Debate: Terrorist or freedom fighter?

INTRODUCTION
“One man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter.” This quote is a well-known one – with the on-going conflict around the world, the debate surrounding this quote is more fervent than ever. While the West has categorically labelled those fighting for the Islamic State and other similar groups as terrorists, for others, they are freedom fighters. The question is though, which of these beliefs is correct, or do both have grounds?

IDEOLOGIES
Western and Eastern ideologies play a big part in this overall debate. While the West is firmly in the modern day, offering an opportunity and a better life for many, the East appears at times to be in the dark ages, often medieval with some of their rules and regulations. As mentioned, there are a host of conflicts going on at the moment – the on-going conflict in Iraq and Syria, the battle in the Congo and also the Nigerian encounter.

TERRORISTS?
To take an example – the Islamic State – formally known as ISIS or ISIL. During their bid to claim large swathes of Iraq and Syria, forming a “caliphate”, they have left a bloody trail behind, killing thousands. Without doubt, this has been an act of evil. While they suggest that they do this in the name of religion, no religion can condone the acts of violence we have seen in recent months. There have been so many victims of the advancement of the Islamic State. When the West designates an organisation like this as a terrorist group, there are always grounds to do this.

Perhaps the biggest signifier that they are terrorists is their sickening videos they have released through their Al-Furqan media arm. Many journalists, even some aid workers – all innocent bystanders in the conflict, have been murdered in cold blood, before putting their families through the pain of releasing a video of the act. While these videos have been released in their dozens, we are yet to see a video of Barack Obama or any leading authority figure from the West engaging in such a brutal act. The US continue to help the Iraqi and Syrian civilians in trying to halt the advance of the Islamic State, however there is only a certain amount they can do.

FREEDOM FIGHTERS?
While the obvious idea is that those that take part in these mass executions, suicide bombings and despicable videos are terrorists, it would be unfair to not analyse the other side of the story. A freedom fighter is defined as a “person engaged in a resistance movement against what they believe to be an oppressive and illegitimate government.” When applying this to Syria – you could suggest that the Islamic State can fit this category. The Assad regime have been known to not treated their civilians well.

The Nigerian group Boko Haram have also labelled themselves’ freedom fighters. They bid to impose sharia law in Nigeria. Their name translates close to “Western Education is forbidden.” One thing is for certain – it is unfair to deny children the right to an education – no freedom fighters would be doing this. But it is only to fair to an extent to consider terrorist groups freedom fighters – after all, many consider them to be.

OVERALL
In conclusion, this is a topic very much open to opinion. From a Western perspective, it is clear that these organisations are terrorist-related. No politically-correct group would go round killing masses in sickening executions. The Islamic State are an ideal example of how a group can be designated terrorist. What is important to remember is that these groups do have support, whether those who support them have had their mind-warped is a question for another day, but to some, they are freedom fighters. However overall, it is hard to justify the acts of terrorist groups around the world, with their designation as a terrorist group surely correct.

/MF/
(‘036’)

Life After Life: An Interesting read

Having just completed Raymond A. Moody’s timeless classic “Life After Life”, I feel more philosophical than ever! Life After Life was first published in 1975, focusing on the endless question – what happens when we die? With the advancements of Science in recent times, the practice of religion seems to be on the decline. With many believing that there is no life after death, this book gave me plenty to think about. The book is essentially recounting the stories of over 100 people who have technically been declared “dead”, only to have gone on to lived.

Some of the more interesting accounts from those considered “dead”, included being able to see their lifeless body. One of the best accounts was of a patient who had been aware of an item placed on a cupboard after they were given anaesthetic. The patient was due to have an operation – the question was how did the patient see the item if they were out cold. The patient said that they had been floating above their body.

Many other accounts included being able to see a “bright light” or a “tunnel.” This is something often heard – that when a person “dies”, they often see a bright light. Many also spoke of the peace they felt – it certainly sounds nice. Others revealed that they also saw their deceased loved ones. Perhaps what was most remarkable was how consistent the stories were with each other.

Of course life after death is something we will never know certainly exists. Many sceptics call the idea of Heaven a “coping mechanism” – an idea pioneered by Sigmund Freud. Although there seems to be a lack of belief of the afterlife – the stories in this book are enough to get anyone thinking about the ideas explored. Near death experiences are fascinating to hear about – this groundbreaking book is a must read for anyone interested in philosophy!

“It is research like Dr Moody presents in his book that will enlighten many and will confirm what we have been taught for two thousand years – that there is life after death.”
-Elizabeth Kubler Ross

/MF/
(‘033’)

Suicide: Is it selfish?

In the wake of the death of respected actor Robin Williams, I recently read an article from British newspaper “The Guardian”, stating that his death is a reminder that suicide is not selfish. Suicide is something that is deeply sad, there are people who come to the end of their tether, not wanting to live on anymore. If the person has family, or friends, it is likely they will want to know why – why would the person take their life? This is why it has been said that suicide is a selfish act – however on balance, is it selfish or not?

Robin Williams, a highly-respected actor. RIP

The issue surrounding suicide was highlighted once again by the media in recent days with the death of Robin Williams. Almost 4,500 people take their own lives’ in the UK alone per year. It is a real issue. Suicide can often be linked in with mental problems. Often the reason that people end their lives’ is due to on-going mental problems. Robin Williams was known to suffer from mental problems and it is believed that this was one of the factors leading to his death. I took a quick look around the Internet – a website named debate.org were debating this question as well, opening it up to the public. The results are as follows:

This is an international-based website and the views come from all over the world. Each person who votes gets to write an opinion based on the topic. There are a lot of people both suggesting that suicide is selfish, but the majority suggest that suicide isn’t selfish.

SUICIDE IS SELFISH:

Here are some opinions suggesting that suicide is selfish.

The idea of a “permanent solution to a short or temporary problem” is one that is always used against the idea of suicide. It is also important to take religion into consideration here as well. Many religions are taught that suicide is wrong – it is a waste of life. It can be argued regardless of the situation the person is in – it is still a waste of a life.

SUICIDE ISN’T SELFISH:

On the other hand it can be argued that suicide isn’t selfish. 66% of those who answered suggested that it wasn’t selfish. Here are some answers:

Both arguments put together some very valid points. Many people that suggest suicide isn’t selfish talk about the problem of those in pain. Those who are terminally ill and have no quality of life – is it really loving to keep them alive? It is difficult but sometimes it could be suggested that the most loving thing to do is to free them from pain.

OVERALL

In conclusion personally I would put it down to quality of life. When people who have limited problems yet think that suicide is the best action to take – this is something that is wrong, especially if their quality of life is high. However there are some people who have such a poor quality of life and in the end perhaps the most loving thing to do can be to end their life. On the other hand some will suggest that life is a gift and any attempt to end the life isn’t fair on people around that person. It is a topic that can be debated forever, it is likely there will never be any proper answer to it – like so many other topics – everyone will have their own opinion on this topic, differing opinions too.

/MF/
(‘008’)