Thread: Apparently, White America is the new terrorist.

I love you more Oneironaut.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Fuck the US government.

"I agree that everybody is overly alarmist about terrorism, but it's a reality that over the last 50 years, islamic groups have been responsible for an overwhelming majority of high profile global terrorism. It's something the whole muslim community will have to live with for a long time, in the same way that Germans are associated with Nazis and Native Americans with scalping savages.

I think the biggest reason that islamic groups come up so often is because they attack everywhere. The IRA doesn't attack Spain and the Red Brigade doesn't take on Indonesia, but Islamic groups are going after everybody, which is an easy way to get international attention."



that depends on what your definition of terrorism is of course. if it was measured in civilian casualties then Muslims are not the overwhelming offenders. If its measured in violence unsanctioned by the west then yes i agree.

The subject of terrorism, in my opinion has become a tool of distraction. Unite everyone in the distraction of the fact that no one truly has "rights" under these systems. That piece by piece, liberties are being stripped away, unconstitutional acts and laws are being passed, people are essentially being kidnapped and locked up for no reason, (see the "patriot" and "victory" acts), having their homes ransacked, items destroyed, confiscated, family members kept in the dark about it all, all in the name of "fighting terrorism." In my opinion, it's no accident that this intangible enemy has been created.

Perhaps that's largely why this video was not race-specific. That's the point. Anyone could be a terrorist, so BE AFRAID! Call the police about that "suspicious individual" in the mall! As long as we all have a common enemy, we won't pay attention to the fact that the real enemy is the tightening grip of over-powered, fear mongering crazy people participating in passing all of these ridiculous laws and acts which violate our "rights" that we don't really have anyway. Calling the enemy "the terrorists" just takes away that pesky problem of having to deal with the political repercussions of accusing a specific group of people, or a nation of terrorism. It's genius.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

If not, then try making a point without being a douche about it. Really. Give it a shot. It's It's kind of liberating.

A great number of Xei's responses to posts could easily be considered to be unpleasant, condescending, and antagonistic. I don't feel that the one you're referring to fits those descriptions. Then again, it's all about frame of mind. My thought is, if his response is unpleasant, ignore the unpleasantness in the response, and just reply to the point made neutrally. Or politely point out that it isn't necessary to be condescending. It's much more effective than pointing it out in a counter-antagonistic way. That will only produce more condescension. Every time, I guarantee you. The alternative may produce courtesy, or it may not. But believe it or not, I've seen Xei appologize before, in a way. :p

Originally Posted by Rainman

A great number of Xei's responses to posts could easily be considered to be unpleasant, condescending, and antagonistic. I don't feel that the one you're referring to fits those descriptions. Then again, it's all about frame of mind. My thought is, if his response is unpleasant, ignore the unpleasantness in the response, and just reply to the point made neutrally. Or politely point out that it isn't necessary to be condescending. It's much more effective than pointing it out in a counter-antagonistic way. That will only produce more condescension. Every time, I guarantee you. The alternative may produce courtesy, or it may not. But believe it or not, I've seen Xei appologize before, in a way. :p

Fair enough. We may disagree as to whether or not what Xei said was antagonistic (though I wasn't really just talking about that one quote), but you do have a point.

Withdrawn...

...kind of... Lol.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

WHOA. Hold up. Are you serious??

Um... yes?

O, your thread is called 'white America is the new terrorist'. What do you think it looks like?

You did not make a joke out of it. Nobody else thought you were making a joke out of it. The entire OP except the first one or two lines looks like it is about the racial issue and your 'suspicions'. You just dedicated another half a paragraph to it.

What are you objecting about? Most of the terrorists were white. There was a black guy, a hispanic looking guy, and an asian guy, too. So unless you're upset about under representation of the natives or something, your point was that there weren't any arabic terrorists. Right? What's the problem? This is what you were talking about.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

It shows absolutely no awareness of the possibility of being wrong. It's fun for show, but is that really how you feel, Xei? That people who may question the benevolence of government, from time to time (even on such obvious [to you] topics as this), are insane?

Now I'm thinking you can't have given my posts anything more than a cursory glance. I was objecting on the basis of your questioning the government, was I? This is seriously an intellectually honest thing to say? Right, congratulations on your outstanding bravery and scepticism, perhaps one day I'll have it in me too, to question the benevolence of the government and not reject anything on the sole basis that it contradicts it.

Here's the point. Even if it's a ridiculous piece of propaganda, just like virtually all media about terrorism: if that piece of propaganda succeeds in annoying you, or even making you laugh, because there aren't any arabic terrorists in it, then that is a victory for the propagandists. The link in your mind is there, and is strong enough to elicit a response. You can't complain that the entire basis of the propaganda is ridiculous and then take issue with the details. And hey; perhaps this sleight of hand IS the mysterious ulterior motive, and you've fallen for it. Just look at how many people in the YouTube comments are ranting about the lack of arabs, too (not implying you were).

Did you see the news channels covering the Norwegian terrorism yesterday? It was ridiculous. All day, the reporting was about Al Qaeda, how this fits their modus operandi, their motives, how exactly foreign policy should reflect this new attack by the Muslims, etc. etc. etc. The journalists, the 'expert interviewees'; everybody, despite zero evidence for that. Just check out the thread in the news section. When the gunman started firing on the governmental youth camp it should have been patent that this was a domestic issue, but the news gave virtually no credence to this angle and kept talking about Muslims. A total lack of objectivity or common sense. When multiple eyewitness accounts were saying the man looked Norwegian, still no change. When the police had arrested a Norwegian national with no known terrorist links, I saw somebody in the studio practicably say out loud, 'well, disregard that', and they kept on talking about the Muslims!

THIS is the real, tangible result of the attitude I delineated above.

Oh, and do you who it's looking like the terrorist was? He's a right wing, fundamental Christian, Norwegian national. What was his problem? Too many Muslims in his country.

You couldn't make it up.

I don't want white americans to be the new terrorists, and I don't want muslims to be the old ones.

The "please keep a close watch on others" message (from the government no less) seems vaguely familiar...

Terrorists are the new communists.

Also, is this ad really real? Was it on tv?

If it's the same thing we have here called crime stoppers, they just keep all the information given to them.
If someone commits a crime, they use the information in the court case. And crime stoppers gets paid for the information they've collected.
It's not actually used to catch anybody.

Europol Report: All Terrorists are Muslims...Except the 99.6% that Aren't | loonwatch.com

official FBI records show that only 6% of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil from 1980 to 2005 were carried out by Islamic extremists. The remaining 94% were from other groups (42% from Latinos, 24% from extreme left wing groups, 7% from extremist Jews, 5% from communists, and 16% from all other groups).

But why are there no brown people in my propaganda? It's hilarious! Why is the government doing this?

I mean, you probably should report suspicious activity. But I just think it's weird that they're reminding you to do that.

If I was leaving work, and I saw some odd shit, of course I'd tell someone. That's just common sense. But if my managers every day kept telling me to report anything out of the ordinary, it'd seem like they expect something's gonna go down.

As far as why this video was released, it's probably because of Norway. The US wanted to do something besides standing around picking at their balls. Oh well. I can guarantee you that no more than 10% of the population will even know this video exists.

No.. my hubby about me about this a few months ago. Way before Norway.

This thread is so full of dumb assumptions and horrible misinformation.

Originally Posted by tommo

This thread is so full of dumb assumptions and horrible misinformation.

?

Welp. I haven't heard of the video till now, and nobody I know IRL has either so...

The government is shit at advertising?

Originally Posted by Xei

Um... yes?

O, your thread is called 'white America is the new terrorist'. What do you think it looks like?

You did not make a joke out of it. Nobody else thought you were making a joke out of it. The entire OP except the first one or two lines looks like it is about the racial issue and your 'suspicions'. You just dedicated another half a paragraph to it.

What are you objecting about? Most of the terrorists were white. There was a black guy, a hispanic looking guy, and an asian guy, too. So unless you're upset about under representation of the natives or something, your point was that there weren't any arabic terrorists. Right? What's the problem? This is what you were talking about.

I'm not objecting to anything. My point was that I thought it was funny (not 'funny "ha ha,"' but peculiar). But you make it sound like I'm crying out injustice or something. Like I'm outraged by it. I thought it was peculiar, due to the previous mainstream portrayal of the overwhelming majority of terrorists being Muslim. It was a very radical change from what I'm used to seeing. However, when I spoke about this being a 'propaganda piece', I am speaking about the 'paranoia/snitching' concept. Maybe it wasn't too clear in my OP.

Originally Posted by Xei

Now I'm thinking you can't have given my posts anything more than a cursory glance. I was objecting on the basis of your questioning the government, was I? This is seriously an intellectually honest thing to say?

I believe that you implied it, with your "what's the conspiracy theory today?" Out of context, it's extremely questionable, but given the way I've seen you respond to like subjects, the idea that you implied it is not exactly ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Xei

Right, congratulations on your outstanding bravery and scepticism, perhaps one day I'll have it in me too, to question the benevolence of the government and not reject anything on the sole basis that it contradicts it.

Looks like you're being sarcastic, as usual, but I can't really tell (and it could easily be explained away as benign), so I won't respond to it.

Originally Posted by Xei

Here's the point. Even if it's a ridiculous piece of propaganda, just like virtually all media about terrorism: if that piece of propaganda succeeds in annoying you, or even making you laugh, because there aren't any arabic terrorists in it, then that is a victory for the propagandists. The link in your mind is there, and is strong enough to elicit a response. You can't complain that the entire basis of the propaganda is ridiculous and then take issue with the details.

Well of course the link is there. The majority of terrorist portrayal in the last few years (at least in my experience) have been about Islamic extremism. So when the machine seems to practically stop on a dime and throw out such over-compensation, it struck me as incredibly awkward.

Originally Posted by Xei

And hey; perhaps this sleight of hand IS the mysterious ulterior motive, and you've fallen for it. Just look at how many people in the YouTube comments are ranting about the lack of arabs, too (not implying you were).

Is this not a contradiction?

Originally Posted by Xei

Did you see the news channels covering the Norwegian terrorism yesterday? It was ridiculous. All day, the reporting was about Al Qaeda, how this fits their modus operandi, their motives, how exactly foreign policy should reflect this new attack by the Muslims, etc. etc. etc. The journalists, the 'expert interviewees'; everybody, despite zero evidence for that. Just check out the thread in the news section. When the gunman started firing on the governmental youth camp it should have been patent that this was a domestic issue, but the news gave virtually no credence to this angle and kept talking about Muslims. A total lack of objectivity or common sense. When multiple eyewitness accounts were saying the man looked Norwegian, still no change. When the police had arrested a Norwegian national with no known terrorist links, I saw somebody in the studio practicably say out loud, 'well, disregard that', and they kept on talking about the Muslims!

That is, more-or-less, the point I'm making. The perception of terrorism, fed through the mainstream, has been overwhelmingly islamophobic. That is exactly what I'm saying. So when I see them mainstream putting out something so contradictory to their usual trends, I think it elicits a (reasonable) 'wtf?' response. The thing is, before I saw the chart that you posted after your last reply to me, I actually did not realize that the statistics were stacked so that attacks by Muslims were so much in the minority. My own ignorance, I admit. However, it goes to illustrate why I have such a distaste for your 'insight,' in that you couldn't even post that without some douchey, sarcastic remark behind it.

But anyway, thanks for the perspective (graph). Like I said before, I believe that what earlier posters had suggested was the most logical explanation. It's just interesting to note how many other people were able to make the same point without being asshats about it. (And you even applauded your own condescension, for the record.)

Whatever, tho'.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I think the biggest reason that islamic groups come up so often is because they attack everywhere. The IRA doesn't attack Spain and the Red Brigade doesn't take on Indonesia, but Islamic groups are going after everybody, which is an easy way to get international attention.

That is not entirely true. I do not, I repeat, do not condone the murder of innocent people anywhere but the following made me think very, very deeply about cause and effect.

'Before I begin, I say to you that security is an indispensable pillar of human life and that free men do not forfeit their security, contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom.

If so, then let him explain to us why we don't strike for example - Sweden? And we know that freedom-haters don't possess defiant spirits like those of the 19 - may Allah have mercy on them.

No, we fight because we are free men who don't sleep under oppression. We want to restore freedom to our nation, just as you lay waste to our nation. So shall we lay waste to yours.

No one except a dumb thief plays with the security of others and then makes himself believe he will be secure. Whereas thinking people, when disaster strikes, make it their priority to look for its causes, in order to prevent it happening again.

But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th, Bush is still engaged in distortion, deception and hiding from you the real causes. And thus, the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.

So I shall talk to you about the story behind those events and shall tell you truthfully about the moments in which the decision was taken, for you to consider.

I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind.

The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.

I couldn't forget those moving scenes, blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses destroyed along with their occupants and high rises demolished over their residents, rockets raining down on our home without mercy.

The situation was like a crocodile meeting a helpless child, powerless except for his screams. Does the crocodile understand a conversation that doesn't include a weapon? And the whole world saw and heard but it didn't respond.

In those difficult moments many hard-to-describe ideas bubbled in my soul, but in the end they produced an intense feeling of rejection of tyranny, and gave birth to a strong resolve to punish the oppressors.

And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children.

And that day, it was confirmed to me that oppression and the intentional killing of innocent women and children is a deliberate American policy. Destruction is freedom and democracy, while resistance is terrorism and intolerance.'

- Osama bin Mohammed bin Laden

This thread needs some knowledge, let me see if I can find that one TED talk I saw...

FOUND IT

Maajid Nawaz: A global culture to fight extremism | Video on TED.com

Basically extremist organizations are out-evolving democratic culture because they are part of a Behavioral Paradigm while democratic culture is still stuck on an older paradigm based on National Legitimization. On all communication technology and social integration forefronts, the extremists are capitalizing first. The lecture is mostly about trying to evolve democratic culture so its playing in the same field as extremist organizations (as a Social Movement, which I believe Anonymous is necessary for). However, for me the take away aspect relative to this thread is the following



These are the world terror networks. White Christian Fascist is one. While the OPs vid is obvious propaganda meant to intimidate people into creating a self-surveillance population, a very specific and real threat of terrorism now exists in the US an EU from White Christan Fascists.