The rise of extremism

9/11 was certainly not the beginning of the so called extremism but it was clearly the start of the awareness of it. Before that tragic date, a huge percentage of the population in many countries had not idea of the existence of an old religious movement with millions of followers called Islam.

Soon after 9/11 the mainstream media started talking about radical muslim extremism and many forms of it.

Those who did only follow mainstream media en had little of not formation in any type of believe system soon began to repeat as a sparrow statements such as; “Not all moslims are terrorists but most terrorists are Muslims ”, something that is completely devoid of factual information and is absolutely not true.

The world has known extremism in many forms since the beginning of time, it is just that mainstream media had never been so synchronized in such a way that they appear to widely agree in what to call terrorism.

But what is terror in the first place if not the act to inflict terror on people weather the mean is by randomly harming people physically or causing panic and despair in the forms of words, images or propaganda?.

What is the criteria to qualify as a terrorist attack an act of terror?. 

We know for sure that a terrorists attack can be perpetrated by using an airplane and smashing it against a building or by using a car and harming pedestrians or by using a knife or a riffle. But sadly enough when this incidents occur they are not always catalogued as terrorist attacks. 

They receive various names to cover the headlines, sometimes they are label as just incidents or just shootings.

Every now and then I see on the news of another shooting incident in the United states mainly where oftentimes a young guy opens fire indiscriminately against innocent people and experts gather together on talk shows to discuss about what led this young boy to commit such an atrocity, they try to understand what where his motivations. Was he a looner, did he smoke dope, did he perform well at school?, maybe his parents were divorced.

The other day a guy drove with his car through the multitude and kill one in the Charlotesville incident just the same style of attack used in Barcelona, London and a city of Germany. There were two big differences in those attacks or incidents as they call it. The author of Charlotesville was not a moslim, therefore not an extremist, therefore not a terrorists which reduces the attack to just that, an incident. Although there were casualties, that doesn't count a terror, although people were in panic, literaly terrifyied, that doesn't rise the incident to the degree of terror.

So now we have a so called war on terror going on but since the word terror can only be associated with a certain group of a certain believe located in a certain place of the world it seems like those non-terrorist countries have the right to invade and even arm groups in those areas so that terror can be erradicated.

Not long ago in Las Vegas, a mad man did let bullets rain from the his hotel room upon the multitudes killing many, it is irrelevant how many were killed because it is not about the numbers, even if not one had resulted injured, to me such an act causes not other thing than terror among the people witnessing the incident. Again, it was not labeled as a terrorist attack, again it was just an incident. Did the guy belong to certain religious group or had the guy friends from that particular area of the world?.

I personally can not agree or disagree with the moslim faith because I simply don't know what it's all about. The only thing I know is that they are not allowed to eat pork meat and I love pork meat, that's what I grew up eating. Were I grew up there were not muslims at all but I can tell you one thing there was terrorism, there were gansgsters, shootings, bombings, subversive groups and mafia, that place is called Colombia. A place where drugs bosses did build churches and neighbourhooods on one day and the next took airplanes down from the sky just to target one passenger who changed his flight at the last minute. Where they terrorists? Yes, where they muslims? I don't think so, I didn't even know what it was when those events happened.

So extremism is a gentleman which wears many disguises, it appears as the mafia, as the lefty movement that fight for the rights of the poor, as the army that fights to defends of freedom and democracy or the western values even though they have to leave the west to fight for those values which makes no sense and it will continue to mutate and wear different disguises. 

Today I came across the most chocking video on youtube, It was about the Rohingya in Myanmar. Thousands of people are being expelled and their houses being burnt. Buddist Monks where interviewed and I just couldn't believe what I heart, the interviewed monks held the same views and believes towards the moslim population. They were considered in their eyes as violent people and according to many sources buddist monks are responsible for the boiling hatred that has led to these folks fleeing to the neighbourig countries.

So here we have mr extremist wearing a disguise that nobody could possibly ever have expected the orange buddist suit.

Is this a war of the opposites rather than a war on terror and extremism?

I ask myself whether this is human nature and if we just have to learn to live with this.

When these terrible things happen the heart of many people is touched on the other side of the world and that evokes in them pure feelings like compassion, charity, fraternity. Feelings that otherwise would have remained asleep.

Will we ever find global balance, the sort of balance where we become neigther too bad nor too good in order to not create abusers?

I just don't know, I just wanted to reflect on this.