a White person would never be given the benefit of doubt like this. and I'm not saying this from a place of white grievance, but just the truth---when Stephen Paddock murdered 50 people in Vegas (with no known ideological bent), it was imperative in leftist circles to call him a terrorist. The rush to call a White person a terrorist and the skepticism to call a Muslim a terrorist is a leftist attempt at narrative turnabout. While it may be rooted in good intentions, unfortunately it usually just results in racism against Whites or increased Islamophobia (due to perceived political correctness)
13 comments
If you don't like calling Paddock a terrorist, I'm fine with calling him a murderer, serial killer, or lunatic. Just don't call him a hero or anything positive.
a White person would never be given the benefit of doubt like this
Donald Fart? Roy Less ? Jon Ritzcracker & co.? Chrissy Cantdoverywell & co. at Charlottesville: including James Fields? Dylann Roof?
I couldn't agree more, Ramalamadingdong.
So what's your excuse for not being an Alt-Shitist then? Unless you're prepared to equally refer to the above white people as terrorists as well.
What do YOU call someone who sets up military-grade firepower over a civilian entertainment event and opens fire just to inflict death and terror, then? Face facts: the only reason you WON'T call him a terrorist - but would call any NON-white shooter a terrorist - is because YOU ARE THE ONE PUSHING A NARRATIVE.
When Stephen Paddock killed all those people the immediate response from the people who use use anyone that isn't white as a rallying cry to outlaw a religion, put a full stop on immigration, endorse torturing people's families by association, or things slightly less heavy handed like applauding police brutality and suspending legal rights often before they even confirm the shooter's name let alone all those assumptions?
"We don't know enough about this guy to hate him." and "Let's not politicize this."
Consistency, shithead. Very recently a string of cop killings was called terrorism because someone with a vaguely Arabic name did it and was used as a platform to attack immigration but then when five police officers were wounded and one killed in an ambush by a white guy the response was entirely different with Trump actually bothering to fake empathy for the officer's family because there was nothing to hijack for his own purposes. You're complaining about people condemning a known killer, a mass murderer, but equivocate it to being told to hold your horses for condemning people as "terrorists" when all you know is that they're Muslim if they're not even criminals, or declaring any given black guy "had it coming" when he was shot multiple times at a traffic stop, or basically deciding any collective automatic condemnations that are going around today. And more tellingly? That you absolutely stonewall any desire to get to the facts of the matter or disregard them entirely because they're less important to you than having an excuse.
It's the other way around, dolt! White people are called "lone gunmen" and Muslims are called terrorists, even when they have done similar things. Besides, white people can be Muslims too, and Christians are not always white people.
Immediately after the attack in Norway (in Oslo and on Utøya) in 2011, people said "It has to be terrorists". Then it was know that it was a white supremacist Norwegian, and people turned to "Must be a crazy dude". Breivik is DEFINITELY a terrorist.
The guy who drove into a shopping-street in Stockholm, Sweden, last April with a truck and killed 5 people, was fairly light-skinned. He's from Uzbekistan, if my memory is correct. He's apparently done "Sieg Heil"-gestures in prison AND he's shown appreciation for Daesh. So I'd go with crazy-ass dude.
it was imperative in leftist circles to call him a terrorist.
What else do you call someone who murders a large number of people in a public gathering? I hate how when a Muslim kills someone it's "OMG! TERRORISM!" but when a white Christian guy does it, it's "Hey, let's not jump to conclusions here. He was likely just mentally ill."
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
