1. This is not just a tragedy for African-Americans. It's a tragedy for all Americans. CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood is trying to use this as a wedge to broaden it's front against its real target...America and her institutions.

 

2. CAIR's interest in labeling this as terrorism is to detract and distract from our Islamic Terrorism problem.

 

We do have a limited problem with extreme violent neo-Nazis but there should not be some thinly veiled attempt to muddy the issue of the principal terror threat to this country....Muslim terrorism.

Terrorism by anyone is wrong, be they western or middle eastern.

 

The narratives woven around terrorism are very imperialistic and propagandistic.

well . . . is it "terrorism" or not?

 

Well in strictly moral terms it is absolutely terrorism. It fits the definition.

 

We do indeed have a problem with the extreme white Nationalists and they do resort to violence to further what are arguable political goals.

 

However, they do not have a really sustained and well coordinated campaign of terror to achieve definite political goals. This kid wanted to propaganda of the deed his way to some "race war."

 

I know this appears tortured but the classification of terrorism should be reserved for those groups who are furthering some definite theoretically "achievable" political goal. Like Hamas is clearly terrorist and clearly can achieve its political ends. They not only kill but they have erstwhile "achievable" political goals.

 

The issue is that if we expand "terrorism" to be a blanket catch all term we would then simply have to invent a new term for the concept of organizations employing the tactic of assymetrical warfare encompassing violence against civilian targets for definite political ends. As in the terrorists that need to be handled by the President of the United States at his level. As opposed to the "terrorists" that can be handled by the local law enforcement authorities because they are localized and limited threats.

 

Making these victims the victims of "terrorism" will actually undermine the meaning of their deaths instead of enhance it as would be the intention.

 

This extraordinary act fits into the narrative of this nation's at times bestial behavior towards African-Americans. And more specifically segments of the white majority. That is where it springs from and that is where it belongs. We must all see it for what it is. To call it "terrorism" which is a rather amorphous term, I think clouds what really happened and absolves American society of its guilt. This kid was no doubt influenced by a society which in some instances demonize Blacks as some scourge on a once great nation. No doubt the Tea Party demonization of Obama for his Blackness and not his policies is part of this national sin which we just cannot seem to absolve ourselves of.

 

For quite a few years South Carolina was my home and the Black community (on post and off) there was my family away from my family so I am personally much grieved by this. One has never truly felt human warmth unless one been in the presence of Southern Black hospitality and friendship.

 

P.S...The issue here is race and the fact that African-Americans are still the victims of race murders in 2015 in America. Anything else detracts from that. It's not about gun control, Muslims, etc. etc. The only thing that can be legitimately linked to this is that Roof is still very much alive as he was captured alive by the police while Eric Garner was choked to death for the "crime" of selling loosie smokes.

tortured bullshit indeed!

 

what exactly are the definite "politically achievable" goals of Hamas' terrorism?

 

how exactly is the goal of establishing The 21st Century Caliphate a definite "politically achievable goal" of ISIL?

 

of course Timothy McVeigh must have been a 'non-terrorist' too, rite?

 

smfh

 

It's not tortured. ISIS is an actual fairly functioning state. Territory, population, government, military, borders etc. etc. And they have a Caliph atop it all. They have achieved some definite political aims using terrorism. The extent of the Caliph's authority is another matter. He exists and has genuine authority over a fairly populous state. Five ISIS their due.

 

I must be terribly masochistic to follow you down these rabbit holes.

dude, stop your incoherent nonsense

 

let's forget Hamas for a second . . . that's low-hanging fruit

 

now, Isis' limited, tactical achievements on the ground have come thru waging brutal war on a divided and unmotivated enemy not thru "terrorism"

 

the group's "terrorism" impacting us (hollywood style beheadings, etc.) is the enticement strategy of the weak aimed at the West having little to do with some pipe dream 'Caliphate' being carved out of mostly empty desert no-man's-land in Syria-Iraq presently occupied thru war . . . you do know what "Caliphate" means, rite?

 

so, besides Tim McVeigh, let's consider:

 

the 9/11 terror attacks (bin Laden and al Queda dem)

 

PanAM 103 blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland (Gadaffi dem)

 

Air India 182 jumbo jet blown up off Ireland (Babar Khasla Sikh militants)

 

these people are not "terrorists"?!!!!!!! . . . huh?

 

you are not venturing down a rabbit hole "chap" . . . it's actually a rather ignorant, stink arsehole

 

I'm quite aware of what the political-religious concept of the Caliphate is. Historically its always been more theoretical than actual. Not unlike the medieval papacy's pretensions to supreme secular power in addition to supreme religious authority. In addition there are multiple claimants historically and even today. King Mohammed of Morocco claims to be the Caliph. So does the current deposed Nizam of Hyderabad exiled somewhere in Europe

 

McVeigh was clearly a case of domestic terrorism. Terror. Civilians. Governmental target. Clear set of political grievances and objectives. Retaliation against the government etc. etc.

 

PanAm Lockerbie Scotland was clearly state terrorism. Political goals of a nation-state.

 

Air India I think was the fight for Khalistan or whatever. Clearly terrorism. They have definite political goals.

 

If you notice the theme here of terror in the service of POLITICAL OBJECTIVES.

 

This kid claims he was trying to start a "race war." It is a stretch to make that fit into the political element which makes terrorism terrorism. The political element of terrorism has to be fairly clear and defined.

 

P.S...This is not really an appeal to authority but this fairly nuanced definition of terrorism is what I was taught at school by one of the Pentagon's senior terrorism experts. He had a PhD in political science. And he kept harping about the political goals which truly give terrorism its unique categorization above "ordinary" crime. Even hate crime. This kid simply hated Black people to the extreme (among other personal factors). A terrorism charge would not stick.

look dude

• McVeigh wanted to make his "loudest statement" [his words] against the government in retaliation for Ruby Ridge and Waco . . . there is no "definite theoretically "achievable" political goal" here

• PanAm 103 was Iran's "loudest statement" in retaliation for the accidental shootdown of Iran Air 655 by the USS Vincennes over the Persian Gulf earlier the same year; the terror was [sub?]contracted to the PFLP-GC (facilitated by Libya) . . . there is no "definite theoretically "achievable" political goal" here either

• Air India 182 was the Sikh militants' "loudest statement" in retaliation for the massacre at the Golden Temple (Amritsar); this does not further the establishment of Khalistan . . . again, there is no "definite theoretically "achievable" political goal" here
• ditto 9/11
• this fella in South Carolina was making his "loudest statement" against existing political arrangements consigning Jim Crow apartheid to the dustbin of history; so he took out the innocent in the spectacular the way he did!

not supposed to be rocket science sir . . . your instructor's "PhD in political science" notwithstanding

 

Shameless appeal to expertise....why hasn't law enforcement rushed to charge this antiman with terrorism? You know why? Terrorism charges just won't stick. He was charged with murder by state authorities. And he's definitely eligible for hate crimes and federal civil rights charges. These statutes more clearly and more elegantly capture his criminal acts.

 

I'm not saying that some of the elements of terrorism haven't been met. I believe all of them have been save for the last one. The goal is arguably political but its also a lot of other things too. And the ends he was seeking is some ill defined "racial war." What new political order was he seeking? How developed was his political philosophy of the changes he wanted to see occur?

These people at the church invited this racist into their bible study group. They saw him as a brother in Christ. This racist saw them as taking over his country.