Comment

Comment by Michael Clauw on August 6, 2012 at 7:06pm

I saw this article today, and I thought I would post it because this I consider this an example of an act of domestic terrorism committed by a white man. The violence was clearly motivated by political and social hatred towards a certain group, and was meant as an act of revenge or simply to send a message

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/06/us/wisconsin-shooting-suspect/index.h...

Comment by Kelly Wade on July 31, 2012 at 3:01pm

Whoa! What a thought provoking conversation! Allow me to interject. 

While I agree that not all terrorists are Muslim and not all Muslims are terrorists, I do think it is important to understand why we have been conditioned to associate Muslims with terrorism. Let me share the words of Mohammad Morsi, the newly elected Egyptian president, who led a crowd in repeating this Muslim Brotherhood motto on his campaign trail: 

‘The Quran is our constitution,’ ‘jihad is our path,’ and ‘death for the sake of Allah is our most lofty aspiration."

... Accuracy in Media

I understand the arguments everyone is making, however, I think they are slightly narrow minded. No one has yet mentioned the greater issue here - that this was the work of a much larger entity. There is NO way Holmes, a neuroscientist with absolutely no criminal or even angry background, accomplished this alone. Why would he withdraw from grad school when his grades were good? How did he obtain such expensive weaponry? Who trained him in explosive wiring? These things simply don't add up. With the Small Arms Treaty around the corner, there needed to be some type of event that would stir a political debate about gun control. 

I also want to make mention of a very potent and gnarly Columbian drug called Devil's Breath. This drug comes from a native tree which has a very alluring appearance. When the pollen from the flowers of the tree are inhaled, it is said to eliminate an individual's sense of free will and erase the memories of whatever took place while under the spell. It is orderless, tasteless, and does not impair your motor functions. Check it out on Deadline.com - it is very possible something like this was used on Holmes. He was even reported asking a jailhouse worker what he had done to put him in jail. 

Comment by Madison Hart on July 30, 2012 at 6:34pm

The shooter did not seem to have any goals, except for the infliction of violence for his own self-fulfillment.

The facts aren't in...the psychiatrist, the ledger, the university, the motive, the training, the charges, the plea, the investigation, the evidence... A horrible atrocity was committed by any label. Families are devastated, and the country is in shock. But don't be too quick to mistake assumptions and speculation for facts. Let the investigators do their job.

Regarding the Arab stereotype, Fahd, Hollywood has been rewriting that script for as long as I can remember...ie. Schwarzenegger, True LIes ('94). The media fuels stereotypes through the power of entertainment. 

Bet they're fighting for the rights to Holmes' story right now.

 

Comment by Michael Clauw on July 30, 2012 at 6:33pm

First, one should not confuse "planning" for "strategy". It is clear that he thought a lot about this attack, and made careful plans to make sure he carried out the attack successfully. But that doesn't mean that his attack was part of a strategy.

Second, I agree with what you all are saying. The media has unfairly vilified Muslims and infused the word "terrorist" with images of Muslim culture. I think that we should work to fix this, but I think the way you suggest going about it is backwards. To simply start referring to violent acts committed by white people as terrorism does not de-stigmatize the term. Rather than saying that the term "terrorist" should be applied to all races who commit senseless violence, we should focus on educating people as to the fact that being Muslim does not make anyone more likely to commit these acts.

And as far as terrorist groups that aren't Al Qaeda, I can name three off the top of my head.

The Provisional IRA (Irish Republican Army) - They were a group that was active in the 70's up until the late 90's which used bombings and other terrorist tactics against the British to oppose their rule.

The Irgun- They were a Jewish terrorist organization that carried out bombings of several buildings so to get the Palestinians and British out of Israel proper.

The Tamil Tigers - They operated in Sri Lanka up until a couple years ago, carrying out suicide attacks, assassinations, and attempting ethnic cleansing so to form their own nationalistic state. They are not Muslim. In fact, Muslims in Sri Lanka were one of the biggest targets of their violence. The United States is one of over 30 countries that classify them as terrorists.

All of these groups carried out violent acts because they had clear goals. For them, terror is not their end game, but rather a way to achieve something else. I honestly don't believe Holmes had intentions passed scaring people and glorifying himself.

I understand that the violent acts committed by Holmes created terror, but I caution against using the term "terrorist" so loosely. When people use terms like this without really thinking about the meaning behind them, they begin to be more readily used, and they often become severed from their true meaning. I think that is one of the reasons why many people stigmatize Muslims as terrorists. When someone ignorantly calls a Muslim a terrorist, they are not thinking "Look at that guy! He is trying to use violence against civilians to progress a political agenda", they are just attempting to use familiar words to describe hatred or disgust. If Holmes was a Muslim, a lot more people would identify him as a terrorist, but I think it would be incorrect to do so. Because no matter what his race, religion, etc, he doesn't meet the qualifications for being a terrorist.

Fahd - You say, "Terrorism has multiple meanings and Americans are stuck on the fact that "the attack had no political goals" why don't you look past politics and think of the word TERROR."

and Andrea wrote, "By associating the word terrorism with someone like Holmes - a white male who committed an act of terror- it may help to realign the word with ‘fear’, ‘death’ and ‘danger’, instead of: ‘fear’, ‘Muslims’, ‘danger’, ‘Middle East’, ‘death’, ‘Quran’, ‘brown people’, etc."

But despite what you're saying, Terrorism doesn't have multiple meanings. In academia, it clearly means the use of violence against civilians to achieve socio-political goals. Yes, people use the term to mean other things, but that doesn't make those uses correct. I just don't understand why you both want to apply the term "terrorist" to this man so badly, when a great number of terms (evil, delusional, murderer) could be applied more accurately. Calling this evil white man a "Terrorist" does not make up for all of the good and innocent Muslims who have been wrongly called the same thing.

 

Comment by Andrea Tavino on July 30, 2012 at 4:31pm

You wrote, “…this is an isolated incident motivated by delusion, and to assume greater intentions would only justify the egocentric crime that was committed.” Could it be the other way around? I don’t know if you’re familiar with George Carlin’s stand-up on ‘soft language’ but in it he describes how the evolution of the terms Americans use to describe soldier’s PTSD parallels how seriously we consider the condition.

In World War I it was originally called ‘shell shock’. Carlin described this term as, “Simple, honest, direct language. Two syllables. Shell shock. It almost sounds like the guns themselves.” Over time though it degraded into ‘battle fatigue’ into ‘operational exhaustion’ until by the Vietnam War “the pain is completely buried under jargon: post-traumatic stress disorder.”

My point is, maybe calling the shooting a ‘isolated incident’ belittles the terror the victims experienced, as well as the effect it had on the whole country. By associating the word terrorism with someone like Holmes - a white male who committed an act of terror- it may help to realign the word with ‘fear’, ‘death’ and ‘danger’, instead of: ‘fear’, ‘Muslims’, ‘danger’, ‘Middle East’, ‘death’, ‘Quran’, ‘brown people’, etc. 

Comment by Xhiljola Nano on July 29, 2012 at 9:30pm

terrorist or not..he definitely terrified and terrorized the lives of many people...

Comment by Fahd AlQasimi on July 28, 2012 at 6:06pm

Good topic Michael, but as a Muslim myself i have to disagree. 

"One should think of terrorism not simply as actions intended to scare, but as an attempt to coerce through terror. It is not simply an action, but a strategy."
It seemed like he had a strategy, purchasing all the ammo over months, booby trapping his apartment and his high powered weapons show alot of thought was put into the attack. I would have to say this is terrorism 101, he terrorized people, put the country in a state of fear and more. 

I think the media has been hypnotizing Americans to link terrorism with Arabs, brown people, beards, etc. That word "terrorist" is chosen very carefully and the meaning has been changed from "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce" to "Muslim/Arab".  When this shooting took place all the news stations would refuse to call this man a terrorist which is bullshit and instead they just say "he seems to have no links to any terrorist group".

Can anyone, off the top of their head name me a terrorist group that is not call "Al Qaeda"? 

Stop letting the media control your mind and change the meaning of words. Terrorism has multiple meanings and Americans are stuck on the fact that "the attack had no political goals" why don't you look past politics and think of the word TERROR. Because i bet all those movie goers where feeling TERROR when this piece of shit terrorist attacked them.