Tackle white supremacy as terrorism, experts say

[SaysWho?]

 

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.

 

[SaysWho?]

 

[Chairslinger]

"No." responds Republican party.

[Greatoneshere]

What an idea. Took them years to even think of this huh?

[Dodger]

 

 

 

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?

[SilentWorld]

3 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

 

 

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.

[Bloodporne]

10 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

 

 

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. 

[SilentWorld]

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.

[SaysWho?]

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.

[Dodger]

 

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?

[MarSolo]

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

[mclumber1]

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. 

[Ghost_MH]

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?

[mclumber1]

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.  

[stepee]

1 hour ago, Dodger said:

 

 

 

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

[mclumber1]

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. 

[Ghost_MH]

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.

[mclumber1]

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. 

[Guest]

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

[Greatoneshere]

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

[CastlevaniaNut18]

Dodger disappoints, but sure doesn't surprise in this thread. 

[Anathema-]

"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.

[Anathema-]

A difference of degree, not of kind.

[Dodger]

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.

[johnny]

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! 

[Anathema-]

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.

[Greatoneshere]

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. 

[Ghost_MH]

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.

[Dodger]

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.  

[Firewithin]

that R you vote for = Racist   

 

new page edit.  not directed to lucian

[Dodger]

10 minutes ago, Man of Culture said:

The improper use of "Liberal" irks me quite a bit. Never Trumper types are primarily Progressives and Far Left Commie Larpers, not Liberals. Those same people also hate Liberals due to the very fact that most of them are not confrontational with Trump voters or Conservatives in general (e.g. Joe Rogan platforming people like Kanye West or Ben Shapiro instead of condemning them) despite said liberals sharing many of the same views that could be considered socialist in nature.

 

FTR, I consider myself socially liberal on most every issue and I've actually been called a white supremacist, a Nazi, a fascist, put on a national hate watch list in a foreign country, etc. Being left leaning liberal or center-left/center-right on social or economic issues is looked on with disdain as well @Dodger. 

 

 

Damn dude, I just get a bunch of shit on a message board nobody cares about. Even I'm not on any hate watch lists. I don't think I've actually been called a nazi and a facist here, just a racist piece of shit a million times.  Funny thing is, I'm not even against immigration. All I've ever really said is maybe letting hundreds of thousands of poor immigrants over here every single year is maybe not the greatest idea and we should have some limits or maybe work towards a better system. For that I'm called a "fucking racist piece of shit" and reminded of every dumb thing I've ever said years ago. 

 

Shit I'll vote for the first Democrat who actually says hey we need some serious immigration reform instead of just jumping on the abolish ice pandering bandwagon. I still actively support universal health care. So if this bad for a liberal who isn't on board with unlimited immigration, I can't imagine how bad it would be for an actual Trump Conservative around here. 

[Dodger]

17 minutes ago, Firewithin said:

that R you vote for = Racist   

 

new page edit.  not directed to lucian

 

I voted for Obama both times.

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, Man of Culture said:

The improper use of "Liberal" irks me quite a bit. Never Trumper types are primarily Progressives and Far Left Commie Larpers, not Liberals.

 

“Never Trump”ers were conservatives who refused to support Trump after he locked down the GOP nomination.

[johnny]

2 hours ago, Dodger said:

 

I voted for Obama both times.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

Yep, Dodger has gotten shit just because he reasonably asks for immigration reform. 

 

Not because he's said stupid, racist shit on numerous occasions. 

 

Edit: plenty of sexist shit, too.