Among western specialists, there are no great differences when defining terrorism. However, the Arab-Islamic block of countries, where most of the terrorism of the world originates, considers that if someone combats against what they qualify as “foreign occupation”, the person has the right to use all the possible forms within his reach (including terrorism). In general, definitions of terrorism in the west include all of the following conditions: 1) killing or threatening, 2) civilians, 3) intentionally, 4) to achieve political objectives, 5) within a propagandist framework. The definition accepted in the academy and in different international conventions is more detailed than the aforementioned here. People in Latin America who sympathize with terrorism, show it as the “weapon of the poor” when it should be presented as the “weapon of the immoral”.
The traditional modus operandi of the PLO in the 70s were random terrorist attacks, and at present (2019) terrorists use firearms to shoot against Israeli civilians. Hamas, on the other hand, launches rockets from Gaza or has executed (2003-2016) 151 suicidal attacks killing 725 people. Hamas tries to argue that what they do is not terrorism: 1) “We try to shoot rockets against military bases but it doesn’t come out right, and we shoot civilians”, 2) “There are no Israeli civilians, they are all potential military”, 3) “Our rockets are so bad that they fall on Israeli cities… but actually, we want to assassinate the military”. If Israelis bombard intentionally the Palestinian population to assassinate civilians, the country would carry out state terrorism. If that were the case, Israelis would be processed in international courts. To prove the contrary, the Israeli army films its air raids so when irresponsible or malicious accusations come about, they can be defeated easily in a court of justice.