This site contains information about the shadowy world of terrorists and terrorism. However, that does not mean that every person referenced here is a terrorist. Many have not been charged in any court, and much of the information about them comes from various government security and political sources, sometimes speaking anonymously and often speaking with an agenda. Therefore, from a legal perspective, it is important that readers consider much of this information simply "alleged."
In addition, some of the people and groups described are most certainly not terrorists, but are included here because they are part of a chain of relationships that lead to terrorists. Unless otherwise stated, it should be assumed that people and organizations described as having had relationships with terrorists did not knowingly do so.
Terrorism bears no easy definition, and, in some cases, the line between freedom fighters, guerillas, criminals and terrorists is a very subjective one. But we'll go ahead and take a stab anyway: terrorism is deliberate, organized violence committed against civilians and civilian areas toward a political goal. This definition probably raises as many questions as it might answer, but one has to start somewhere.
We've attemped to classify information about various terrorists, organizations and activities by noting our level of confidence in a given piece of information. These are subjective ratings, based on the track record of the sources providing the information. To break it down:A green bullet by a given piece of information means we have a high degree of confidence that it is accurate. This may mean it comes from on-the-record, apolitical sources within the U.S. or other generally open governments, or has been reported by several top-tier media outlets, such as The New York Times, Washington Post or The Associated Press. Consider it very likely true.
A yellow bullet indicates we have some, but not total, confidence in the associated information. It may come from a single, reliable media outlet quoting anonymous sources, or from foreign press reports. The information itself may be presented as uncertain, as when a military spokesman says an event is believed to have occurred. Consider it possibly true.
A red bullet indicates we have a low degree of confidence in the associated information. It may have come from ideological U.S. government or press sources that have demonstrated a willingness to use questionable or unconfirmed intelligence to support their point of view, from shaky or authoritarian foreign governments who have a spotty track record in getting their facts straight, or from terrorists themselves. It may also have been presented as dubious or unconfirmed by generally reliable sources, or it may just mark our informed speculation. Consider it with a large grain of salt.
A black bullet indicates we are confident this information is false. It is for information that may have once been considered true, but has since been invalidated.
Page maintained by John Lumpkin