When a husband and wife allegedly murdered two police officers and a bystander in Las Vegas, the story received a lot of coverage. But it was coverage that mostly failed to call the crimes “terrorism,” despite the alleged killers leaving behind a note that said, “The revolution is beginning,” and a Revolutionary-era “Don’t Tread on Me” flag closely associated with both the Patriot and Tea Party movements (Hatewatch, 6/9/14). The couple, both white, were also associated with far-right causes and had expressed extreme hostility toward authorities.
When the Washington Post‘s Paul Farhi asked about this media omission in a trenchant report (6/10/14) headlined, “In the News Media, Are Muslims the Only ‘Terrorists’?,” he got some interesting answers. The Associated Press‘ Paul Colford told him the AP shied away from the using the “terrorist” term unless someone has been “listed or labeled as such by someone else, such as the FBI or another government entity.”
Farhi also cited the Reuters style book which, he reported, tells journalists to
use the terms “terrorism” and “terrorist” only when attributing them to a specific source. “Aim for a dispassionate use of language so that individuals, organizations and governments can make their own judgment on the basis of facts.”
It doesn’t say much for journalists making independent judgments. But as Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations told the Post:
Without a doubt, if these individuals had been Muslim, it not only would be called “terrorism” but it would have made national and international headlines for weeks…. It was an act of terror, but when it’s not associated with Muslims, it’s just a day story that comes and goes.
Perhaps the most revealing quote in Farhi’s report came from Daniel Bynam of the Brookings Institution, who told him media avoid the “terrorist” label in such cases because “many of the objectives [of right-wing extremist groups] are close enough to legitimate political movements” that the labeling might disturb those in the movements “who don’t have violent aims.”
Which may explain why some outlets, including CNN, were refusing to even call the Millers’ politics “right-wing,” as C.J. Werleman found in an Alternet report (6/9/14) documenting how the cable station avoided describing the the alleged killers politics as anything other than “extremist.”
This pattern of journalistic denial diminishes the role of white, right-wing terrorism in the US, which Werleman points out resulted in 348 murders between 1990 and 2010–nearly 20 times as many murders as were committed over the same period by Muslim Americans whom the press often didn’t hesitate to label “terrorists.”
But it also exposes the gaping double standards that are applied by media and society to violent and threatening behavior depending on what group is doing the threatening. As Black Agenda Report‘s Glen Ford (6/11/14) observed about the Millers having participated in the heavily armed anti-government gathering at Cliven Bundy’s Nevada ranch in May:
If a thousand armed blacks had gathered in one place, pointing rifles at federal officers, and two of them later cold-bloodedly assassinated policemen, the federal response would touch every black neighborhood in America. But the armed white right gets a pass.
It’s not just the police and other authorities; the armed white right gets a pass in the press too.
As to the note the couple left behind, it will be difficult for historians and anthropologists to name one singular event or period of time that could be attributed as the beginning of the revolution (if one is to come). These problems have been mounting for years, and some will probably say they have been with us for a century or more, depending on their political POV. Socialists may claim that the seeds of revolution began the day the first capitalist was born, while liberals and progressives may claim the post-New Deal period or even the Reagan era.
I certainly agree that the term “terrorism” is relative — it all just depends on whose ox is being gored.
For the corpress, the difference between a white hood
And a white turban
Is the white skin underneath
A term that I have heard repeatedly to describe this shooting is that it was done by an “anti-government” couple. Well, that’s about as neutral as you can get and covers a lot of territory. Back in the days following 9-11, when I would ask people if the US had a history of domestic terrorism. the answer was often no, or I received a perplexed look. I would then point out the history of lynching, of the Oklahoma City bombing, of the Trail of Tears, or the Sand Creek Massacre, or the massacre of the German settlers in Texas who attempted to flee to Mexico rather than be forced to serve in the Confederacy. This list is very easy to extend. For example, the killing of Medgar Evers, the bombing of the church that killed the little girls, or the My Lai massacre. I remember one fellow who decidedly said no to my question. I responded by pointing out the thousands of lynchings that took place following the Civil War. (Be the way, following the slave revolt of
Nat Turner about 200 slaves were executed and many heads were placed on stakes and prominently displayed along roads–sounds like terrorism to me.) His response was that this was merely breaking the law, not acts of terrorism. If this is where we are at, then we are in deeper shit than anyone can imagine.
Let me add just two more to my list: (1) the race riots in Cincinatti in the 1840s and (2) the race riots in Oklahoma City (if memory serves) in the 1920s. Race riots means of course black people on a wild rampage, looting, pillaging, destroying property, right? Well, go check your history.
(With respect for Black people.) Watch how fast the NRA would change its “open carry” talk if Black guys carried M-16’s into Walmart and Target stores around the country.
Even when extreme islamist militants kill dozens with a car bomb it’s not called terrorism in the US media when it’s done by Syrian “activists” and the target is the Assad “regime”.
But if the same thing happens a couple of hundred miles to the south in Israel the US media will be hyperventilating for days on end. ‘Terrorism’ and ‘terrorist’ will be mentioned constantly. Not once will Palestinian militants be called activists, nor will the Israeli government ever be called a regime.
The nouns/adjectives that are used reveal one’s bias.
The obvious is too horrid to talk about.
Since Kennedy’s assignation, it is clear the hateful far right is ever eager to impose their arrogance and attacks into our formerly civil society. One side of the political spectrum has deliberately armed up for decades, saying they’re “defending themselves.”
Just as the U.S. invaded an innocent and mostly defenseless country, accusing them of having the weapons we imagined and feared, but invading with thousands of actual murderous weapons, so does the right wing accuse the left of a culture war that they are actually waging, pushing their guns in our faces, saying they’re defending themselves.
Shallow-thinking “patriotic” zealots murder innocent policemen for no more reason than they’re “fighting for freedom” and they’re “agin the govment.” They’re proud of it, and praised for it, except across our media, which ignores it.
The American eagle is a pathetic eagle flopping on the ground, crazy with compulsive self-hate, the right wing mutilating the left, tearing out its feathers, breaking its bones, and attacking any who dare object. It isn’t reported on, for most news organizations “cover the news.”
A correction to what I wrote earlier, although not a change in content. Yes, in Virginia, white retaliation following the rebellion of Nat Turner led to the execution of 200 black people, but not to their beheading. That took place in North Carolina. You see, there was widespread white retaliation throughout the South in the immediate aftermath. Just want to be correct.
Sincerely, I rarely see any Western journalist taking this issue without taking.any side and is blunt.for. The truth. Otherwise.everyone bashes Muslims.as u know.better.
Nice.job
Sincerely, I rarely see any Western journalist taking this issue without taking.any side and is blunt.for The truth. Otherwise.everyone bashes Muslims.as u know.better.
Nice.job