Salon columnist David Sirota’s recent piece (4/16/13), right from the headline, was supposed to be provocative: “Let’s Hope the Boston Marathon Bomber is a White American.” And it made an important point:
White non-Islamic terrorists are typically portrayed not as representative of whole groups or ideologies, but as “lone wolf” threats to be dealt with as isolated law enforcement matters. Meanwhile, non-white or developing-world terrorism suspects are often reflexively portrayed as representative of larger conspiracies, ideologies and religions that must be dealt with as systemic threats–the kind potentially requiring everything from law enforcement action to military operations to civil liberties legislation to foreign policy shifts.
His point was that the government’s response would be very different–more costly, potentially more violent–if the perpetrators fit a certain profile.
This did not sit well with Fox host Bill O’Reilly (4/18/13):
This loon hopes that a deranged American killed other Americans so his own political agenda is not scrutinized.
This is especially ironic, because O’Reilly had, the night of the attacks (4/16/13), basically made Sirota’s point:
Talking Points believes the perps will be found and brought to justice and executed. But if this is an international terror attack, the repercussions will be severe. And if it’s home-grown, that will be another stain on American history.
Of course, there’s a massive difference between “severe repercussions” and a historical stain. And one needs only a passing familiarity with O’Reilly’s bloodthirsty rhetoric to understand what he means by repercussions.
After the September 11 attacks, he went on the air and advocated widespread attacks on civilians in countries he determined were guilty of something (9/17/01; FAIR Action Alert, 9/21/01). If the Afghan government did not quickly turn over Osama bin Laden, “the U.S. should bomb the Afghan infrastructure to rubble–the airport, the power plants, their water facilities and the roads.” He went on:
This is a very primitive country. And taking out their ability to exist day to day will not be hard. Remember, the people of any country are ultimately responsible for the government they have. The Germans were responsible for Hitler. The Afghans are responsible for the Taliban. We should not target civilians. But if they don’t rise up against this criminal government, they starve, period.
And it wasn’t just Afghanistan–Iraq’s “infrastructure must be destroyed and the population made to endure yet another round of intense pain…. Maybe then the people there will finally overthrow Saddam.” And if Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi did not leave his country, “we bomb his oil facilities, all of them. And we mine the harbor in Tripoli. Nothing goes in, nothing goes out. We also destroy all the airports in Libya. Let them eat sand.”
These are the kinds of “repercussions” Sirota was hoping would be avoided if the perpetrator turned out to be a white American.
Of course, O’Reilly’s reasoning is identical to those who commit acts of terror.
They make no distinction between governments and civilians. In their view, the nation as a whole is responsible for whatever crimes have been perpetrated against the people they claim to defend by their acts.
The difference is that their claims often are valid, whether or not they are merely rationalizations for another agenda.
O’Reilly’s bloodlustful rants are part and parcel of the imperial project.
O’Reilly is actually endorsing the thinking behind the terror attacks for which he calls for repercussions. If it is OK to attack a people because of the actions of their government, that’s just what the attackers of 9-11 were doing.
Help! The extremists of all sides are out to get us (whether they know it or not)!
The only real problem I have with “the Difference” is in reality there is not much Difference to us.
If it’s foreign terrorists, they go over seas and fight a war, then come back and take our right from us to protect us.
If it’s Domestic Terrorist, they just take our rights and continue the War on the working class.
In the end, is where we get it shoved, in the end.
What a dumbass…the irony is that so many people in other countries hate us precisely because the U.S. supports their dictators to make SURE they can’t “rise up against their criminal government. Take a look at the very House of Saud that helped fund the very terrorists that O’Reilly says he hates…60 Billion in U.S. weapons. Of course, he doesn’t see a conspiracy when there actually is one…
Bill O’Reilly should not be on air influencing others, he should be in jail for his crimes of incitement. Magestrates and Judges all over the western world make lenghty speeches during sentencing of criminals lambasting them for their shocking criminal mentality in having acted on the very same primordal logic that O’Reilly is advocating – “you touch my car asshole I’ll come round with a gemmy bar and smash your f***ing skull”.
Repelling invaders is the only act of war that is not terrorism.