Published 29th October 2014

What is a Terrorist...? Interestingly enough, the Department of Defense, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the State Department all have different definitions of terrorism.

Department of Defense 
“http://usiraq.procon.org/sourcefiles/InsurgentsvsTerrorists.pdf”
The calculated use of unlawful violence to inculcate fear, intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.

Federal Bureau of Investigation
“http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terror99.pdf”
[T]he unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives

State Department 
“http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/20177.pdf”
[P]remeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

A Common Theme

Though the definitions are a bit redundant, there are a few key words that each department shares in use:
-Unlawful
-Violence
-Intimidate
-Influence

For purpose of this website, we will subscribe to the Department of Defense's definition since they mention fear, religion, and ideology.

"You can kill a man but you can't kill an idea."-Medgar Evers [1]

"Kahless has been dead for a thousand years; but the idea of Kahless is still alive. Have you ever fought an idea, Picard? It has no weapon to destroy, no body to kill." 
— Gowron, Star Trek: The Next Generation [2] 

Fear, religion, and ideology are all intangible and therefore impossible to fully subdue, unlike an insurgency.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Above is a diagram of Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Maslow, a psychologist, first provided this concept in his paper titled "A Theory of Human Motivation"[1].

The base of the pyramid contains all of a human's basic needs. Once all or most these needs have been achieved, a person can move onto the next level of the pyramid.

Physiological Needs
 

These needs are absolutely necessary for a person to continue living. According to Maslow, these needs are ingrained into the human psyche, making them instinctual and thus takes priority over all other needs.

Safety Needs
 

Feeling safe and being safe both contribute to survival, but not as much as the Physiological Needs previously mentioned. This level does not only refer to security of one's home, but of the stability of ones life. For example: protection from natural disasters, having a reliable source of income, and keeping good health.

Belonging Needs
 

This tier includes a person's desire to be accepted among others. Each individual wishes to foster a relationships that involves friends, family, lovers, religious groups, society, and coworkers.

Esteem Needs
 

Once a person is accepted by a group(s), they will most likely seek a way to improve their own self-worth, social standing, and accomplishments.

Self-Actualization Needs
 

At this point, a person no longer cares for the opinions of others and only focuses and maximizing their own potential. This is an ongoing stage and is never fully satisfied. Unless one manages to answer the ultimate question to life, the universe, and everything. (It's not 42).

Now That You Understand What "Terrorism" Means...

Terrorism is not a new concept, it came into existence as soon as people gained the ability to control one another. Marrying the oppressed with unbridled fanaticism will give birth to offspring that is impossible to completely destroy. Freedom, Justice, Honor, Truth, Liberation, God; whatever the cause is, the imminent conflict may bring death to people but never the idea. And the idea is how a reform, reaction, or revolution begins. 

The 1st Century Zealots and Sicarii might not have been the first terrorist organization, but their footprints paved the way for future generations of terrorists to follow. The environment that fostered their revolution was realized once their lands were taken from them. 

The Roman Empire continued to take and take from the Jewish people; desecrating their traditions, openly mocking them, and leaving them with no identity. The government of Judea did nothing to liberate its own citizens, so they turned to extreme methods in order to regain their basic needs and the Zealots were formed. From the Zealots came even more radical terrorists --the Sicarii-- which eventually clashed with their own brothers. 

We will see in the future how these exact conditions will give rise to a new form a terrorism.

The Roman Occupation of Jerusalem

In 63 BCE Roman forces, under the command of General Pompey the Great, conquered Jerusalem and adding the Jewish Kingdoms into the already vast Roman Empire. Then in 40 BCE, despite years of mounting tension, the Roman Senate appointed Herod the Great as King of the Jews.

In 37 BCE King Herod the Great defeats Antigonus II Mattathias, the last Hasmonian King who led the Jewish armies against the Romans. At this point, the Jewish nation has been fully dominated.

Into Pious Minds

The Kingdom of Jerusalem had always been a theocracy. Their laws were not of the world but of Grand Providence. High Priests would give directions according to the guidance provided to them by God. Therefore it was a great insult to the people of Judea for anyone, especially and the idolatrous Roman Empire, to entitle any man as "King of the Jews" (Remember that Jesus guy?). 

So, in the eyes of his own citizens, King Herod was a living blasphemy. It also didn't help that he was ruthless and filled with contempt for his Jewish subjects. As a matter of fact, he was so hated that "The day of his death was marked in the Jewish calendar as a festival."[1]

Replacing Judea's governmental structure was not just an utterly detestable act against its citizens and God, it also greatly disrupted their lives and inherently took away a piece of their cultured identity.

"If you rob people of their identity, if you rob them of their democracy then all they are left with is nationalism and violence."
-- Nigel Farage [2]


"The value of identity of course is that so often with it comes purpose." 
-- Richard Grant [3]

Reign of Terror

For the next sixty years the Zealots incite a colossal amount of terror throughout Judea. No Roman soldier, citizen, or sympathizer is free from harm. The Zealots continue to draw massive amounts of support to their cause all the while becoming more adept in the art of killing.

Though never mentioned by Josephus, Judas the Galilean is eventually executed [1] and is succeeded by his son Menaham. Menaham doesn't believe the Zealots are making a strong enough impact on the Roman empire and decides to resort to more extreme methods.

The Zealots only focused their efforts on Roman government or military officials, Menaham wanted to target anyone who did not support the Fourth Philosophy, even civilians and Temple priests. Menaham employed such methods as:
 

Kidnapping / Hostage Trading

Blackmail / Life Threats

Poison

Recruiting Gentiles and Criminals

Harming Women and Children

Eventually Menaham broke off and began the Sicarii. The void left by him was filled in by Temple priests. Two in particular: Eleazar son of Ananias who led the revolt from within the Temple; and Simon bar Giora who led the revolutionary army.

Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures

Unlike some modern day terrorist attacks, which emphasize drawing attention to the guilty party, the Zealots and Sicarii preferred to stay out of Roman jails. They would instead blend in with a large crowd at a social gathering (i.e. a party, market, religious event), attack their victim, then slip away. When the victim finally attracted attention from bystanders, the Zealots and Sicarii would mirror the crowd and would act just as horrified and bewildered.

The Zealots and Sicarii probably used a 1st Century Roman daggers called Pugio (pictured at the top of the page) as their main instrument of death. 

"The Sicarii committed mass murders in broad daylight in the heart of Jerusalem. The holy days were their special seasons when they could mingle with the crowd carrying short daggers concealed under their clothing with which they stabbed their enemies. Thus, when they fell, the murderers joined in cries of indignation, and through this plausible behavior were never discovered ... The panic created was more alarming than the calamity itself."[2]

Cloak and Dagger

"The toga was a garment that was only to be worn by free Roman citizens ... foreigners could not wear a toga in public."[3]

Since the Jewish community were considered outsiders, the Zealots and Sicarii probably wore a tunic and cloak like other contemporary foreigners. Effectively utilizing their cloaks would have allowed for quick and inconspicuous attacks, maintaining a low level of awareness.

The History of Hamas:

1947 - After WWII Palestine is fragmented between Muslim and Jewish territories.

1967 - Israel captures more Palestinian land during the Six Day War.

1987 - Hamas is formed by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

1989 - Hamas's first attack on Israel.

1991 - Independent Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades are formed.

1993 - Suicide bombs become regular tactics.

2000 - Hamas is better funded thus attacks become more violent.

2004 - 10 year truce is offered to Israel but denied. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin is assassinated.

2005 - Israel pulls out of the Gaza Strip and "officially" ends the occupation.

2007 - Hamas ends truce claiming Israel attacked West Bank.

2007 - Fatah and Hamas break out into civil war.

2008 - Truce between Israel and Hamas. Broken four months later.

Position of Juxta

Palestinians lose their land through war and are at the mercy of United Nation authority. Their country is butchered and they are forced to share it with neighbors who do not share the same religious views. The Palestinians lose their identity.
 

The Kingdom of Judea is conquered by the Roman Empire and split apart into different territories.

An ineffective government compels the people of Palestine to seek a more desirable solution to end their suffering. Though extreme and excessive, the Palestinians support Hamas because it is seen as the only path to liberation and reclaiming what is rightfully theirs.
 

Jewish citizens having no other banner to unite under turn to support the Fourth Philosophy and the extreme methods imposed by the Zealots and Sicarii

Even with common goals, a civil war breaks out within Palestine between the Fatah and Hamas. This war is sometimes referenced as the Conflict of Brothers.
Zealots and the more radical Sicarii clash after the murder of The High Priest Ananias 



The Causes of Terrorism Change with Political Winds

The causes of terrorism seem almost impossible for anyone to define. Here's why: they change over time. Listen to terrorists in different periods and you'll hear different explanations. Then, listen to the scholars who explain terrorism. Their ideas change over time too, as new trends in academic thinking take hold.

Many writers begin statements about "the causes of terrorism" as if terrorism were a scientific phenomenon whose characteristics are fixed for all time, like the 'causes' of a disease, or the 'causes' of rock formations. Terrorism isn't a natural phenomenon though. It is name given by people about other people's actions in the social world.
Both terrorists and terrorism's explainers are influenced by dominant trends in political and scholarly thought. Terrorists—people who threaten or use violence against civilians with the hope of changing the status quo—perceive the status quo in ways that accord with the era they live in. People who explain terrorism are also influenced by prominent trends in their professions. These trends change over time.



Viewing Trends in Terrorism Will Help Solve It
Viewing terrorism as the extreme edge of mainstream trends helps us understand, and thus seek solutions, to it. When we view terrorists as evil or beyond explanation, we are inaccurate and unhelpful. We cannot 'solve' an evil. We can only live fearfully in its shadow. Even if it is uncomfortable to think of people who do terrible things to innocent people as part of our same world, I believe it is important to try. You will see in the list below that people who have chosen terrorism in the last century have been influenced by the same broad trends that we all have. The difference is, they chose violence as a response.

1920s - 1930s: Socialism as a Cause
In the early 20th century, terrorists justified violence in the name of anarchism, socialism and communism. Socialism was becoming a dominant way for many people to explain the political and economic injustice they saw developing in capitalist societies, and for defining a solution. Millions of people expressed their commitment to a socialist future without violence, but a small number of people in the world thought violence was necessary.

1950s - 1980s: Nationalism as a Cause

In the 1950s through 1980s, terrorist violence tended to have a nationalist component. Terrorist violence in these years reflected the post-World War II trend in which previously suppressed populations committed violence against states that had not given them a voice in the political process. Algerian terrorism against French rule; Basque violence against the Spanish state; Kurdish actions against Turkey; the Black Panthers and Puerto Rican militants in the United States all sought a version of independence from oppressive rule.

Scholars in this period began seeking to understand terrorism in psychological terms. They wanted to understand what motivated individual terrorists. This related to the rise of psychology and psychiatry in other related realms, such as criminal justice.

1980s - Today: Religious Justifications as a Cause

In the 1980s and 1990s, terrorism began to appear in the repertoire of right-wing, neo-Nazi or neo-fascist, racist groups. Like the terrorist actors that preceded them, these violent groups reflected the extreme edge of a broader and not-necessarily violent backlash against developments during the civil rights era. White, Western European or American men, in particular, grew fearful of a world beginning to grant recognition, political rights, economic franchise and freedom of movement (in the form of immigration) to ethnic minorities and women, who might seem to be taking their jobs and position.

In Europe and the United States, as well as elsewhere, the 1980s represented a time when the welfare state had expanded in the United States and Europe, the agitation of the civil rights movement had produced results, and globalization, in the form of multi-national corporations, had gotten underway, producing economic dislocation among many who depended on manufacturing for a living. Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, the most lethal terrorist attack in the U.S. until the 9/11 attacks, exemplified this trend.

In the Middle East, a similar swing toward conservatism was taking hold in the 1980s and 1990s, although it had a different face than it did in Western democracies. The secular, socialist framework that had been dominant the world over—-from Cuba to Chicago to Cairo-—faded after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and the death in 1970 of Egyptian president Gamal Abd Al Nasser. The failure in the 1967 war was a big blow—it disillusioned Arabs about the entire era of Arab socialism.

Economic dislocations because of the Gulf War in the 1990s caused many Palestinian, Egyptian and other men working in the Persian Gulf to lose their jobs. When they returned home, they found women had assumed their roles in households and jobs. Religious conservatism, including the idea that women should be modest and not work, took hold in this atmosphere. In this way, both West and East saw a rise in fundamentalism in the 1990s.

Terrorism scholars began to notice this rise in religious language and sensibility in terrorism as well. The Japanese Aum Shinrikyo, Islamic Jihad in Egypt, and groups such as the Army of God in the United States were willing to use religion to justify violence. Religion is the primary way that terrorism is explained today.

Future: Environment as a Cause

New terrorism forms and new explanations are underway, however. Special interest terrorism is used to describe people and groups who commit violence on behalf of a very specific cause. These are often environmental in nature. Some predict the rise of 'green' terrorism in Europe--violent sabotage on behalf of environmental policy. Animal rights activists have also revealed a fringe violent edge. Just as in earlier eras, these forms of violence mimic the dominant concerns of our time across the political spectrum.

Riveting Conclusion

Have you actually gotten this far? I mean without cheating? Really? Wow, thank you! Don't forget to use the bathroom after this.
 

It shouldn't be surprising that terrorism generally tends to flourish in similar environments. An oppressed country with a weak government unable to sustain its own citizens and, most importantly, left without a national identity.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs are not met. The citizens have no longer have a heritage to take pride in. Parents are forced to watch their children starve to death. No one has rights, no one is treated like a human.


Disgruntled crowds gather; riots begin; people have a cause, something to believe; they become unified; they call for a reform, reaction, or revolution; they want change, something to be corrected.

A brave leader grabs their hand; the system fails and the people achieve nothing; now extreme measures are taken, violence is inducted. 

The government pushes back and either the movement or the government perishes; a new identity is born. The people are happy, for now.