“What is the definition of terrorism or a terrorist?”
by
Abu Muhammad al-Jolani. Photo by Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0, Wikipedia
Qatar’s Islamist regime showed off its global power at its ‘Doha’ summit attracting everyone from Bill Gates to Tucker Carlson to current Syrian leader and former Al Qaeda leader Ahmed al-Sharaa.
The former terrorist leader who had a $5 million reward on his head when he was going by Al-Jolani was asked by CNN’s Christiane Amanpour about his terrorist past.
And Ahmed al-Sharaa predictably replied that it’s really hard to define what a terrorist is and that America, the UK and Israel are the real terrorists.
Syria's Al Qaeda Leader Al-Sharaa at Doha says he's not a terrorist, America is the real terrorist
"There's a lot of confusion in the word 'terrorist'"
“We saw wars in Afghanistan, in Iraq, all of those that were killed were innocent" pic.twitter.com/zvfGGx9Zj7
— Daniel Greenfield – "Hang Together or Separately" (@Sultanknish) December 7, 2025
“What is the definition of terrorism or a terrorist?” Al-Sharaa, who had been originally backed by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the original caliph of ISIS, asked. “Saying that I was a terrorist and judging me as a terrorist is politicized.”
“Judging people as terrorists needs to be proven,” the head of a terror group that massacred numerous civilians argued. “There’s been 25 years of us hearing this word in the world, but there’s a lot of confusion in understanding the word terrorist. Terrorists, in my opinion, are those that kill innocent people, children and women. And that use illegitimate means to harm people.”
And if there’s one thing that Al Qaeda and ISIS were known for, it was their firm refusal to ever harm innocent people, children and women.
Ahmed al-Sharaa then claimed that the term ‘terrorist’ would be better applied to the non-Muslim countries targeted by Islamic terrorists.
“The number of victims in Gaza … most of them are innocent,” Al-Shara said, referring to the dead terrorists in his fellow Muslim Brotherhood terrorist groups. “We saw wars in Afghanistan, in Iraq, all of those that were killed were innocent – and it is the killers that describe others as terrorists.”
The last part is true. We’ve got an Al Qaeda terrorist now trying to flip the definition of terrorists to mean the United States and those countries resisting Islamic terrorism.
Al-Shara argues that most of the terrorists killed in Gaza were innocent, and apparently “all of those that were killed were innocent” in Afghanistan and Iraq. Including presumably Al Qaeda.
This does show real appreciation by Ahmed al-Sharaa for the way President Trump honored him by inviting him to the White House.
“Now, on a personal level, I have never harmed a civilian, I fought on several fronts and I fought for more than 20 years, with honour,” Al-Sharaa falsely claimed. “People now know that this description is not accurate, that is why I am no longer listed as a terrorist by the Security Council.”
Whatever his ‘personal’ level is, he headed a terrorist organization responsible for killing plenty of civilians. The only reason he was delisted by the Security Council was because Turkey’s Islamist regime helped him seize power, at which point he was no longer a terrorist leader, he was now the leader of a terrorist state.
Can anyone please help this man define ‘terrorism’?
Typical of Muslims: they are always the victims and the infidel is always the “terrorist” or “committer of genocide.” Then, when they act as mass murderers, they say those they killed (yes even infants) are the “colonizers” and are part of the “army of colonizers.”
This is a good example of perversion, a perverse mind-set: everything they do is justified because they are “victims.” The world is turned upset down.
Similarly, this was how Hitler thought: the Jews had been predators or like rats and needed to be exterminated. The Nazis were victims and the Jews were the aggressors.
It should be noted that when people experience themselves as victims, they cannot regulate their aggression: everything they feel like doing to the “aggressor” feels 100% justified. So they do not have their aggressive impulses in any kind of control.
This dynamic is similar to the way a psychopath’s mind work: a psychopath always feels like a victim and the aggression is always on someone else’s side of the line.
Now we’ve got psychopathic mass murderers like Al Jolani opining on how the US is the aggressor. And we have a US President who appears to accept this person as head of state. As his National Security brief says, the US accepts the positions of each country and is not in the business of trying to force regime change.
Is this an improvement over US foreign policy up to now?