they are demonstrating faith and loyalty to their religious views and beliefs, political, or ideological and the persecutors aim to intimidate governments and put fear into the eyes of societies. In Australia this year, there are about 7 known terrorist groups spread around the country. These seven groups in Australia at the moment includes: "Ahmed Y" group, Benbrika group in Melbourne, Al-Shabaab, Syrian syndicate, Cheikho group in Sydney, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Mantiqi (Jemaah Islamiah). All around the world, terrorism is growing quickly and it is damaging countries, communities and families. Something needs to be done about the issue and some people are already acting on it today.

“Things will never be the same.” (Miller, Stone & Mitchell, 2002, p. 3) Law enforcement has undergone dramatic changes as a result of the devastating events in the United States on 11 September 2001 (9/11). This essay will examine how law enforcement, specifically within Australia, has shifted its policies and strategies to fight the post-9/11 terrorist threat. An analysis of police actions towards terrorist related incidents since 9/11, displays how law enforcement agencies have demonstrated their

Terrorism as defined in the document Global information about Terrorism, is “The use of force or violence

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines terrorism as, “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal” (Terrorism, n.d.). The various definitions of terrorism are typically close in comparison but can carry a slightly different tone when used by a government for purposes of the law.

The United Nations (U.N.). The best reference I could fine as a reconized “definition” of terrorism by the United Nations came from reviewing the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1566 that was adopted by the Security Council on 8 October 2004. In the document it states “s that criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions

The terrorism act of 2006 bases its definition from the terrorism act of 2000 that indicated terrorism to be the usage of threat of action that fulfils three circumstances; (1) an action that includes severe violence against another person or causes severe harm to belongings, jeopardizes a person’s life (apart from the person that is committing the action), generates a severe menace to the well-being or security of the public or a section of the public, or is considered earnestly to interfere with or seriously to disorder an electronic system; (2) the use or threat of action is designed to impact the government or an intergovernmental organisation or to frighten the public or a segment of the public; and (3) the usage or menace is made for

Terrorism is hard to be defined accurately as no universal agreement has been made on the definition of terrorism. This is because the term is politically and emotionally charged. The National Security Council (NSC) of Malaysia defined terrorism as “unlawful use of threat or the use of force or terror or any other attack by person, group or state regardless of objective or justification aim at other states, it citizens or their properties and its vital services with the intention of creating fear, intimidation and thus forcing governments or organisations to follow their impressed will including those acts in support directly or indirectly”.

Terrorism in the twenty-first century has some similarities and differences from terrorism in the twentieth century. Terrorism is, in its broadest sense, the use or threatened use of violence in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim. Also useful to remember that because the two entities involved, the terrorists and the terrorized, are on the opposite end of the political, religious or ideological continuum, the same act is viewed by them differently. There is much sense in the phrase one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

Have you ever had a fear for your family, your town, your country, or your world. How about the fear to have everything taken from you, destroyed, and not caring if it has hurt you or not? What about your fear and pain is, and can be someone else’s happiness? The fear of you being terrorized? That is terrorism. Someone else bringing fear and terrorizing you. That is a terrorist’s goal. Terrorism is common and is very difficult to stop. The government promises protection for the people, and their home, but they can not give that protection if they can not stop terrorism. Terrorism needs to stop to protect the live of the people, and their country.

Think of the word terrorism. What is the first thing that comes to mind? One might think of kidnapping, assassination, bombing, or even genocide and guerrilla warfare. Because it is such a broad and complex issue, an all-encompassing definition is hard to formulate. The United States Department of Defence defines terrorism as…