i don't have a reference to support but i think i read somewhere that it was first used during Mao's Cultural Revolution, please check

Will do. That could definitely be. I am think of G. Lukacs in the 1930s. Still trying to track it down. Thanks Farhan.

What is Terrorism? This is the first question we must ask.

The “War on Terror” that governments’ state they are combating is a misnomer. Terrorism is a tactic, a method to gain an end. It is used to intimidate nations to capitulate, to force their citizens to give up land, freedoms, beliefs, and values. You do not wage war against a tactic. War is waged against individuals and groups who employ, support, or finance this tactic. The tactics used include targeting civilian populations by executions, hijacking, kidnapping, suicide-murdering, rocketing, and shooting innocent civilians.

The goals of using this tactic are to undermine the resolve of a civilian population, initiate faulty logic dealing with self-blame for being attacked, instill fear and flight in the attacked civilian population, and ultimately gain land & political dominance & for many to establish their brand of religion. 

Far too many educated people have called those who use terrorist tactics, Freedom Fighters. As Boaz Ganor, Director of the Institute for Counter Terrorism, points out---“Freedom Fighters do not purposely attack civilians; terrorists target your brothers, sisters, children, parents and grandparents”. The tactic of terror has been conducted against Israel and the USA for more than a half a century, uniting both democratic governments in the concerted effort to eradicate terrorism.

Let us back up a second: Do you remember that the multiple attacks on our nation where more than 3,000 of our citizens were murdered on 9/11 were followed by radiological, bio-chemical envelopes sent to government officials and random citizens in the USA? These letters contained the anthrax virus. Radical ideology threatens Christian, Jewish, and Muslim peoples who do not share the same radical points of view. 

USA military, law enforcement officers, and security personnel are well-trained to deal with terrorist threats. Our politicians, the policy makers, are ill-informed, and far too often more concerned with their political party and themselves and not willing or able to make proper decisions concerning terrorism.

Terrorism would be less of a threat if there were fewer countries that tolerated or supported them terrorist organizations.

It’s upsetting that the London based, Financial Times, called the Abu Nidal terrorists who killed scores of civilians in Israel, Vienna and Rome guerrillas, creating a false image of freedom fighters.

Terrorism goes beyond being labeled criminal actions. Syria, Iran, Pakistan, etc. say they do not support terrorism, they only support the national liberation of oppressed people. As Brian Jenkins stressed when he was with the Terrorism Study Division of the Rand Institute, “If we look at terrorism as a simple crime we will need to gather evidence, make arrests, and have trials. This presents a problem with of international cooperation in countries that house, train, finance, and arm terrorist organizations. We have to understand that terrorists threaten not only individuals but also the publics’ trust in government. We need a thoughtful set of laws with checks & balances that help better protect our citizens from terrorists.

Friends, the goal of terrorism is always political; its aim is to change governments to act in ways that support terrorist actions, replace existing officials, revising economic, social goals with nationalistic and religious ideologies that are more in tune with the terrorists.

Terrorists are NOT: guerrilla or commando units, they are NOT national liberation movements or freedom fighters. None of these groups attack children at their schools, ordinary citizens, or kill for the sake of killing.

The International Islamic League (IIL) states that, “Terrorism is any injury to a person’s body, property, dignity or intellect and when goals are justified it should not be considered terrorism”. So it’s fine to murder children, grandmothers, and others at random.

It was the Lutheran Pastor, Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemoller, who was thrown in the Dachau death camp by the Nazis for preaching the following: “First they came for the Jews & I did not speak out because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they Catholics and I did nothing because I wasn’t a Catholic. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out we are not at war with a tactic, terrorism; we are at war with those individuals and organizations and the nations that support and or employ the tactic of terror. Support ranges from funding, training, recruiting, providing safe havens, arming and terrorist organizations and individuals who use terror.

Charles - I agree with what you have said so eloquently and thank you for taking the time to write this up. Any thoughts about cultural terrorism - when you first took notice of the term and with regard to its history? Thanks.

Hi,

Throughout history , and especially when nation-state did not exist yet , there were wars that caused destruction of cultural artifacts. I do not know the exact time the term "cultural terrorism" emerged, but in in August 2016 was the first time the international Criminal Court sentenced a person for destroying cultural artifacts in  Timbuktu, Please follow the link:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/08/man-trial-icc-destroying-timbuktu-artefacts-160822100834765.html

Thanks Avishag. I know about this. The online Oxford English Dictionary cites the use of the term for the first time in English in the 1930s but it does not give the source of attribution nor context. I went to TAU's library to look at the print edition of the OED and no mention is made at all under the entries "terrorism" or "culture". I have found that G. Lukacs's work has been described as a kind of cultural terrorism and this usage would fit with the use of political terrorism by authoritarian state's engineering culture. There was a shift in the use of the term 'terrorism" after WWII to non-state actors. (B. Hoffman notes this) Farhad in this discussion points to Mao bc of the cultural revolution but I have not found it described as cultural terrorism. I do appreciate you taking time to contribute to the discussion. 

check this out, might help

http://www.dawn.com/news/1094274

Hi,

Perhaps the term denotes other meanings, and that is why it is difficult to locate it in connection to terrorism against national culture. Usually when we put together the words "terrorism" and "Culture" we find papers that deal with terrorists' attacks on religious beliefs or  culture symbols that are not artifacts. Nevertheless, I found an article that deals with terrorism against national heritage:

1.

The Islamic State's symbolic war: Da'esh's socially mediated terrorism as a threat to cultural heritage

By: Smith, Claire; Burke, Heather; de Leiuen, Cherrie; et al.

JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ARCHAEOLOGY Volume: 16 Issue: 2 Pages: 164-188 Published: JUN 2016

Abstract

Using the Islamic State/Da'esh as a case study, we identify the genesis of a new form of terrorism arising from the convergence of networked social media and changes in the forms of conflict. Socially mediated terrorism is defined as the use of social and networked media to increase the impact of violent acts undertaken to further a social, political and/or religious cause with the aim of creating physical, emotional or psychological suffering that extends beyond the immediate audience'. Our analysis distinguishes three strategies involving cultural heritage. The first is smoke, mirrors and mock destruction, which exaggerates perceptions of power and tests the impact of potential destruction. The second is shock, awe and censure, which uses international outrage to cloak the Islamic State with an aura of invincibility and highlight the impotence of its opponents. The third is financing the Kaliphate, which has transformed the ad hoc looting of archaeological sites into a business model. Iconoclasm has a lengthy history in which cultural icons were destroyed with the primary aim of subjugating local populations/audiences. In contrast, the Islamic State's promotion of cultural heritage destruction through networked social media is directed simultaneously towards local, regional, and international audiences with reactions from one audience used to subdue, embolden or intrigue another. As such, networked social media can be viewed as a fresh - and currently under-rated - threat to cultural heritage in conflict zones. Finally, we draw attention to Bevan's (2012) notion that crimes against cultural property can provide an early warning of potential genocide.

hi Avishag

the term refers to destruction of religious and cultural symbols of the enemy as we could give example of Hamas destroying Jewish religious and cultural symbols of in Gaza and West Bank. The 9/11 attacks could be categorized as another example as Al-Qaeda attempted to target cultural and civilizational symbols of the US. I agree with Bevan;s notion as radical Islamist terrorist groups like Hamas do have genocidal tendencies.   

Hi Dr. Farhan

Thanks for the clarification.

Thank Avishah for the article. I missed this one and also thanks to Farhad for his comment too.

my pleasure Dr Avishag

Ive seen the term used in reference to British Colonialism but I think it was entirely made as secondary commentary decades if not centuries after the events under discussion. Nancy - if you are looking for the first time it was used as commentary of a past event or at the time of an event?

Outstanding posting and discussion. I also very much agree terrorism is a tactic and find cultural terrorism an interesting concept.

How “cultural terrorism” became a matter of international law

The destruction of manuscripts in Timbuktu became a landmark case for cultural terrorism.

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/observations/2015/11/how-cultural-terrorism-became-matter-international-law

Of course, ISIS took it to the next level!

Ahmet thanks so much. It appears earlier but for sure the

Timbuktu case was a turning point.

It is not right to understand cultural terrorism on the basis of terrorist incident center. A terrorist attack in a temple, mosque, church or in other particular place can have many tactical objectives. I think, Cultural terrorism is an ideology under which a country or a group or a community tries to impose its culture on another by force of terror or fear.

Hi,

It seems that the term "cultural terrorism" was first used in Shakespeare's oeuvre Macbeth, and then mentioned again in the 9/11 events .