Terrorist caught sending ricin-laced letters in the mail

[Underseer]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0LeQFoG-cY[/youtube]

Isn't it funny how whenever an act of terrorism is committed by white conservatives, the media either doesn't make a big deal out of it, or very carefully avoids using the term "terrorist"?

I wonder why that is.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

They don't use the word "terrorist" because they use the words "climate of hate" and "racism".

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

A few years ago a man was arrested for attempting to assassinate Bush Jr. I thought it odd for a few reasons. The first thing odd I noticed about it was that Bush Jr. was already out of office, so what would it accomplish. Some weird sense of justice? The second odd thing I noticed about it was how quickly the story disappeared.

So we have two assassins, and both of them the story was dropped down the memory hole. Except the one you posted still has a few people wondering why the story was dropped. What you're giving us is a standard Republican complaint of media bias. The media dropped both stories, but only commented on dropping one of them, the one where Obama was a target and a Republican was the perpetrator. You wish the media had commented on why the other story was dropped instead, so your precious Republicans would look like the victims instead of the criminals.

I think Republican complaints about media bias a rather weak, especially now that you and yours have Fox News to provide your side of the story. But if it bugs you so much, you should have your favorite star at Fox News do a similar story about why the coverage of the other assassin was dropped down the memory hole.

 

[Bomb#20]

Isn't it funny how whenever an act of terrorism is committed by white conservatives, the media either doesn't make a big deal out of it, or very carefully avoids using the term "terrorist"?

I wonder why that is.

Terrorists are people who try to kill or wound non-combatants for political purposes. Are you suggesting America's drone-strike-instigator-in-chief is a non-combatant?

 

[dismal]

There was a lot of discussion about this months ago when it happened but it sort of cooled off when it turned out it was a nutty actress trying to set up her husband and not the great right wing terrorist hope.

I guess for some the dream dies hard...

 

[Underseer]

Isn't it funny how whenever an act of terrorism is committed by white conservatives, the media either doesn't make a big deal out of it, or very carefully avoids using the term "terrorist"?

I wonder why that is.

Terrorists are people who try to kill or wound non-combatants for political purposes. Are you suggesting America's drone-strike-instigator-in-chief is a non-combatant?

Thank you for showing that American conservatives are just as likely to make excuses for this sort of thing as Muslims. It would be more convincing if you ended with "Jesus is great!" or something at the end of your rant.

- - - Updated - - -

There was a lot of discussion about this months ago when it happened but it sort of cooled off when it turned out it was a nutty actress trying to set up her husband and not the great right wing terrorist hope.

I guess for some the dream dies hard...

Link?

And even if you are right, that still doesn't excuse the other acts of terrorism or attempted acts of terrorism by white American conservatives. My comment still stands about the media's reticence to use the term "terrorism" in such cases.

In other words: if she was trying to frame her husband by committing an act of terrorism, this shows that she has an expectation that the public will believe a conservative would commit an act of terrorism for political ends. This shows it is widely assumed by the public that American conservatives are capable of such things, and yet neither you nor the media want to use the word "terrorism."

 

[dismal]

Terrorists are people who try to kill or wound non-combatants for political purposes. Are you suggesting America's drone-strike-instigator-in-chief is a non-combatant?

Thank you for showing that American conservatives are just as likely to make excuses for this sort of thing as Muslims. It would be more convincing if you ended with "Jesus is great!" or something at the end of your rant.

- - - Updated - - -

There was a lot of discussion about this months ago when it happened but it sort of cooled off when it turned out it was a nutty actress trying to set up her husband and not the great right wing terrorist hope.

I guess for some the dream dies hard...

Link?

And even if you are right, that still doesn't excuse the other acts of terrorism or attempted acts of terrorism by white American conservatives. My comment still stands about the media's reticence to use the term "terrorism" in such cases.

http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=324356&highlight=ricin&page=5
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=324331&highlight=ricin
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=325329&highlight=ricin

Hey, you even posted in there:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alcoholic Actuary View Post
I can see why someone who might send poison by mail would be opposed to mental health checks and other gun control measures,

but I can't figure out why anyone else would be.

aa

Um, maybe because they know that the moment we implement any kind of background checks, all of our guns will be confiscated and we will come under the thumb of a communist dictatorship like they have in Canada and Europe? Do you truly hate freedom so much that you seriously want this to happen?

The man who sent that letter is obviously a patriotic Real American™. [/conservolibertarian]

Of course some other guy completely owned you:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alcoholic Actuary View Post
I can see why someone who might send poison by mail would be opposed to mental health checks and other gun control measures,

but I can't figure out why anyone else would be.

aa

I bet it was a crazed actress trying to set up her husband because of some sort of marital dispute.

 

[thebeave]

Hey, I was in those old ricin threads too. I didn't think it was a Muslim either. Do I get a prize?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

dismal, it's not nice to disturb Underseer with facts. If even a single fact gets through it would threaten everything he knows.

 

[Underseer]

Sorry for dredging up an old topic. I honestly didn't realize.

Of course some other guy completely owned you:

That's what you think.

Even if she was trying to frame her husband, the fact remains that she expected to get away with it, which in turn means she expected the public to be willing to believe that a conservative would commit an act of terrorism. There have been enough past acts of terrorism by conservatives, that the public would indeed have this expectation, which only serves to emphasize the point: that conservatives do commit acts of terrorism, and that the media doesn't call them out on it.

 

[Bomb#20]

Terrorists are people who try to kill or wound non-combatants for political purposes. Are you suggesting America's drone-strike-instigator-in-chief is a non-combatant?

Thank you for showing that American conservatives are just as likely to make excuses for this sort of thing as Muslims. It would be more convincing if you ended with "Jesus is great!" or something at the end of your rant.

So, having no actual counterargument, you resort to a groundless personal attack. Classy move. The media didn't need an excuse not to call her a terrorist, any more than they needed an excuse not to call Jeff Dahmer a terrorist. Words mean things. What they're in need of an excuse for is calling the people who attacked the USS Cole terrorists.

 

[J842P]

Thank you for showing that American conservatives are just as likely to make excuses for this sort of thing as Muslims. It would be more convincing if you ended with "Jesus is great!" or something at the end of your rant.

So, having no actual counterargument, you resort to a groundless personal attack. Classy move. The media didn't need an excuse not to call her a terrorist, any more than they needed an excuse not to call Jeff Dahmer a terrorist. Words mean things. What they're in need of an excuse for is calling the people who attacked the USS Cole terrorists.

Or for that matter, the people who attacked the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

 

[dismal]

Sorry for dredging up an old topic. I honestly didn't realize.

Of course some other guy completely owned you:

That's what you think.

Even if she was trying to frame her husband, the fact remains that she expected to get away with it, which in turn means she expected the public to be willing to believe that a conservative would commit an act of terrorism. There have been enough past acts of terrorism by conservatives, that the public would indeed have this expectation, which only serves to emphasize the point: that conservatives do commit acts of terrorism, and that the media doesn't call them out on it.

I think what this proves is that some people, in and out of the media, are so desperate to believe in right wing terrorists they invent them even where they do not exist.

As I'm watching that Cenk Uygur clip I'm thinking "holy shit is this tool not aware this was a nutty actress who was trying to set up her husband" then when it became clear he did know that it was more "holy shit this clown is a completely idiotic douchebag, what an asshole".

 

[Bomb#20]

What they're in need of an excuse for is calling the people who attacked the USS Cole terrorists.

Or for that matter, the people who attacked the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

The Pentagon, yes, absolutely.* The World Trade Center, I'm not following. How do you figure that's a military target?

(* Although using a jet full of civilians as your weapon of choice makes the term apply again.)