The Obama administration, seemingly without any concern or worry, funneled money around U.S. law through foreign central banks to provide a state sponsor of terrorism with $400 million in blood money for American hostages.
War on terrorism reflects, in my view, a rather narrow and extremist vision of foreign policy for a superpower and for a great democracy with genuinely idealistic traditions.
Dick Clarke, who was head of counter-terrorism in the National Security Council, pushed constantly for the Principals Committee, which is the key national security group of top officials to take up the issue of terrorism.
My friends, there is no Palestinian-Israeli conflict. There is only the global war on terrorism.
Since September 11th, federal terrorism investigations have resulted in charges against more than 400 suspects, and more than half of them have been convicted.
We remain vulnerable. There is no such thing as 100 percent security against terrorism.
Terrorism is not a public health threat, relative to cancer and heart disease and malaria and so forth.
Trade creates jobs and lifts people out of poverty. And when that happens, societies stabilize and grow. And there is nothing like a stable society to fight terrorism and strengthen democracy, freedom and rule of law.
In 1985, the Iranian sponsorship of terrorism was clear, solid evidence.
There was a clarity to the Nineties. It was pre-9/11, before that anxiety kicked in that exists right now about the financial crisis or terrorism. We were all just going to move forward into the millennium and everything was always going to get better. Then, whoops, that didn't happen.
I held a conference in Harvard where Americans said they didn't believe in risk. They thought it was just European hysteria. Then the terrorist attacks happened and there was a complete conversion. Suddenly terrorism was the central risk.
I consider Bush's decision to call for a war against terrorism a serious mistake. He is elevating these criminals to the status of war enemies, and one cannot lead a war against a network if the term war is to retain any definite meaning.
I am committed to protecting our country against the threat of terrorism.
Elected president of the Republic, I would immediately, and with no hesitation, carry out the battle plan against Islamist terrorism and against judicial laxity.
I think the risks that people see of terrorism are incredibly important but we are very confident we have got the right people on it and the risks have been minimised.
Throughout the second intifada, America provided unprecedented support for Israel's struggle against Palestinian terrorism and Israel's construction of the security barrier.
The biggest danger of this terrorism and extremism is the tarnishing of the reputation of our beloved religion... We will not allow this to happen.
The U.S. government has in recent years fought what it termed wars against AIDs, drug abuse, poverty, illiteracy and terrorism. Each of those wars has budgets, legislation, offices, officials, letterhead - everything necessary in a bureaucracy to tell you something is real.
Most people are basically a victim of the circumstances of their life. They have things like 9/11, they have terrorism threats, they have new war threats, they have economy problems, and they think, 'What can I do? I'm basically a victim.'
The FBI. is a massive culture. It's been a culture that served America well, and it's been focused on prosecution. But what we need in terms of terrorism is prevention.
We will not import crime, terrorism, homophobia, and a brand of anti-Semitism that sets synagogues ablaze.
Our plan is to struggle against terrorism and have security for the country and help draft a democratic constitution as soon as possible.
I think it's very important to have a sense of balance in covering the war, but you don't have to be morally neutral about terrorism.
As a state sponsor of global terrorism and supplier of weapons to terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons capabilities.
Terrorism has become a festering wound. It is an enemy of humanity.
India has a consistent and well-known position on terrorism. We oppose all acts of terrorism, wherever they occur. We have repeatedly said that no cause can justify violence and destruction, particularly aimed at civilians.
Undoubtedly, the U.S. harbors leading international terrorists, people described by the F.B.I. and the Justice Department as leading terrorists, like Orlando Bosch, now Posada Carriles, not to speak of those who actually implement state terrorism.
Publicly, we're saying we're better at fighting terrorism. Privately, we know that the bureaucracy has only gotten worse, since the high-level people are scared of being held responsible for 9/11.
Terrorism is in good part an effective government propaganda; it serves to deflect attention from governmental abuse toward a mostly imagined, highly dangerous outside enemy.
There are people, particularly in the United States with which I am most familiar, who would say how ironic that Tehran would be the sponsor of an anti-terrorism conference, because there are people who say that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism.
It does surprise me that intelligent people in the 21st century could claim that if you respond to the terrorists with force, you spawn terrorism, but if you appease them, you somehow tame them. This argument, as I said, is very interesting, and very surprising.
Nothing, nothing justifies terrorism.
Now we are showing to the world that this fighting against two terrorist groups was feasible and now we have an isolated case which doesn't mean that terrorism is alive, as it was before.
Because our homeland and very survival are once more at stake, the American people can't afford to treat this new war against terrorism like they did Vietnam.
The enemy for the fanatic is pleasure, which makes it extremely important to continue to indulge in pleasure. Dance madly. That is how you get rid of terrorism.
The unspoken thing, the elephant in the room, is the war against terrorism, it's tainting everything.
