 |
|
Definitions of Terrorism—Reply
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In Reply: In reply to Dr Lipton and colleagues, we agree that terrorism may be a biased concept for politicians, political analysts, and historians. It is not so for those who experience it firsthand. Unfortunately, terrorism is usually a legitimate cause for some, and a curse for others. This does not make it less dreadful for those who live with its consequences and clearly does not make it an unscientific subject of study. On the contrary, we feel that there is a moral obligation to give voice to all casualties, whomever they may be. To deny the right to study a phenomenon on the grounds of its being politically prejudicial to one side is neither sound science nor adequate medicine.
Lipton et al state that we "did not develop a meaningful definition of ‘terrorism.'" We find this to be a political point of view. We simply intended to study the . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Marc Gelkopf, PhD;
Avraham Bleich, MD
Lev-Hasharon Mental Health Center
Tel-Aviv University Sackler School of Medicine
Tel-Aviv, Israel
Zehava Solomon, PhD
Shappel School of Social Work and Adler Research Center
Tel-Aviv University
RELATED ARTICLE
Definitions of Terrorism
Robert Lipton, Jess H. Ghannam, and Joel Beinin
JAMA. 2003;290(17):2254.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
