National September 11 Memorial, New York City. Photo by Axel Houmadi/Unplsash.

Mainstream pundits’ outrage over CBC News’s recently revealed guidance on describing the September 11 attacks may have more to do with ideology than semantics. Until late August, CBC journalists were instructed to attribute the characterization of 9/11 as terrorism rather than apply the term directly—a policy the broadcaster has now changed following public criticism.

Many of the same commentators support Canada’s terrorist designation of resistance groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah without acknowledging that the conduct of states—including Israel—can also conform to the legal definition of terrorism.

The popular and political meaning of terrorism differs sharply from its formal definition. In practice, the term is frequently reserved for violent resistance to the actions of the United States and allies such as Canada and Israel.

According to the RCMP, terrorism includes an act or omission committed “for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause” with the intention of intimidating the public, including through serious violence against people, property, critical infrastructure or essential systems.

Canada’s legal definition of terrorism can just as readily describe state violence, including Israel’s Dahiya Doctrine, which features the use of massive, disproportionate force and the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure.

The words used to describe 9/11 ultimately matter less than the consequences of that atrocity. Twenty-five years later, questions remain about aspects of the official account, while Osama bin Laden is unavailable for comment. The orchestraters of the attack........

© Canadian Dimension