In the reporting in the Western media on the conflict in Palestine, almost all violence from Palestinian side in their battle with the Israeliís is called terrorism. In actual fact, this qualification is highly unjustified, and if it were the other way around would have led to outcries of racism, anti-semitism, and denying the holocaust
The state of Israel has been declared in 1948 on the territory of the region called Palestine, an area inhabited by a people called the Palestinians. In whatever form or with whatever reason this happened, there has never been any consent from the Palestinians to this declaration of the state of Israel, so from this point of view the Palestinian have all the rights in the world to resist the presence of the state of Israel. This right to resistance also includes violence, if only because the coming into existence of Israel was also possible only through the use of violence against the Palestinians.
The war of the Palestinians against the occupation of their territory has known up and downs in its intensity. At no time however have the Palestinians indicated that they have resigned their rights to their territory. So the war they wage at the moment is valid, and should never be described as anything else then as a war against occupation. Any attempt to deviate from this has the same formal status as the denial of the holocaust.
The second issue is the use of the term terrorism. By nature, the long term occupation of a territory involves all kind of people. It doesnít suffice to employ military personal, these military have all kinds of needs like the simple one of feeding. It is usual to leave the growing of food (etcetera) to non-military personal, even is this food is for the military. So a long term occupation requires a large amount of civilian personal. Even in a regular army, the amount of non-combatant personnel versus combatants is about ten to one. While this personal is in one sense civilian, in the case of long term occupation they perform functions without which the military could not function. From this point of view, the so-called civilians are an essential part of the occupation. The latest wars that have been fought seem to confirm this view. In the wars against Iraq and Yugoslavia, the United States justified the bombing of civilian targets like bridges, power stations, and media facilities and their associated personal by stating that they also could perform services for the military.
So when the Palestinians fight their war against the Israeliís, they have the same right as the Americans to designate the civilians that aid in the occupation of their territory. This is any Israeli civilian, since all of them occupy Palestinian territory. So the designation of Palestinian attacks against those that aid in the occupation as terrorism is hypocritical, and a lie.