I totally disagree with Corrado and Cohen's theory of political terrorism. I believe that political terrorism is committed by dominant, aggressive males in positions of power, acting with other dominant, aggressive males to gain more power, money, or status, and without regard for the spiritual nature of humankind. I believe that dividing political terrorism into state terrorism or anti-state terrorism does not reach the root cause of terrorism. To discover the true cause of terrorism, I believe it is necessary to identify the motives and personalities of those who "terrorize". In most cases they are dominant and aggressive males who hold positions of power in the political, economic or military arena and who manipulate events to suit themselves, for example Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and, in more recent times, Slobodon Milosovic . I believe that those who fight against domination and aggression should be called revolutionaries. For example, the Irish Republican Army. The North of Ireland was home to a Protestant streak of dominant and aggressive males, who in an attempt to maintain power, unleashed the horrific events of Bloody Sunday and many other unsolicited acts of aggression. These acts were sanctioned by politicians, both in Northern Ireland and England, who acted in collaboration with both the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army. On Bloody Sunday, British soldiers deliberately targeted and killed young men, who they believed most likely to be members of the Irish Republican Army, during the peaceful, albeit illegal, demonstration. “…all the deceased were men and nine of them were under the age of 25.” It was an effort to stop what had almost happened. A fair assembly of politicians, representing all strata and fabrics of society. The event is still under review. The actions of the Irish Republican Army ultimately destroyed the positions of power abused by dominant, aggressive males. But I don't think we should label those who fought for a better life as terrorists. I believe that people who put their lives on the line to achieve true justice should be called revolutionaries. Today we are exposed to new conflicts, almost daily, and no two situations are ever identical. This makes subdividing a typology extremely difficult. The typology that defines "political terrorism", according to Corrado and Cohen, includes eleven different categories, in order to embrace all the different situations. These typologies can be useful in a security context, but to get to the bottom of the problem, I believe that instead of complicating the issue with many meanings, it should instead be simplified and attributed to one of two choices.