"It did not take long after 9/11 for the American government and public to realize that a critical obstacle to combating terrorism effectively was the surprising willingness of people in many parts of the world to excuse or, worse yet, applaud terrorist acts, depending on the cause in whose name they were committed. Notwithstanding the enormity of the attacks on New York and Washington and the wave of sympathy for the United States expressed in most quarters in the immediate aftermath, simply reaching international agreement on the meaning of terrorism proved impossible once someone intoned the mantra that 'one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.' To overcome the attitudes that generated support for terrorism among key elements of the world's population, the Bush administration concluded that it would be necessary to build a global antiterrorism consensus. Working from the grassroots up, the United States would persuade people that the intentional use of violence against noncombatants for political ends was evil in itself regardless of the merits of the cause to which terrorism was used. […] The studies in this volume contend that the strategic approach must be complex and nuanced; we cannot prevail with arguments at the level of bumper-sticker slogans and slick advertising campaigns designed to make Muslims feel good about America. Indeed, we must understand that countering ideological support and sympathy for Islamist terrorism requires more than merely rhetorical action.
USAF Air University: www.au.af.mil
McMillan, Joseph (Ed.). 'In the Same Light as Slavery': Building a Global Antiterrorist Consensus. Washington, D.C.: National Defense University Press, 2006