tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5448657.post8504536729543339896..comments2023-09-30T08:07:26.165-04:00Comments on Mystical Politics: Terrorist attack in Austin, TXRebeccahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17626228106192215280noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5448657.post-90082352393985432102010-02-27T14:48:55.562-05:002010-02-27T14:48:55.562-05:00Rebecca,
I read this interest post by Lee Harris,...Rebecca,<br /><br />I read this interest <a href="http://www.lee-harris.org/6954/attention-must-be-paid" rel="nofollow">post</a> by Lee Harris, who has written a highly acclaimed - and, I might add, an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/06/arts/06conn.html?pagewanted=print" rel="nofollow">interesting</a>, well written and disturbing - book which is really a very long essay. His writing is akin, in readability, to those of Paul Berman although Harris has a very different point of view. Whether or not we might remotely agree with his point of view, he is certainly rather brilliant.<br /><br />As for the article he wrote about the Texas airplane killer, he places the Texas attack outside of left or right wing violence. He, however, sees this as a wake-up call for the political system, which is faced with something rather new and deep seated, something that may have legs, violent legs at that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5448657.post-77561285249665774202010-02-20T17:47:13.817-05:002010-02-20T17:47:13.817-05:00You're right of course, but I think this is a ...You're right of course, but I think this is a big blind spot on the part of both the press and the government. I was quite appalled when the attack on the El Al counter at LAX wasn't labeled terrorism by the police.Rebeccahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626228106192215280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5448657.post-72797999076312457752010-02-20T10:26:38.305-05:002010-02-20T10:26:38.305-05:00Rebecca,
You write: "Can anyone doubt that i...Rebecca,<br /><br />You write: "Can anyone doubt that if this plane had been piloted into a federal building by a Muslim angry at the U.S. government for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, CNN and all other news media would be calling it a terrorist attack?"<br /><br />While I certain agree with your view that the attack has all the markings of a terrorist attack, the press has, in fact, not consistently termed attacks by single persons as terrorist attacks. <br /><br />And, that has been the case even with people of Muslim background. Remember the incident at LA-X some years ago when a Muslim man - I believe an Egyptian - shot up the El Al counter? It was a clear terrorist attack. The same for the incident at the Seattle Jewish center. The press treated these incidents as something else. <br /><br />More interestingly, the press insanely resisted calling the recent, well planned Ft. Hood attack by Dr. Hasan who was clearly religio-ideologically driven. That led to quite a stir since it was rather obviously an act of terrorism, whether or not the man was also a loony-tune. Likely, the man who just now flew a plane into that building was also nuts. <br /><br />So, I think you are not be careful in your thinking on this issue. The press has typically avoided calling most attacks - even where there is no other reasonable interpretation - terrorism. The press even resisted calling the attackers who committed the horrors in Mumbai Muslim and did not think the attack their on the Chabad Center was chosen because of the religion of the Chabad organization. C'est la vie. The press has its own agenda and why it does what it does is often driven more by business needs, politics, public relations, etc., than efforts to gather and report news. <br /><br />I might add, I inquired with a major newspaper why papers stopped calling terrorists by the name "terrorists." I was told - and this was before the adoption of the word "militant" was widely criticized and a public relations version of the reason began to circulate - that reporters who did not call terrorists "terrorist" but, instead, "militants" were given better access terrorist groups. I also heard the same thing said on the radio - again, before the cover story was developed that the label is more accurate. And, the papers do know the difference. The BBC and other British news sources, immediately after the London subway bombing, called the attackers terrorists and then, some hours later, changed the term to militants. <br /><br />Now, it seems to me that when a person flies a plane into a building to destroy the building if not also the people that may be inside, the person is a terrorist and the attack is a terrorist attack. But, the press has been inconsistent with the matter, as has been the government.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com