I was watching the CBS coverage of Yasser Arafat's death and they did a mini biography on him, telling about how he rose to become the leader of the palestinian people. At first they said he led the PLO resistance with violence coordinating attacks on isreali civilians, airliners and such. Then in 1988 he renounced violence and tried to lead a more passive rebellion. The palestinian people wouldn't go for this and terrorism was out of his control. The interesting thing about it is at the end they asked the question: Is he a terrorist? They said that if you define terrorism as the purposeful murder of civilians for political gain, as he did in the seventies and early eighties, then he is a terrorist plain and simple. Nevermind the fact that he publicly renounced the violence later, he once used terrorism, so he will always be a terrorist. Its like the joke about the guy who complains that he did all the great things like build a hospital, paint a masterpiece and such but is not remembered for those things. The punchline goes "... but, you fuck one goat...." So my question is this: If terrorism is defined as such, and if you engage in it once and are therefore forever a terrorist, then is the United States a terrorist organization for bombing civilian targets in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They knew they would kill nearly half a million civilians( im not sure of the figure but I know its in the hundreds of thousands) and the reason they did kill all those civilians was to send a message to the japanese emperor. They did it so the enemy would give up. This is exactly the same reason that terrorists today use terrorism, they want to sedn a message, they know they have no chance going after our military, so they attack civilians in order to get their point across.