Terrorism' has been a mainstream discussion since the early 2000s. Though much academic and government research has been produced on the subject, consistent and appropriate application of the term seems to be elusive. As a result, the modern incarnation of the word carries baggage of the event that inspired its political appropriation and relies on synonyms to maneuver the limitations of legal definitions. I use critical discourse analysis to explore how terrorism and terrorist identity have been discursively constructed in the 2017 Public Report on the Terrorist Threat to Canada and its predecessors. My analysis suggests that this series of reports strategically manipulates Canadian readers by artificially inflating the 'terrorist threat' and securitizing policies and Canadians themselves. The 'war on terror' narrative persists as the difference between 'political' and 'legal' terrorism becomes increasingly unclear. These findings indicate the need for further discursive analysis of the politicization of terror in Canada.iii
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.