أنا إرهابي has been evolving a bit, if not in form and formal presentation, but in applicable concept. I have been presented with two conceptual quandaries. One is the prospect of owning the label of "Terrorist" is far too confrontational. In the face of everything that is happening with what essentially amounts to separate media echo chambers in which each side accuses the other of being terrorists to one degree or another. Generally, I agree with some progressive principals: Equal rights for all, woman's reproductive health is a between a woman and her doctor, and generally speaking, religion likewise is between you and your god or no god if you so choose. To the conservative fringe, and the conservative fringe of the fringe, such beliefs and inclinations are seen as a form of terrorism. There is a myth perpetrated that to go against what are seen as conservative principles is somehow Un-American and you are effectively a 'terrorist'. Or another of my favorite myths, that progressives, liberals, and even center-left people have a deep-seated disdain and hatred for America. I find the thought laughable, and at worst deplorably close-minded. Conceptually, owning the phrase "I'm a terrorist" or "أنا إرهابي" would be seen by this possible audience as a defiant declaration which would validate their worst suspicions. They would totally miss the point. The echo-chamber propaganda spin would be something along the lines of "They admit it! They really are terrorists! We are justified in waging war against the godless liberal left!". It amounts to a rallying cry which poses those who are different as enemy, and attempts to dehumanize stated enemy in order to justify violence as an appropriate response.
The second is the possibility of presenting the project as a passive voice, basically questioning the premise that because people hold beliefs essentially opposed to certain, for lack of better descriptor: biblical moral principles, those people are somehow terrorists. It is another angle for the concept of owning this idea that those who would oppose your views would be your enemy and at worst, terrorists who are looking to destroy one's way of life.
"I believe that the lesbian couple who has been together for thirty years deserve to get married as a symbol of their devotion to each other, and in that receive all the legal benefits that a civil marriage bequeaths unto them. In believing that, I'm a Terrorist?" Rhetorically, phrasing it in that way rings dramatically different. "I believe Planned Parenthood is an important resource for women in low-income circumstances, for that, I'm a terrorist?" Presented in this manner, أنا إرهابي questions the dehumanizing effect which violent rhetoric puts forth on those who politically do not agree with you. We have freedom of speech, but with such freedoms, do we really exercise the responsibility of how the words will impact those who listen?
