According to him in modern times, terror is considered to be the totalitarian view of politics as well as war. It destroys the conventional thinking as well as the political mode. It ignores moral confines and for being inside the groups of citizens/civilian population, there is no such small category wherein the immunity may be claimed. Terrorists anyhow do not make provisions for such forms of claim and they kill any person. (Blin; Schneider; Pulver; Browner, 2007) V. Terrorist or Freedom Fighter:

Whether a person is a terrorist or a freedom fighter depends on the perspective. Civilian society treats terrorists as 'those involved in spreading terror' while terrorist groups regard their brethren as 'freedom fighters'. Interestingly there are three perspectives of terrorism. First is the terrorist, the next is the victim and the third is the general public. The concept that "one person's terrorist is considered to be another person's freedom fighter" is a view which the terrorists themselves would accept. The terrorists never view themselves or their acts as immoral. They regard themselves as freedom fighters, with nothing wrong in it, fighting for what they believe in and through whatever means possible. A victim of terrorists act views the terrorists as an offender without any regard for human life. The view of the general public happens to be the most unstable. The terrorists undergoes a lot of trouble in presenting an image of 'Robin Hood" in the expectation of turning around the viewpoint of the general public towards their cause. This compassionate idea of terrorism has come to be central for the psychological combat and is required to be counteracted in an aggressive manner. ("What is Terrorism," n. d.)

VI. Influence:

It is a general observation that majority of the violence can be conveniently seen as deliberate. It is considered as a strategy of action. It is resolute and is planned to attain some important results for the performer. Hence, it is never a product of inherent, or of instinct, nor it is the expected outcome of predetermined forms of psychological and social forces. Perceptibly a lot of factors influence that decision and the opposing alternatives are available. But individuals are not reflexive vessels for instinctive manifestation of attitude. Nevertheless,...

(Borum, 2004)
VII. Psychological Gain on Counter Terrorism:

There is no issue which is so central for designing a suitable counter strategy. The strategic model which is the leading model relating to studies in terrorism hypothesize that terrorists are 'political utility maximizers'. Going by this view, people choose the terrorism route when the supposedly political advantages, less the anticipated costs, offset other forms of protest. However the strategic model is yet to be tested. Other counterterrorism approaches look forward to overwhelm terrorism by negating its political utility. The most common approaches are to combat terrorism by lowering its political gains through a rigid 'zero-tolerance' approach, lowering its future political benefits through pacification; or minimizing its future political benefits through fostering of democracy. (Abrahms, 2008)