Jump to content
SaysWho?

Tackle white supremacy as terrorism, experts say

Recommended Posts

190514161030-desktop-roof-fields-jackson

 

Before some of you one-line this with, "No shit," the article is in-depth and covers some of the complications and some of the terrorists who haven't been charged as such (like the two men on the left).

 

Manhattan District Attorney on when he realized that the laws need to change:


 

Quote

 

Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance came to that realization while investigating the homicide of a black man in the center of New York City.


66-year-old Timothy Caughman was walking alone in Midtown Manhattan collecting cans to recycle when a man approached from behind. That man plunged a sword through Caughman's chest.

Caughman uttered his last words as he turned toward his killer: "Why are you doing this?"
The man continued to stab him. Caughman bled to death.


The answer to Caughman's question would soon become clear. His killer, James Jackson, had come to New York from Maryland with a plan to start a race war.


This was more than a murder, Vance decided. It was more than a hate crime. It was the targeted killing of a black man with the aspiration of dividing the races to keep killing each other, ending in the death of every black person in the United States and around the world, according to Jackson's manifesto, Vance said.


The case was a seminal one for the district attorney's office and for New York state, where it was the first domestic terrorism conviction of its kind. Vance hopes it sends a message.

...

"This was an act of terrorism," Vance explained. "This exists in our country and it happened here."

 

 

This was the poor man who died:

 

 

New York was able to convict the man as a terrorist, but:

 

Quote

Many states do not have terrorism laws on the books or prosecute cases the way he did with the murder of Caughman

 

On white supremacy's rise:

 

Quote

 From the Charleston church massacre through the killing of a protester in Charlottesville and the shootings at synagogues in Pittsburgh and Poway, far-right extremists are responsible for -- or suspected of - most of the ideological killings in America in the last 10 years, according to data from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which tracks extremist activity.

White supremacist murders in the US "more than doubled in 2017," with far-right extremist groups and white supremacists "responsible for 59% of all extremist-related fatalities in the US in 2017," ADL's audit shows. They were responsible for 20% of these fatalities the year before.

 

Quote

But it's still a mistake not to call out white supremacy, according to the former head of the Countering Violent Extremism Task Force at DHS, George Selim.

"If the same number of Americans had been killed at the hands of an individual that was inspired or directed by a foreign terrorist organization, you can bet this Congress and any administration, irrespective of political party would be reacting much differently," he said.

 

On Trump's dismantling of programs to tackle domestic extremism:

 

Quote

During the Bush and Obama administrations, he was often in the room -- whether the Situation Room or the Oval Office -- when key decisions were made about tackling extremism at home.
And as they saw the threat of white supremacists grow, Selim said he worked with colleagues on federal programs, specifically at DHS, that aimed to address and intervene during the radicalization process.

They "were on the cusp" of creating a system to do just that, he said. With bipartisan support, key puzzle pieces were being put in place in the final months of the Obama administration, he said.

And then Trump took office. Selim said during the first seven months of the administration there was a "decimation of the people, resources and prioritization" of those key programs and infrastructure that was aimed at working with law enforcement, counter-messaging, community resilience and engagement and outreach.

 

Complications:

 

Quote

Even similar attacks are handled differently depending on the perpetrator in the US. Sayfullo Saipov allegedly rammed a truck along a New York City bike path, killing eight people, three months after Fields' attack.


But Saipov, unlike Fields, was able to be charged with a federal terror offense because of one simple difference -- his alleged allegiance to the foreign ISIS organization.

Another case is the Coast Guard lieutenant currently accused of plotting a domestic terror attack. Prosecutors say he planned to conduct a mass killing of prominent Democratic politicians and members of the news media, including CNN. But without a law saying domestic terrorism is a crime, he can only be charged with lesser offences.

 

Quote

"To illustrate how ridiculous the current situation is, when I was in the FBI investigating people inspired by international terrorist groups like ISIS and al Qaeda, the mere association with those groups was enough to land someone behind bars," said Josh Campbell, CNN law enforcement analyst and former FBI special agent. "Not so with domestic terrorism. Even if someone is politically motivated to cause violence due to their right- or left-wing extremist views, that's not enough to get them off the street. Opponents to such a law claim it might infringe on free speech. The issue appears to be a political third rail that few in Congress actually want to touch."


Campbell said that the FBI Agents Association, a private organization that represents the bureau's approximately 13,000 special agents, has been very vocal about the need for new legislation that would equip law enforcement with the tools needed to stop these threats.

 

Quote

Rep. Mike Rogers, the ranking Republican member of the committee, asked intelligence and law enforcement experts from the FBI, Justice Department and DHS how the US can tackle the issue, seeking advice to guide possible legislation.


"Do you have any recommendations about what can be done to address the violent hate speech and incitement of violence found on fringe sites like 8chan and Gab, and that's for any of you," he asked.


He was met with silence.


"Y'all don't have any suggestions for us?" responded the Alabama congressman. "That's scary. We can't make policy without good advisement."


The officials then explained the difficulties in monitoring the forums and balancing free speech. 

But at the root of it all, again, is there's no domestic terrorism statute.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

160929-interracialkillings-graphic.png

 

 

 

And this is just raw numbers so not adjusting for the fact that there are what, 4x as many white people as blacks in the U.S.?

 

So what is your solution to the fact that blacks consistently kill double the number of white people killing blacks each year without even adjusting for population differences. Why is it terrorism when a white man kills a black, but not when a black kills a white?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dodger said:

160929-interracialkillings-graphic.png

 

 

 

And this is just raw numbers so not adjusting for the fact that there are what, 4x as many white people as blacks in the U.S.?

 

So what is your solution to the fact that blacks consistently kill double the number of white people killing blacks each year without even adjusting for population differences. Why is it terrorism when a white man kills a black, but not when a black kills a white?

 

It’s not terrorism when a white person kills a black person. It’s terrorism when a white person kills a black person because he’s black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dodger said:

160929-interracialkillings-graphic.png

 

 

 

And this is just raw numbers so not adjusting for the fact that there are what, 4x as many white people as blacks in the U.S.?

 

So what is your solution to the fact that blacks consistently kill double the number of white people killing blacks each year without even adjusting for population differences. Why is it terrorism when a white man kills a black, but not when a black kills a white?

 

 

You should probably read the article before posting. The murderer in question wrote a manifesto stating that he wished to start a race war that would culminate in the elimination of all black people. That's akin to a Jihadist wanting to murder Jews in order to incite a war between Israel and other Muslim nations that would culminate with the elimination of Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SilentWorld said:

 

It’s not terrorism when a white person kills a black person. It’s terrorism when a white person kills a black person because he’s black.

That isn't even terrorism, that's just plain ol' racism. Killing a black person to stoke fears and incite a race war, that's terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dodger said:

160929-interracialkillings-graphic.png

 

 

 

And this is just raw numbers so not adjusting for the fact that there are what, 4x as many white people as blacks in the U.S.?

 

So what is your solution to the fact that blacks consistently kill double the number of white people killing blacks each year without even adjusting for population differences. Why is it terrorism when a white man kills a black, but not when a black kills a white?

That's not what the article is talking about.

 

It's talking about killing with a particular agenda to incite this or that social response, that's terrorism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Man of Culture said:

That isn't even terrorism, that's just plain ol' racism. Killing a black person to stoke fears and incite a race war, that's terrorism.

Oh yeah that’s right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Man of Culture said:

That isn't even terrorism, that's just plain ol' racism. Killing a black person to stoke fears and incite a race war, that's terrorism.

 

Good catch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

29 minutes ago, Man of Culture said:

That isn't even terrorism, that's just plain ol' racism. Killing a black person to stoke fears and incite a race war, that's terrorism.

 

 

So it's only terrorism when you leave a manifesto behind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

 

 

So it's only terrorism when you leave a manifesto behind?

 

No, it's terrorism when you make your motives clear that your criminal act was intended to stoke fears with the intended result of either making people cow to your demands or to incite further violence based on ideological motivations. This person did the latter, which falls under the concept of terrorism.

 

 

Edit: I'm certain most people here believe that the simple act of killing a person is not terrorism in and of itself. It's those extra bits... context, intent and motivations which are the determining factors for whether or not a murder can be construed as just that, or as an act of terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m just sitting here eating popcorn waiting for Dodger to start on black on black crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Man of Culture said:

 

 

You should probably read the article before posting. The murderer in question wrote a manifesto stating that he wished to start a race war that would culminate in the elimination of all black people. That's akin to a Jihadist wanting to murder Jews in order to incite a war between Israel and other Muslim nations that would culminate with the elimination of Israel.

 

Whether they are charged with terrorism is kind of a moot point because they are already being charged with murder and are likely to either spend the rest of their lives prison or face the death penalty.  And I don't think we should entertain the idea of simply having shitty views, like white supremacy, be a chargeable offense just because they are shitty views. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

 

Whether they are charged with terrorism is kind of a moot point because they are already being charged with murder and are likely to either spend the rest of their lives prison or face the death penalty.  And I don't think we should entertain the idea of simply having shitty views, like white supremacy, be a chargeable offense just because they are shitty views. 

 

So, you're saying we should take all terrorism laws off the books?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

So, you're saying we should take all terrorism laws off the books?

 

No.  I'm just saying that Tim McVeigh would have been executed regardless of his terrorism charge. Same with Dylan Roof.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mclumber1 said:

 

No.  I'm just saying that Tim McVeigh would have been executed regardless of his terrorism charge. Same with Dylan Roof.  

 

 You know that you are arguing against calling a spade a spade, right? Penalties for different crimes carry different weights based on a variety of factors. There is a massive difference between murdering someone in the heat of a moment (e.g. lovers quarrel) and murdering someone in order to incite a race war and the differences in charges as well as their subsequent penalties should reflect that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dodger said:

160929-interracialkillings-graphic.png

 

 

 

And this is just raw numbers so not adjusting for the fact that there are what, 4x as many white people as blacks in the U.S.?

 

So what is your solution to the fact that blacks consistently kill double the number of white people killing blacks each year without even adjusting for population differences. Why is it terrorism when a white man kills a black, but not when a black kills a white?

 

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Man of Culture said:

 

 You know that you are arguing against calling a spade a spade, right? Penalties for different crimes carry different weights based on a variety of factors. There is a massive difference between murdering someone in the heat of a moment (e.g. lovers quarrel) and murdering someone in order to incite a race war and the differences in charges as well as their subsequent penalties should reflect that.

 

Oh I know.  I guess I just don't see the point in further charges when these people, like Roof, are already going to be executed regardless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

 

No.  I'm just saying that Tim McVeigh would have been executed regardless of his terrorism charge. Same with Dylan Roof.  

 

What would be the point of terrorism laws then? I guess I'm looking for an example of something that should be handled as terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm not adequately conveying my thoughts here.  What these people did was absolutely terrorism - but I just think it's overkill in some regards when the offender is already going to face execution or life in prison.  IDK. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any aspects of a terrorism charge that aren’t already criminal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hate crimes" are terrorism too. Nobody has been killed "just" because they were black .. They've been killed to send a message about their place in American society. No race war is needed as long as the lynchings quell the rebellion, but it's still terrorism.

 

Redemption was nothing other than a successful terrorist campaign and its that success that has made it hard for us to see it for what it really is. "Hate crimes" were always just soft-pedaled terrorism acceptable to a sizable part of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anathema- said:

"Hate crimes" are terrorism too. Nobody has been killed "just" because they were black .. They've been killed to send a message about their place in American society. No race war is needed as long as the lynchings quell the rebellion, but it's still terrorism.

 

Redemption was nothing other than a successful terrorist campaign and its that success that has made it hard for us to see it for what it really is. "Hate crimes" were always just soft-pedaled terrorism acceptable to a sizable part of the country.

 

100% no.

 

"I'm going to kill that nigger who sullied my daughter's honor" is nowhere near the same level as "I'm going to kill a random nigger in an effort to incite a race war so that my white brethren take up arms and genocide niggers out of existence."

 

This is no better an argument than Kaberle going full dunce over words and violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

A difference of degree, not of kind.

Both actually, but I guess you could draw your conclusion if you begin with a faulty premise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

I guess Dodger is pretty upset since now some of his white friends may be considered terrorists and start going to jail. 

 

I bet you’d be pretty excited to see white conservatives thrown in jail for no reason other than being white conservatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

I bet you’d be pretty excited to see white conservatives thrown in jail for no reason other than being white conservatives.

Bring out the guillotine and then we’re talkin! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dodger said:

 

I bet you’d be pretty excited to see white conservatives thrown in jail for no reason other than being white conservatives.

 

Conservatives of all colors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dodger said:

I bet you’d be pretty excited to see white conservatives thrown in jail for no reason other than being white conservatives.

 

I think stupidity mixed with toxicity and hate should suffer some kind of punishment. Jail? No. Shame on an internet message board? It's the least I can do. It's not like white conservatives have been doing themselves any favors for decades now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dodger said:

 

I bet you’d be pretty excited to see white conservatives thrown in jail for no reason other than being white conservatives.

 

You're not doing yourself any favors by equating white supremacists with white conservatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

You're not doing yourself any favors by equating white supremacists with white conservatives.

 

 

Liberals have basically already equated any white conservative with white supremacists. Being a never Trumper is about the only way a liberal won't consider a conservative a racist, and even that's not a guarantee.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...