Are there people involved in these acts, "terrorists" OR ""freedom fighters"

Some people have developed the idea that terrorists are from Arab descent and need to be stopped when going through Airport security, in fear that they might blow us all up. That however does not define a terrorist. One needn't be an ethicist to realize that it is unjust to slap such a noxious label on a whole group of people on account of the misdeeds of a few. A terrorist is usually part of a terrorist group, but as above that does not mean the entire group of people are terrorists. A terrorist fights without a just cause, they may have a cause but that does not mean it’s a good one!

Freedom fighters also fight with cause, there cause however can be justified and the act would be done to achieve a short or long term goal. When terrorist acts are done, there is fear, destruction and lack of hope. Whereas when a freedom fighter acts, good things can come out of it such as rights, respect and laws. Even when a terrorist thinks they are doing it for what’s right, they can be misled by powerful figures in their groups. They are the real terrorists, the people high up who give the order not the people who go through with them. To me anyways, the master minds in those operations are in the ones in the wrong. Whereas freedom fighters are in command and do what they think is best and needed for the people they fight for! Fighting for justice is what they are all about! Like Louis Riel, leading the Metis for their rights and putting himself on the line for the people. A truly good man- that freedom fighter was.

Is there such thing as a 'just cause'?

Just cause is often a matter of interpretation by the courts or arbitrators. The interpretation can exempt someone from a wrong doing, in this case terrorism. Then the incident(s) could be named as acts of freedom instead of oppression. Just causes can range from: political, ideological, or religious although not all of these reasons for making a statement are in fact just.

The Oklahoma Bombing, was done for religious reasons yet it was not just. After the Waco incident where government officials went into a cult many died and Timothy McVeigh was outraged and set out to kill people for it. No peaceful goal could be achieved from that, just destruction and a settled mind. That is not a just cause. The immediate affects were 168 deaths, which gained the people of Texas Waco no respect.

Nelson Mandela and the ANC could be a justified incident however because they were fighting after they were oppressed because of racism towards them. Which allowed in the long term a more equal government as Nelson Mandela was freed from prison and became the President of South Africa.
So to conclude, there is such thing as a just cause. Although sometimes it’s hard to find the fine line between the two, the judgement can be made.

What is terrorism?

Terrorism is the unlawful act of violence or threat of violence on civilians. It take place in public areas to make a statement and influence decisions and thinking. Usually thought of as a good cause by the oppressors, causes such as religion, economics or being oppressed. The people involved are civilians attacking civilians like in the Oklahoma Bombing, when 168 civilians were killed. Which is different than war where soldiers fight each other, in the battlefields not on public domain. Although deaths do not have to take place in order for an act to be terrorism, a large threat that alters decisions made can be considered an act.
Weather or not it is a good cause can be easy to tell when a group is fighting for their basic rights like in the North-West Rebellions. It was easy to tell that the Metis were freedom fighters and that the government was the terrorist. It can be harder to decipher when someone is acting in self defense or revenge like after 11 Israeli athletes were murdered, they wanted to make a statement that they could not be abused and disregarded. The Israelis assassinated several people which could be considered terrorism if you look at the attacks at face value instead of looking at how many times Israel has been attacked in the past.