Terrorism has been a problematic issue since the beginning of man until now. Politifact.org contends that terrorism was not always a senseless act of violence against the innocent to get a message across to the government. In earlier centuries terrorist committed “noble acts” of violence. They only attacked and killed nobility and government officials. Although now, the game has changed and with it no one whether a government official or an innocent bystander is safe from an act of terror. The reason as to why there is no one definition is because terrorism can be committed in many ways like for example the usage of social media or through acts of physical terror. Just like everything else in this world terrorism is an ever-evolving idea. By keeping a broad understanding, it gives the government free rein over how to label terrorism even as new acts of terror are committed. To properly define terrorism, it must be split up into various sub sections and then rephrased in such a manner that ties in all definitions from local to global into one conclusive statement.
When aiming to comprehend terrorism on the local level, acts of terrorism are more individualist acts that harm a small group of people for a political cause. This type of “harm” could be in a physical, mental, emotional, economics or self-motivated way. On the global level though, terrorism is aimed at harming international communities for political means, religious means and even revenge against an oppressed group. Like Sinai says, defining terrorism is an ambiguous task. He goes on to state that by giving terrorism a label, governmental groups as well as society may just be over-simplifying the act of