They exist. Who funds them though?

Depends on the terrorist.

Edit: Wait it doesn't depend on the terrorist?

You should watch this. Its a BBC documentary about how Al-Qaeda as its presented by our media and governments doesn't really exist. There isn't and never was a global network of "evil doers".

https://archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares-Episode1BabyItsColdOutside

Adam Curtis certainly does provides an alternative eye opening view of world events. The series aired on the bbc which adds a certain air of authority.

yes, they actually exist.

The lable "terrorist" is somewhat subjective. Depending on which side you are on. However, the definition is someone whom uses violence or threat of violence to achieve some political or idealogical goals. The definition can, therefore, be applied to many people or groups. Concerning the media's portrail, there are definately some that just want to kill or to gain/remove power, but some are fighting for what they actually beleive is right.

I believe they are real, but largely exaggerated.

If you don't watch TV you start forgetting that you're supposed to be scared all the time. Anyone concerned about terrorism can take a look out the window and see problems of bigger concern; poverty, ignorance, and rampant hedonism for example.

Yes, as a TV broadcast engineer I am quite torn between my beliefs and my career. I love working with the technology and providing the free service to my locale, but I absolutely HATE the garbage that gets fed by the networks!

Well it depends on what you mean by exaggerated.

What I mean is that there is (and have been) such a thing as legitimate terrorists. I believe that MANY things that happen in the world that are attributed to "terrorists" are in fact not the work of terrorists in the traditional sense (unless you consider the CIA a terrorist organization, that is).

Well what would you call a "traditional sense?"

Typically terrorist groups are depicted as militant guerrillas whom are anti-government, ideological, often religious, and independent. That's what I would call a traditional sense. These groups do exist and have been involved in violence targeted against innocents or military targets, this much is true.

I believe that in many cases what is attributed to "terrorists" is in fact the work of: (fill in the blank with your choice) the US military / NATO, private military contractors, various intelligence organizations, etc. There are probably also other instances where traditional terrorist groups may be funded and/or directed by any of the aforementioned.

I'm just one person, but that's my opinion.

A terrorist doesn't have to be a militant group. I would say it is in it's most basic form, a man (or woman) with an ideology that he will try and enforce on others through terror and violence. Take Timothy McVeigh he wasn't part of a group or religious.

As for more government involvements? I don't think they happen very often and only happen against enemies of the government. I honestly can't believe that they would be used against their own people but maybe that's the point.

So do you think Government falls under the militant groups tag since they promote terror (dropping bombs whenever and wherever they want) on people around the world or do they fall under another tag since they say they're promoting peace with violence?

The terrorists exist and they are America.

Replace the word "terrorist" with "jerk faces".

You might not agree that someone was being a "jerk face", its an opinion. It's a label, not a title.

There are two kinds of terrorists:

• The disgruntled individuals who take action on their own, or in small groups, because they hate the existing power structure and want to replace it with another tyrannical power structure of their own choosing. This type of terrorist is not of much importance. Sure, they kill some people, blow some shit up, but nothing ever comes of it.

• The government sponsored, government financed terrorists who have the training of the military and as much weapons and explosives as they could ever need, as well as key enablers in the police, bureaucracy and government. This type is more dangerous because they are used to destabilize societies and overthrow regimes.

These are types of people you haven't actually defined what a terrorist is.

They exist, but they are not exclusively Muslim. And further, as people often say, American colonialists could easily fit into the definition of terrorists.

People do things....sometimes they are sponsored, sometimes it's by their own choice. They may or may not kill people, just scare them. But these people are terrorists.

I just don't think they are the same kind of people George W Bush had in mind when he landed on that aircraft carrier saying "mission accomplished!"

Remember terrorists were originally defined as state employees. Later, they changed the perception of the meaning of the word yet these so called terrorists are still agents of the state. So in this sense these terrorists are real but they aren't who we think they are. I'm thinking of fbi agents or cia agents and of course many contract workers in the employ of the state.

Remember terrorists were originally defined as state employees.

A quick Google search tells me that the word was originally used in the French Revolution to refer to the Jacobins, the radical government rebels famous for the Reign of Terror.

Thanks for the correction which I fully accept. I see how I made my error because so much so called terrorism is state sponsored. Truly, I find myself hard pressed to find many which are not. But be that as it may, you are correct the term was coined as you said.

What's the definition of terrorist?

Non state sanctioned actors who carry out acts of violence aimed at causing fear and loss to its enemy/victim usually in the name of political/religious grievances? It's a good question.

Traitor..............Sympathizer...............Anarchist.....................Communist...................Terrorist......................CONSPIRACY THEORIST. These words are made up by the people in power to demonize and destroy the credibility of those that are against them.

Well, just for posting on Conspiracy, your login will be added to a list of potential terrorists. So, yes. You exist.

Non state sanctioned actors who carry out acts of violence aimed at causing fear and loss to its enemy/victim usually in the name of political/religious grievances? It's a good question.