Create Account

Username
Password
Remember me
Email
 
48

Top Ten differences between White Terrorists and Others

3 comments, 163 views, posted 10:14 pm 15/08/2012 in Politics by Rosie
Rosie has 2929 posts, 1358 threads, 5 points, location: FL USA
Uber Something

Top Ten differences between White Terrorists and Others

Posted on 08/09/2012 by Juan

1. White terrorists are called “gunmen.” What does that even mean? A person with a gun? Wouldn’t that be, like, everyone in the US? Other terrorists are called, like, “terrorists.”

2. White terrorists are “troubled loners.” Other terrorists are always suspected of being part of a global plot, even when they are obviously troubled loners.

3. Doing a study on the danger of white terrorists at the Department of Homeland Security will get you sidelined by angry white Congressmen. Doing studies on other kinds of terrorists is a guaranteed promotion.

4. The family of a white terrorist is interviewed, weeping as they wonder where he went wrong. The families of other terrorists are almost never interviewed.

5. White terrorists are part of a “fringe.” Other terrorists are apparently mainstream.

6. White terrorists are random events, like tornadoes. Other terrorists are long-running conspiracies.

7. White terrorists are never called “white.” But other terrorists are given ethnic affiliations.

8. Nobody thinks white terrorists are typical of white people. But other terrorists are considered paragons of their societies.

9. White terrorists are alcoholics, addicts or mentally ill. Other terrorists are apparently clean-living and perfectly sane.

10. There is nothing you can do about white terrorists. Gun control won’t stop them. No policy you could make, no government program, could possibly have an impact on them. But hundreds of billions of dollars must be spent on police and on the Department of Defense, and on TSA, which must virtually strip search 60 million people a year, to deal with other terrorists.

Source, with hyperlinks

Extra Points Given by:

Weedenski (10), bradpitt (10), Flee (5), DoomOnYou (5), evolution (5), Quaektem (5), bytehead (5)

Comments

2
1:28 am 16/08/2012

Quaektem

1. The 'Fort Hood Shooter', who was actually part of a larger group... and Timothy McVeigh and the Uni-bomber were both 'Domestic Terrorists'. I think the distinction comes with method rather than race. If you use a bomb you're a terrorist, if you use a gun you're a shooter or gunmen, the reason is because it benefits those that want to restrict gun ownership (kinda like the headlines that start 'SUV kills...')

2. Neither the Oak Creek shooter or McVeigh were labeled 'troubled loners', and those that were, like the Gifford's shooter and the recent Batman shooter were in early reports tied to the conservative movement, it was only later when we learned who they really were did they become loners.

3. From the report your guy wrote (the PDF Link is in the article you linked to):

"Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

It's no surprise that grouping libertarians and conservative groups in with Neo-nazis and the KKK while ignoring radical liberal groups like the Animal Liberation Front who actually firebomb businesses they disagree with.

5. Sorry, every terrorist, especially Muslims, have been billed as part of a 'radical fringe' since 9/11. The only one that seems not to have been 'fringe' is McVeigh.

7. Well duh... we expect white folks to go crazy!

8. Are we talking about a particular society that has people among them that have declared Jihad against the Great White Satan?

9. ...or brainwashed by an extreme religion that strictly prohibits drug and alcohol consumption. I'm sure we can tag most of them as virgins too if that fits a narrative. Again, the last two 'real' American terrorists, McVeigh and the Uni-bomber, were not users.

10. Not if you ask Liberals! They think that to stop domestic terrorism you need to disarm everyone but the government, strip-search every little old lady that runs into the TSA and send out government drones to monitor everyone. Remember the TSA will bend over backwards (and make you do the same) in order to avoid doing the exact thing you're accusing them of!

3
1:39 am 16/08/2012

DoomOnYou

Just some random thoughts...

Other terrorists are always suspected of being part of a global plot, even when they are obviously troubled loners. Kinda true when they travel thousands of miles to come here to be crazy, some of our crazies can't even make it out of their own neighborhoods...

The family of a white terrorist is interviewed, weeping as they wonder where he went wrong. The families of other terrorists are almost never interviewed. ...and if they are they are usually the ones to say they are proud of what their family has "accomplished"

White terrorists are part of a “fringe.” Other terrorists are apparently mainstream. well, to most Americans, their whole way of life is "fringe" so it would be kind of redundant, no?

White terrorists are never called “white.” But other terrorists are given ethnic affiliations. ... you left out black, no one has EVER said "a black terrorist"

Nobody thinks white terrorists are typical of white people. But other terrorists are considered paragons of their societies. hmm, ya gotta admit, not alot of white people were out on the streets cheering "Hooray Timothy McVeigh!" or "Free TIMMY!!!"

Add Comment

Log in via teoti, or register to add a comment!