My Photo

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 08/2003

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Snap

  • Snap

What's with Dana?

    follow me on Twitter

    Google Analytics

    • Google Analytics

    Blogads

    • Put your ad here with Blogads

    Adify

    • Adify Skyscraper

    « The Money To Do Online Journalism | Main | The Cult of Bushism »

    July 28, 2008

    None Dare Call if Terrorism

    Jim_adkisson American terrorism is back. But the media won't call it that.

    They may tiptoe around it. ""Church gunman says he acted out of 'hatred for the liberal movement'" writes USA Today, but do they call 58-year old Jim Adkisson what he is, a terrorist? Nope.

    How about CNN? "Shooting happened during childrens' play," the headline admits. Yet no "t" word.

    Had Jim Adkisson been a 30-year old Muslim, had he attacked a conservative Christian megachurch, do you have any doubt whatsoever that this would have been branded a terrorist attack? C'mon.

    But this was a conservative American targeting a liberal American church, one with an historic record of opposing war, supporting government programs and, yes, even accepting gays. So is this terrorism, oh great New York Times? No, it's a shooting.

    Even Wordpress's own page linking to stories on this horror doesn't call it terrorism. Most of the blogosphere is complicit in the silence.  They will talk about "serial killers." They will even talk about "guns."

    Terrorism? Nope.  Just a few DFHs are telling the truth. The Blue Voice. Bob Cesca. Loring Wurbel. Nobody reads 'em. Nobody reads me either.

    Eric_rudolph What was Adkisson's motivation? It was to terrorize. It was to keep people from living their daily lives, to make them afraid because of who they were, because of their religion or their politics.

    This is the definition of terrorism, and this particular page has many, many links to various forms of the definition. "Violence against civilians to achieve political or ideological objectives by creating fear."

    Isn't that what Jim Adkisson engaged in yesterday?

    Then why isn't it terrorism? Why isn't he a terrorist? Why is he charged with murder, and not terrorism? Why aren't his acquaintances being investigated, his family being harassed, his computer being gone through for terrorist links?

    Timothy_mcveigh Because he's white. Because he's conservative. Because his targets were liberals, women and children. They don't count.

    This story proves that the "War on Terrorism" of the last 6 years has been a crock. It has been a war against Muslims, nothing more. When you can't call your own terrorists by that name, you're not fighting a war against terrorism.

    You're just fighting the other. Unless we fight all terrorists, we are just taking sides.

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451da3169e200e553db75388834

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference None Dare Call if Terrorism:

    Comments

    BrightAds

    • BrightAds by Kanoodle

    Cafepress

    • CafePress