We use terrorism as shorthand in this country, like we shortcut the word racist or fascist to apply when it's technically incorrect. I try to not get to tied up in knots about it, but I'm sympathetic to both arguments.
For the record:
Terrorism -
1. "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents"
2. "the use of violence or threat of violence especially against civilians in the pursuit of political aims, religious, or ideological change"
So you need to be a) not a national majority (Basque separatists, Klansmen, Tamil Tigers) b) acting in support of political goals (IRA - independence from England, ISIS - establishment of an Islamic Caliphate) and c) target non-combatants (lynchings, purposeful vehicular collisions, nightclub shootings, etc.).
As of 3 PM EST, October 2, 2017, we're only sure about C. American media is incredibly hypocritical in that they generally don't reserve this kind of circumspection when the shooter is brown or has squiggles on his twitter feed. But they are, technically, correct in not calling this terrorism. For now.
Also, fuuuuuccckkk that CBS lawyer. Not a single person deserves to die for their beliefs, whether religious, political, or other. Not. A. Single. One. She's no liberal. Glad she was fired.
__________________
One note timeless, came out of nowhere...
|