SAY IT!!!!

[Initech]

Today's act of terrorism in San Diego was an act of radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

Radical white supremacist terrorism.

What's so hard about that?

[sinkingfeeling]

1. In this case, it's a radical white Christian terrorist.

[Initech]

2. Ah that makes it even worse!

[Hortensis]

3. :) Not yet? Words have meaning. If people are going to shout

and chant, the words should at least be honest and meaningful.

It does seem is very likely the killer is white. They have descriptions and a 19-year-old white guy in custody.

But the rest, supremacist, terrorism, and radical, are all unknowns.

Terrorism is defined by intent, and we have idea yet what was in this person's head. Perhaps it was typical unbalanced hate, action sparked by being turned down for a date. And of course the high levels of negative energy in society these days.

Same for supremacist, or specifically white supremacist. Again, no idea of what the killer was thinking. By far most Jews in the U.S. are white, immigrants from European nations, but of course many antisemites deny that. Could it be religiously motivated? Does he have religion?

Why radical, though? Politically, that word is usually used for those on the left who lean toward extremism (reactionary for their counterparts on the right). Before we start using a typical RW slur for the left, do we know this guy is left wing?

Radical can, of course, also just mean advocating something much different than currently generally considered, but again no idea of intent. Is he advocating a Final Solution for Jews in America, which certainly would be radical, though I'd go straight to extremist, or just a typical hater of many he considers outside his tribe, with this group gathered in proximity when he acted without any agenda beyond murder?

Don't know.

[sarabelle]

4. Intent: to kill people.

[Hortensis]

5. Yes, it's probably not too irresponsible assume that!

The major's calling this tragedy a hate crime against "our Jewish community" because of statements the killer reportedly made on entering the synagogue, but FBI and other experts will have a live 19-year-old, plus his miserable parents, and so on, to tack this down from.

Unlike that older killer in Las Vegas who seemingly left nothing significant to explain why.

[ck4829]

6. Words have meaning... that we assign them

If we're truly going to only use "terrorist" as a label for someone when a certain someone says the label is appropriate, then we need to set up a council with a mission of "Is it appropriate to call this person a terrorist? To call this act a terrorist act?" and we need some self-proclaimed terrorists on this council.

Otherwise, maybe it's OK to call violence terrorism. Because practically all violence in the US is political, and this was especially political; he was influenced by right wing conspiracy theories of white replacement, how he was able to get a gun was because of politics, and more.

I'm done asking for permission from bigots, millionaire playboys, and fools in the government to call someone a terrorist... and I see other people are done with it too.

[ck4829]

7. K&R