Mark Anthony Conditt terrorized Texans, but he's not called a terrorist because of his skin color

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

For 19 days in March, 23-year-old Mark Anthony Conditt terrorized Austin, Texas residents before committing suicide. He is not called a terrorist.

As details continue to emerge regarding his motives in the bombings resulting in the deaths of two men and the serious injury of a woman, it appears generous public deference is afforded this white male who grew up an in observant Christian family.

Self-described in a chilling recording as a “psychopath,” Conditt for many is undeniably a serial bomber who would likely have perpetuated his bombing campaign indefinitely if law enforcement hadn’t closed in on him.

Yet if Mark’s name was Muhammad and he was raised in an observant Muslim family, his actions would immediately be linked to domestic Islamic terror.

According to the budget for fiscal year 2018, the FBI spends $3.5 billion — or nearly half its budget — on counterterrorism.

The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged in their 2017 Joint Intelligence Bulletin not only that white supremacist groups had carried out more fatal attacks than any other domestic extremist groups since 9/11, but they were also poised to commit more the following year.

Nonetheless, the FBI continues to use the vast majority of its counterterrorism budget to focus disproportionately on the Muslim community and specifically on observant Muslim males between 16 and 35 years old who have expressed discontent with American foreign policy.

http://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/380438-mark-anthony-conditt-terrorized-texas-residents-but-hes-not-called

[Blue_Tires]

1. kick

[catrose]

2. Austin lived in terror for several weeks

and is still mourning the death of two and the injuries of others. I've no problem calling Conditt a terrorist.

[MosheFeingold]

3. Doesn't a terrorist have goals?

Terror being a means to an end?

I gather he just wanted to cause mayhem. The equivalent of The Joker, writ small.

More of an anarchist, to the extent any political label applies to such a non-political event.

[dalton99a]

4. Kick

[Nitram]

5. Since this idea was first posted on DU I've thought a lot about it, and read up on how

terrorism is legally, academically, and sociologically defined. It doesn't just mean that someone commits an act to terrify people. Terrorism requires a political component. It has a motive and a goal designed to change people's behavior. It is designed to send a message besides the wanton killing of innocent people. Certainly white people have committed acts of terrorism. Timothy McVeigh, abortion clinic bombers, the KKK, various militia groups, the Unibomber are all examples of white men who clearly committed acts of terrorism. From what we know so far, it seems doubtful that the actions of Conditt and Cruz can be classified as terrorism.

However, there is most certainly a tendency, on the right in particular, to immediately assume that any terrorist act must have been committed by a Muslim, and that such an act committed by a white male must be due to mental illness. The FBI always investigates whether an act can be classified as terrorism because the penalties are often more severe than for other violent crimes.