Norwegian Killer Breivik Declared Insane - Admission/Application Essay Example

In another definition, terrorism is defined as the destruction of property and or property by a group acting not on behalf of a government that is established by law for the objective of redressing imaginary or real injustices attributed to that established government and is directly aimed at an established authority or government. According to these definitions, definitely Breivik carried out terrorist attacks. The definition below proves that he did acts that are considered terrorist by looking at specific elements in his case by defining elements relating to terrorism such as: illegality and legality of terrorism, immorality and morality of terrorism, terrorism to governance among others.

The second question that this discussion will conclude by answering is whether in its opinion the accused should have stood trial or not in regard to the decision by the public prosecutor not to try him on basis of insanity. These two elements are very important in understanding this case as well as other terrorist activities around the world especially in this era of terrorism and counter terrorism. This debate will exhaustively dig into in-depth deep and varied material to understand terrorism in the age of international terrorism and international efforts in war on terror.

Discussion Proof of Terrorism The accused from the selection of his targets does not at all choose them at random. Choosing the capital of the country which is like in many other countries the administration center of the government sought to cripple governance or at least threaten the government. Also, the capital of Norway harbors a large population of people who are involved in the daily to daily activities of running the economy, the politics and even the social sphere of that nation. By choosing to bomb the capital, Breivik intentionally wanted to injure, kill or scare that large population (Aljazeera, 2011).

By doing so, the government would directly and indirectly be affected because it would have a rough time trying to convince the people that they are safe and should go about their business in the normal way in running the economies. His act is terrorist because he intentionally sought to cause havoc in a duly elected government otherwise he would have gone to his farm and detonated the explosives there. By targeting to kill or terrorize the innocent citizens by scaring them, he was indirectly targeting the government of Norway.

His intentions are malicious and clear; by scaring the people together by destruction of property, in a great way he is paralyzing the normal running and administration of a government. Therefore, one can conclude that his interests are political because he is targeting a political institution; the government. Just like the definition has stated out, the acts of the accused contain the element of use of violence, directly and indirectly threatening a government and lastly in pursuit of political interests.

In the second instance, the intentions, the actions and the results are out clear. The accused gunned down the teenagers at a camp organized by the Labor Party youth wing which is the ruling party. Terrorism as has already been analyzed entails the targeting of instruments that are directly or indirectly linked to the government. In this case, the youth wing of the ruling party had organized this summer camp at to the accused; this presented a perfect target to get back at the government which he had grievances