Apparently unable to distinguish between light and dark, good and evil, he blundered into the sort of faux deliberation favoured by ill-prepared undergraduates.Peter Whish-Wilson
“I think we need to find better words than ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism’ because, to me, this implies a very one-sided view of the world,” Whish-Wilson said. “Often our forces could be seen by Iraqi civilians as being terrorists. ‘Terrorist’ is a word that is very commonly used against us by those same people in Iraq who have been radicalised — anything that creates terror is, by definition, terrorism. We use that word because it is a very simple word to use and it demonises people.”
Correct. We use the word ‘‘terrorist’’ because it best describes those people who practise ‘‘terrorism’’, that is, participate in violent acts intended to create terror.
Whish-Wilson seems puzzled that it implies a “one-sided view of the world”. Further, and by clear implication, he is drawing a parallel between the actions of terrorists and our armed forces in Iraq — though he later attempted to row back when questioned by Coalition senators.
“I said any soldier in any country can be seen as a terrorist by their enemy, and that the word ‘‘terrorism’’ is a word we should consider not using — that we should come up with a better explanation,” he laboured.