© AP/David Longstreath
There is a double standard: White terrorists are dealt with as lone wolves, Islamists are existential threatsAs we now move into the official Political Aftermath period of the Boston bombing - the period that will determine the long-term legislative fallout of the atrocity - the dynamics of privilege will undoubtedly influence the nation's collective reaction to the attacks. That's because privilege tends to determine: 1) which groups are - and are not - collectively denigrated or targeted for the unlawful actions of individuals; and 2) how big and politically game-changing the overall reaction ends up being.
This has been most obvious in the context of recent mass shootings. In those awful episodes, a religious or ethnic minority group lacking such privilege would likely be collectively slandered and/or targeted with surveillance or profiling (or worse) if some of its individuals comprised most of the mass shooters. However,
white male privilege means white men are not collectively denigrated/targeted for those shootings - even though most come at the hands of white dudes.
Likewise, in the context of terrorist attacks, such privilege means white non-Islamic terrorists are typically portrayed not as representative of whole groups or ideologies, but as "lone wolf" threats to be dealt with as isolated law enforcement matters. Meanwhile, non-white or developing-world terrorism suspects are often reflexively portrayed as representative of larger conspiracies, ideologies and religions that must be dealt with as systemic threats - the kind potentially requiring everything from law enforcement action to military operations to civil liberties legislation to foreign policy shifts.
"
White privilege is knowing that even if the bomber turns out to be white, no one will call for your group to be profiled as terrorists as a result, subjected to special screening or threatened with deportation,"
writes author Tim Wise. "White privilege is knowing that if this bomber turns out to be white,
the United States government will not bomb whatever corn field or mountain town or stale suburb from which said bomber came, just to ensure that others like him or her don't get any ideas. And if he turns out to be a member of the Irish Republican Army we won't bomb Dublin. And if he's an Italian-American Catholic we won't bomb the Vatican."
Because of these undeniable and pervasive double standards, the specific identity of the Boston Marathon bomber (or bombers) is not some minor detail - it will almost certainly dictate what kind of governmental, political and societal response we see in the coming weeks. That means regardless of your particular party affiliation, if you care about everything from stopping war to reducing the defense budget to protecting civil liberties to passing immigration reform, you should hope the bomber was a white domestic terrorist. Why? Because only in that case will privilege work to prevent the Boston attack from potentially undermining progress on those other issues.
To know that's true is to simply consider how America reacts to different kinds of terrorism.
Though
FBI data show fewer terrorist plots involving Muslims than terrorist plots involving non-Muslims, America has mobilized a full-on war effort exclusively against the prospect of Islamic terrorism. Indeed, the moniker "War on Terrorism" has come to specifically mean "War on Islamic Terrorism," involving everything from new laws like the Patriot Act, to a
new torture regime, to new federal agencies like the Transportation Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security, to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to
mass surveillance of Muslim communities.
By contrast, even though America has seen a
consistent barrage of attacks from domestic non-Islamic terrorists, the privilege and double standards baked into our national security ideologies means those attacks have resulted in no systemic action of the scope marshaled against foreign terrorists. In fact, it has been quite the opposite -
according to Darryl Johnson, the senior domestic terrorism analyst at the Department of Homeland Security, the conservative movement backlash to merely reporting the rising threat of such domestic terrorism resulted in DHS seriously curtailing its initiatives against that particular threat. (Irony alert: When it comes specifically to fighting white non-Muslim domestic terrorists, the right seems to now support the very doctrine it criticized Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry for
articulating - the doctrine that sees fighting terrorism as primarily "an intelligence-gathering, law-enforcement, public-diplomacy effort" and not something more systemic.)
Enter the Boston bombing. Coming at the very moment the U.S. government is
planning to withdraw from Afghanistan,
considering cuts to the Pentagon budget,
discussing civil liberties principles and debating landmark immigration legislation, the attack could easily become the fulcrum of all of those contentious policy debates - that is, depending on the demographic profile of the assailant.
If recent history is any guide, if the bomber ends up being a white anti-government extremist, white privilege will likely mean the attack is portrayed as just an isolated incident - one that has no bearing on any larger policy debates. Put another way, white privilege will work to not only insulate whites from collective blame, but also to insulate the political debate from any fallout from the attack.
It will probably be much different if the bomber ends up being a Muslim and/or a foreigner from the developing world. As we know from our own history, when those kind of individuals break laws in such a high-profile way, America often cites them as both proof that entire demographic groups must be targeted, and that therefore a more systemic response is warranted. At that point, it's easy to imagine conservatives citing Boston as a reason to block immigration reform defense spending cuts and the Afghan War withdrawal and to further expand surveillance and other encroachments on civil liberties.
If that sounds hard to believe, just look at
yesterday's comments by right-wing radio host Laura Ingraham, whose talking points often become Republican Party doctrine. Though authorities haven't even identified a suspect in the Boston attack, she (
like other conservatives) seems to already assume the assailant is foreign, and is consequently citing the attack as rationale to slam the immigration reform bill.
The same Laura Ingraham, of course, was one of the leading voices
criticizing the Department of Homeland Security for daring to even report on right-wing domestic terrorism. In that sense, she perfectly embodies the double standard that, more than anything, will determine the long-term political impact of the Boston bombing.
Typical MSM BS as the 'Official Story' Ramps Up:
Above “article” reeks of Acceptance of "Official Versions" of Previous Events such as:
- McVeigh & OKC (No mention of all the BS, Unexploded Ordnance, John Doe 2, there)
- 9/11: OBL in a Cave did it, etc. etc.
It further, both implicitly and explicitly, ‘sells’ the classic - and painfully false - Left/Liberal/Democrats honestly and really fighting the Right/Conservative/Republicans, with America's Current President being, by default, the true, honest and real "Leader of the Free World," and all these public ‘servants’ having noble aspirations, etc. No false flag or PTB discussions here, baby!! Indeed, the very title includes the implication that we "got our perpetrators” in OKC and 9/11, and we will “get ‘em here, too!” Without the ongoing success of that left v. right scam, neither OKC, nor 9/11 would have happened.
As to the article’s primary focus on persecuted Muslims and minorities, I’m obliged to begin with the fact that I emphathize on that plight, and that’s an understatement. Indeed, in Florida, for example, ask any Black Man what DWB is and he'll say, "Driving While Black." At the same time, however, the article appears to be a rather subtly crafted effort of distraction by focusing on a “hot button,” but clearly secondary, issue - ( i.e., persecution as a result of 9/11, et al.) - rather than the incredibly more Important and Urgent Issue re Boston: acquiring and proving as many true facts as possible- and right now while they’re fresh, in an effort to determine: “What REALLY happened in Boston’s act of terror and Who REALLY did it.?” a/k/a THE PRIMARY ISSUE - THE CAUSE!* Such distractive “articles,’ are a standard propaganda technique intended to cause dissention in any group of readers, (such as SOTTites); via tactics of “divide & conquer,” and, failing that, at least confusing the issues, wasting time, and muddying the waters, especially RIGHT NOW!**
This is A PRIMARY MSM technique after a false flag. For example, during that critical period of confusion immediately after 9/11, and when NO fact-based conclusions about the event could even have hoped to have been known, we nevertheless saw - thanks to that "New Pearl Harbor" (TM - PNAC) - the 10-years-in-drafting-Patriosh*t act rammed down America's throats by "our" government using as their excuse their knowingly false fear of being called "soft on terror," by the likes of the above author.
Also, right now, the same is going on regarding Sandy Hook Line & Sinker. Who were the three arrested men in camo? How did that kid become such an effective killer in such a short time? All the rounds fired were RIFLE ROUNDS; 5.56mm/.223 Cal (standard US & NATO round), etc. BUT the kid only had pistols. Nevertheless the laws are being changed regarding rifles (and pistols, too, of course.) And all this is being done BEFORE the facts are even known, and while articles like the above, by division, confusion and delay, help the “official story.” coagulate and congeal into the raw and rancid evil sewage of lies it will be, and all too soon, I dare say.
What has happened since 9/11 is that harrassment and surveillance of EVERYONE by the “authorities” has increased and and EVERYONE'S RIGHTS have BEEN REDUCED and are being destroyed. Moreover, in order to further secure its malignant foothold, our growing Fascist state requires that people continue to dumbly*** acquiesce in the ‘official’ story and its underlying false left/right presumption that “Our public servants are good people fighting for us,” and also, that they, (the MSM) “are telling you the truth!!” THAT is EXACTLY what the above ‘article’ does and WHY it should not stain the pages of SOTT.
Just one example: we now have, due to folks buying official-stories, as above, everyday stops and gropes and sexual assaults (supposedly for preventing terror, of course, yet which has not prevented a single act of terror, aside from that terror of waiting in line at the airport. Which is that real agenda: the limbic/behavioral re-programming and modification needed from subjects of a police state.) You realize that if 65% of America is White then it's likely 75% of flyers are White. This is due to economic/social inequities that preexisted and unsurprisingly postexist 9/11. And just regarding that one example, we’ve had millions of those assaults and over three thousand additional traffic deaths of Americans, who’d prefer that risk to grope/rape.
Beyond aquiring the truth behind Boston, another critical matter is if and how we should insistently and consistently attempt to WAKE UP the populace as to the TRUTH of the Psychopathic PTB, (I say ‘yes and I’m trying right here), or if we instead allow them to sleep comfy in their acceptance of the big lies, because they wasted some time reading this supposedly “liberal” article. (And then they’ll claim they understand and read SOTT! Ha!) No doubt, thanks to “Journalist” Sirota, and countless others of his ilk, many, many idiots will read such tripe, think themselves informed, and close their mind to any real analysis/awakening, etc.- a mindset once best expressed by Barbara Bush*t: “'Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? It's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?'
Folks, if we don’t wake them up, the battle’s lost. Moreover, if one is TRULY concerned with the plight of minorities, I promise you they’ll even be worse off the further down the road to fascism that AmeriKa goes.
As to the Title’s expressed hope, [and ignoring its over racism - I mean, could or would he write ANY other ethnicity as his hope? Of course not. There’d be hell to pay. This is the same logic behind fact that white males can’t be victims of hate crimes.]; again, as to his expressed ‘hope,’ in truth, it IS quite likely that the event WAS caused by a GROUP of (mostly) White American Males, (&/or UK/Israelis) but they are those of the type that Mr. Sirota is not allowed to write about. Indeed, I would not be surprised at all to learn - 25 years hence - that either he, his editor, and/or publisher, are/were paid by, or get/got ”access” to, the PTB via some current version of Operation Mockingbird.
In sum, I'm disappointed to even see SOTT link this disinformational/distractional piece of subtle propaganda, with its inevitable result of simply obfuscating the MOST important issues - the Truth of what happened in Boston and the destruction of America to Amerika going on RIGHT NOW!
R.C.
P.s., Wanna bet that the author hated Bush for War, Gitmo and Torture, voted for Obysmal . . twice . . . and now "understands" the need for those wars, such torture and execution of Americans by drone as necessary when done by Obysmal?
* (IMHO, at present, the odds of it being a false flag - as opposed to whatever the “official story’ will conclude - are 94% and increasing.)
** It’s sad that even here, in order to make any such point, one must begin with a "politically correct" concept to avoid most readers’ programming of a lifetime. We all have long been already programmed to jump in on such issues - because while such discrimination still exists and is a serious concern, it clearly is NOT the REAL issue at stake regarding Boston. And that self-same programming is exactly why the likely White Guy Terrorist Assh*les False Flag Alphabet-Agency Contractors absolutely LOVE it when racism is brought in on a subject to cloud it further, and avoid looking at the critical facts. [It’s called “Playing the Race Card.” Sound familiar?]
Such programming routinely results in good intelligent souls being distracted from the matter properly at hand. And if that doesn’t happen, one can be sure to have some shill hop in with some more standard propaganda techniques, and call the writer "closet racist," “White Supremacist,” or "Anti-Semite," etc. etc. (Or perhaps even a "Self-Hating Black Man" or "Self-Hating Jew," - if those might apply - though they're all ad hominem and irrelevant to the point at hand.) Such is the distraction this article aims to “stir up.” (I guess it even got me, eh?)
As to minorities (and who ain’t one, anyway?) their plight was getting better all the way through the end of Carter's presidency. I remember asking my dad - on a trip to SC in 1965 at the age of 7 - "Why, when both were the same dull-drab-green, did that water fountain have a sign saying it was 'colored'?"
Times HAD improved quite a bit since then and were continuing; at least until the Bush*ts got in power. It’s been all Bush*t (& Bush*t/Authoritarian-Coopted) politics since then. No transition to fascism has ever occurred overnight. But now, thanks to distractions like the above article, and other pathological PTB tactics, we have a Military/Industrial/Law Creation/Enforcement & Punishment Complex that Hitler would have had wet dreams about.
*** double meaning intended.
RC