Recently, and especially after the war of terror was launched, there has been a disturbing trend in the media narrative and academic discourse where terrorism is, without any qualm, associated with any religion such as Muslim terrorists, Islamic terrorist or Christian terrorism. Such misleading and unfounded associations can further exacerbate the already troubling sense of Xenophobia that seems to be prevalent in the world. Furthermore, this is a violation of human rights on religious basis under the Article 3 and Article 14 ECHR and I have recently decided to take this issue in the International Court of Law (ICL). The article says:
The issue of associating religion with terrorism does more than just giving way to false beliefs. By constantly using such terms, a link is created between the both and can contribute to create an identity that is susceptible to manipulation by extremists and terrorists, it can open up, as I mentioned in the letter to the ICL, “unwanted cognitive openings” whereby person can make a transition from extremism to terrorism as they are radicalized through the dynamic cognitive process of radicalization to violence.
It is also ironic and paradoxical to try and establish a link between religion and terrorism or any such violent ideas because the idea of religions and the views it holds are utterly opposite. Religion is a source of self-awareness and aids in development, both moral and cognitive, of human beings.
The fact that there is only a minute percentage of Muslims or Christians or people from other religions turning into terrorists and not a majority testify this claim. The act of terrorism should be associated with that individual and/or group and his mindset and motives without bringing or blaming or using religion.
In fact, the mind of a person engaged in or inclined to be in terrorism behaves opposite to that of a mind of a person who understands religion. The mind of the former cannot differentiate between good and bad, violence and peace.
If we read biographies of thousands radicalized to violence as terrorist, any scientist can identify that their Radicalization process compromises the four types of rational functions of human mind and these 4 rational function distorts in x time at the initial stage before other mind functions including emotional, motivational etc. become unidirectional toward violence.
These deviations and distortions of mind functions are first evidence that terrorist has not ability to understand religion at all under his algorithm of thoughts abnormal management. This distortion and deviation is further exposed in his violent behavior, attitude, exposures and actions because he continues developing new and existing cognitive openings of terror.
Therefore, question is, how one can be a believer of religion while he is killing the innocents and why some academic, print and other media frequently identify these terrorists by mixing the religions with them as Christian terrorist or Islamic terrorist therein billions of believers as Muslims, Christians and others condemn terror act and live a peaceful life in the societies.
This again shows inability of those experts in counter radicalization and counter terrorism, firstly incompetent to understand the dynamic cognitive process of radicalization, purity of religions and secondly not able to use right words for the terrorists.
As the case is presented to UN human right commission pre litigation, it’s important for the individual governments to look this issue seriously: protecting the rights of believers, obstruct discriminatory social views about children of believers in multi religious societies, reform the academic research and educate our experts to best level to learn the process under scientific parameters, use tools of operational value, develop right terms to use in print and broadcasting media.
We should be wise enough not to normalize these unwanted terms as Christian terrorist (frequently used after Canada terror attacks) and Islamic terrorist etc. There in a terrorist is fully satisfied with these terms as doing so gives their insidious mission a support of an ideology.
Finally, a public petition is another democratic right for which we all must be ready to sign to support a peaceful world while protecting the rights of all humans and appreciate the great work by our legal team including Barrister Shazia Anjum and others.