Terrorism: The American Style
Comments (8)
Tucson residents hold memorial for the victims of the Tucson shooting spree. (Creative Commons)
Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."
As popular and common as this term has become in the recent years, for purposes of labeling the Muslim radical groups or condemning the more fanatical religious groups of usually Middle Eastern descent, no one has seemed to recall this common phrase following Jared Loughner’s unlawful use of force and violence against persons to intimidate or murder government officials, the civilian population, including a little child, in furtherance his unknown political or social objectives.
It is vital to note that although his political or social objectives have not yet been cleared or discovered by the hardworking lawyers, detectives, and agents, Loughner cited works such as Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” and Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto” as his favorite books which sheds light on his literacy and strong capacity to have an objective view.
Loughner’s act is parallel with the FBI’s clear definition of terrorism. FBI director Mueller announced that “he wouldn't rule out additional charges for Loughner under a federal domestic terrorism statute.”
By breaking away from the filtered masses, one could redefine the paradigms of terrorism in this country.
Consider, for example, the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, which was known as the first act of domestic terrorism in the United States prior to the 9/11 attacks. The act very similar to the Tucson shooting, shared similar plot and similar charges planned and executed by two American citizens.
When our country is so obsessed with bringing peace and democracy to regions plagued with terrorism and chaos, it often fails to acknowledge the terrorism intact in its own States.
In a very simple analogy, Loughner could very well be compared to suicide bombers in Iraq and Palestine that we so frequently hear about in the news. Some slight differences are adhering, yet many similarities exist.
A suicide bomber is part of a larger terrorism group who has been previously brainwashed and made to believe that the act is in fact a religious and noble one. Similarly, Loughner’s act may have taken root from personal or publicly fed objectivities not yet revealed. This is while many people who knew Loughner, have noted his odd behaviors both in and out of school.
A piece from CNN reports, “Loughner was taken to a hospital for alcohol poinsoning, according to Sheriff’s Department records. In 2007, he was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia, but the charge was dismissed after he completed a pretrial diversion program, according to court records. In 2008, Loughner tried to enlist in the U.S. Army but was rejected for reasons that are protected by privacy laws, officials said. But an administration official told CNN that Loughner had failed a drug test.”
Aside from debates in how he attained his weapon, or why despite his not-so-clean record was he in fact granted permission to purchase his gun, it is important to tie the dots closley.
In Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Palestine, and many other regions that face unrest and the presumable hope that they want to be rescued by the Americans, suicide bombers tend to be young adults. In this case, we have Loughner, a 22-year-old college drop out, who for “failing a drug test” did not get a chance to participate as part of the terrorism rescue group. However, he happened to be of the contrary, as he acted in similar violence and terror that the Americans are trying to content.
With all that in mind and perhaps more that the public does not yet know, similarities can be drawn between him and a malleable young adult in an Al-Qaeda group in Iraq, or as we in the U.S. tend to hunt down too quickly, a Lebanese young Muslim man living in New York City, who usually fits the profile of every wanted list.
A suicide bomber has an ulterior motive driven by high hopes of going to heaven and being accompanied by heavenly nymphs. This is while, for unknown reasons, Loughner’s motifs are not yet cleared; this may partly be due to the fact that we are so rarely faced with modern versions of suicide bombers at home.
Yet, if the picture was reversed and instead of our all-American boy we had an individual of Muslim and/or Middle Eastern decent no media outlet would in anyway miss the title of the “Terrorist attack.”
Hence the question remains blurry; is it the American public that defines who and what is perceived as a terrorist and an act of terrorism, or is the term defined by the violating act regardless of the race or the background of the person in charge—if so, then why has Loughner been exempted from such popular methods of labeling?
On the other hand if not, is terrorism only specific to Muslims and people of Middle Eastern descent? Or, what are the chances of having such individuals at home—and if so, what are the stakes of acknowledging their presence on the same level that the public so generously does the terrorists of the other kind.
Reach reporter Tara Kangarlou here.
Comments
After reading this, a couple of questions really stand out in my mind:
A.) You paid HOW MUCH for your education?
B.)Can you get that money back by demonstrating it was completely wasted?
Seriously, this has got to be the most badly written, poorly conceived garbage ever published by a 'School for Communication and Journalism", as this website's header says. I could pick it to pieces, but it seems from the comments other people already beat me to it. But I'll add a few things...
* If Americans are such racists, as your "article" repeatedly implies, why would Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, "want to be rescued by the Americans"?
* What exactly are 'filtered masses'? Is that what exits a waste-water treatment plant? Is that what remains after brewing coffee? Is that the kind of elitism you learn at a liberal school - that people are actually 'masses'?
* And why, after you went to the trouble of quoting and linking to specific legal definitions of 'terrorism' are you now suggesting we 'redefine' it? So it will then conform to your bogus theories?
* "With all that in mind and perhaps more that the public does not yet know, similarities can be drawn..." Um... are you aware that correlation does not imply causation? Similarities can also be drawn between dinosaurs and birds, but that doesn't make them the same.
* In case you hadn't noticed, Loughner is NOT your typical 'all-American boy', which is part of the reason he was largely isolated, why he felt so disenfranchised, why he was kicked out of school and why his few friends were not at all surprised when he went crazy and shot a bunch of people. Duh!
* "Hence the question remains blurry; is it the American public that defines who and what is perceived as a terrorist and an act of terrorism..." Again - NO. You JUST posted a definition, so why are you now asking who defines it??? Do you have short-term memory problems? Should you maybe, you know, see a doctor about that?
Man... I really hope you are graded on this. Really.
You say: "Loughner cited works such as Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” and Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto” as his favorite books which sheds light on his literacy and strong capacity to have an objective view."
Dena says: How does a person who cites Hitler's autobiography and Marx's manifesto has an objective view? I really don't follow your argument. Makes not an ounce of sense. I am an Arab so I've lived through terrorism. Loughner, from all indications, probably suffers from schizophrenia. Had you bothered to research the Tucson shooting you would note that his internet conversations dealt with incoherent mumbo jumbo about dreams. Terrorists from Al Qaeda are not schizophrenics or mentally insane. They are simply evil and possessed by religious fanatic hatred. Not at all the same thing. Since you bring up "Palestine" look up Sirhan Sirhan. He murdered RFK because RFK supported Israel (Jews). Unlike Loughner who needed mental help, Sirhan Sirhan had a clear thought process rooted in evil.
I wonder that you took the trouble to analyze the Tucson shooter at all. In your very poor article you admit early on that his motivations are unknown, so clearly you're no expert. It's clear you agree that he is not a sane individual judging from his videos on the web. So what exactly is the point of your article? To call Americans terrorists while criticizing government authorities for arresting terror suspects? Newsflash: most terrorists arrested in the U.S. happen to be Muslims. If that offends you, take it up with the mosques that teach these young men hatred. It's clear you're unaware of the difference between an Al Qaeda terrorist (who is sane although contemptible) and a person who suffers from a mental disease (very possibly like the Tucson shooter)? Lastly, to paraphrase Sayan, what in the world is Palestine? Back to the Ottomon Empire, I see. Middle Easterners only matter to you if they're Muslims. I guess you and your ilk don't believe Israel exists but if you look at a map you'll see that it does.
Your hatred and radical views shine through your repulsive comment. I have to say that it doesn’t hurt to be a little open minded sometimes and not attacking anybody who is presenting an alternative view on an issue. Therefore, I suggest taking some yoga classes to calm you down so you would not take your frustration on a very well written and articulate piece. As far as the issues that you have raised, i just have one comment, please and please do your research before presenting facts.
Where to begin? This article was so wrong headed - not to mention poorly written - one is forced to wonder WHAT (if anything) are they teaching you in that school.
First of all, Loughner's motives, as you mentioned, have yet to be determined, so it is premature for you to ascribe his actions to politically or religiously motivated terrorism. In fact, even the most basic research, such as viewing his YouTube videos, shows a deranged mind that is incapable of clearly defined motivations. His diatribes are rambling, and his thought process is often circular, and utterly lacking in any foundation, other than his own misconceptions about the world around him.
A bit more research might include the interview that was conducted with his best friend, who stated Loughner was largely disinterested in politics. He went on to say Lougner had included "Mein Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto" in his list of favorite books at YouTube because "he liked to push people's buttons". So given your theory, apparently my 8 year old nephew is also a budding terrorist, as he, too, enjoys pushing people's buttons.
You then go on to cite the Oklahoma City bombing as America's first instance of domestic terrorism, which could not even be considered correct if one were to adopt your mistaken views about the nature of terrorism. Does the name Sirhan Sirhan mean anything to you? For that matter, given your loose interpretation of the term, would not Charles Manson also be a case of 'terrorism' that predates the bombing in Oklahoma City? You also seem to have overlooked the FIRST World Trade Center Bombing! I suggest you study American history before making such absurd declarative statements based on ignorance.
Oklahoma city was completely unlike Loughner's act for numerous reasons. Not least among them is the fact that Loughner's actions were the act of a lone assassin, which precludes the conspiratorial nature of the Oklahoma city bombing. Further, I suggest you read the work of Jayna Davis or Peter Lance before concluding Americans were the only people involved in the bombing of the Murrah Building. There are reams of evidence, including eye-witness testimony, indicating a Middle East connection to McVeigh and Nichols. There's also the small matter of McVeigh's unsuccessful first efforts at bomb-making, which were miraculously corrected following his trip to a certain Muslim nation. But you need to research more deeply than Wikipedia - which ANYBODY can edit and falsify - if you want to actually know what you are talking about.
Then you go on to draw ludicrous parallels with Iraq, an active theater of war, and.... Palestine? Really?
It will come as a great surprise to the people of the world to learn that we have traveled back in time to the Ottoman Empire, as there is no such nation as Palestine. Nor has there EVER been a nation called Palestine. It was a designation first created by the Romans, used for its insult value, and later adopted by the Ottoman Empire as a regional designation only, when it was divided between the 12 tribes.
Say it with me - ISRAEL. Was that so hard? Of course not. Reality rings true, unlike the Arab propaganda you attempted to slip under the radar. Again, I am not sure what they are teaching you at that school, but it certainly is not history. Or research techniques. Or critical thinking and reading comprehension. Or grammar.
A few other errors:
1. Loughner was expelled, not a 'drop-out' as you claimed.
2. One connect dots, one does not 'tie' them.
3. Afghanistan, Iraq and Nigeria are nations, not 'regions'.
4. Learn the difference between 'motifs' and 'motives'. Dictionaries are not just useful as paper-weights and door-stops.
5. "With all that in mind and perhaps more that the public does not yet know..." - With all of your previously noted errors in mind, and other things you do not know? Given this foundation, it is no wonder you have drawn erroneous conclusions.
6. "However, he happened to be of the contrary, as he acted in similar violence and terror that the Americans are trying to content." This sentence is so badly mangled as to be utterly meaningless. You cannot simply string words together and expect they will convey meaning. In this, you are much like Loughner himself.
7. How quickly is "too quickly" to hunt down "a Lebanese young Muslim man living in New York City, who usually fits the profile of every wanted list."?
Another thing they clearly did not teach you: subtlety.
Yes. We get it. You think Americans are racists. Too bad you failed to make ANY case to support your foregone conclusion. The only think you have proven with this article is your own ignorance.
This comment is more informative than the article.
The reason he didn’t act like suicide bomber or was not called anything like that was because he wanted/hoped to be charged for insanity and potentially like many other cases as such get parole in a near future. Unfortunately in the U.S. there are many ways to go around justice and get parole. We see this in numerous murder and rape cases; where if one gets serious conviction, we might not have so much crime.
http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/01/jared-loughner-what-makes-terroris...