So my esteemed fellow board members know that I, JB Books, wordsmith extraordinare did not write this...
The Tea Party's Homegrown Terror Blind Spot
by Peter Bienart
Instead of blaming people like Sarah Palin for the attack on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, liberals should target the casual assumption that the only real terrorist threat we face is from jihadist Islamnot good old-fashioned white Americans.
Liberals should stop acting like the Tea Party is guilty of inciting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shooting until proven innocent. Thats unfair. If someone finds evidence that violent anti-government, or anti-democratic, rhetoric helped trigger Jared Lee Loughners shooting spree, then the people making those statements should pay with their political careers. But so far, at least, there is no such evidence. Of course, Sarah Palin should stop using hunting metaphors to discuss her political opponents. She should stop doing that, and a dozen other idiotic things. But just as Tea Partiers are wrong to promiscuously throw around terms like communist and death panels, liberals should avoid promiscuously accusing people of being accessories to attempted murder. Thats too serious a charge to throw around unless you have the goods. I want Barack Obama to derail the congressional Republicans as much as anyone. But not this way.
Candles and flowers are placed outside the office of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona on Jan. 8, 2011 after Giffords and others were shot outside a Safeway grocery store. (Photo: Chris Morrison / AP Photo)
The Giffords shooting doesnt prove that Sarah Palin has blood on her hands. What it does prove is that when it comes to terrorism, people like Sarah Palin have a serious blind spot. On the political right, and at times even the political center, there is a casual assumptionso taken for granted that it is rarely even spokenthat the only terrorist threat America faces is from jihadist Islam. There was a lot of talk a couple of weeks back, youll remember, about a terrorist attack during the holiday season. And theres been a lot of talk in the last couple of years about the threat of homegrown terrorists. Well, weve just experienced a terrorist attack over the holiday season, and it was indeed homegrown. Had the shooters name been Abdul Mohammed, youd be hearing the familiar drumbeat about the need for profiling and the pathologies of Islam. But since his name was Jared Lee Loughner, he gets called mentally unstable; the word terrorist rarely comes up. When are we going to acknowledge that good old-fashioned white Americans are every bit as capable of killing civilians for a political cause as people with brown skin who pray to Allah? Theres a tradition here. Historically, American elites, especially conservative American elites, have tended to reserve the term terrorism for political violence committed by foreigners. In the early 20th century, for instance, there was enormous fear, even hysteria, about the terrorist threat from anarchist and communist immigrants from Eastern or Southern Europe, people like Sacco and Vanzetti. In the aftermath of World War I, large numbers of immigrant radicals were arrested and deported. Nothing similar happened to members of the white, protestant Ku Klux Klan, even though its violence was more widespread.
Similarly today, the media spends the Christmas season worrying how another attack by radical Muslims might undermine President Obamas national-security credentials. But when Jared Lee Loughner shoots 20 people at a Safeway, barely anyone even comments on what it says about the presidents anti-terror bona fides. And yet Loughners attack is, to a significant degree, what American terror looks like. Obviously, jihadists have committed their share of terrorism on American soil in the last couple of decadesfrom the attempted bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 to the 9/11 attacks to Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasans murder of 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009. But there have been at least as many attacks by white Americans angry at their own government or society.
For almost two decades, culminating in 1995, Unabomber Ted Kaczynski sent mail bombs to people he considered complicit in industrial Americas assault on nature. (A surprising amount of recent American terrorism comes from militant environmentalists.) That same year, Timothy McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, the second-largest recent terrorist attack on U.S. soil after 9/11. In 1996, Eric Rudolph bombed the Atlanta Olympics to protest abortion and international socialism.
According to the FBI, opposition to abortion also played a role in the 2001 anthrax attacks (you know, the ones Dick Cheney were sure had been masterminded by Saddam Hussein). In 2009, Wichita, Kansas, abortion doctor George Tiller was murdered. (He had already been shot once, and his clinic had been bombed.) That same year octogenarian neo-Nazi James Wenneker von Brunn shot a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. Last February, a man angry at the federal government flew a small plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas.
When Jared Lee Loughner shoots 20 people at a Safeway, barely anyone even comments on what it says about the presidents anti-terror bona fides.
Its true that none of these incidents rivals 9/11 in scale, but the evidence suggests that al Qaedas U.S. attacks are becoming more and more like those perpetrated by right-wing nutcases like Rudolph or McVeigh. Because increased homeland security has made it harder for jihadist terrorists to get into the United States, and harder for them to conspire, al Qaeda has been forced to rely on lone, poorly trained, assailants like Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, whose attacks, even if successful, cannot kill as many people.
The commentators most worried about jihadist terrorism sometimes say that doesnt matter; even if al Qaeda cant kill many Americans anymore, it can sow panic that costs the U.S. economy billions. But it can sow that panic, in large measure, because of the way those commentators respond. The extent to which Americans fear terrorism has a lot to do with the way the media discusses terrorism, and that discussion differs radically depending on the ethnicity and religion of the terrorist. Perhaps the next time al Qaeda tries something in the U.S., we should all stop, take a deep breath, and pretend its Jared Lee Loughner.
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, is now available from HarperCollins. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook.
The Tea Party's Homegrown Terror Blind Spot
by Peter Bienart
Instead of blaming people like Sarah Palin for the attack on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, liberals should target the casual assumption that the only real terrorist threat we face is from jihadist Islamnot good old-fashioned white Americans.
Liberals should stop acting like the Tea Party is guilty of inciting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shooting until proven innocent. Thats unfair. If someone finds evidence that violent anti-government, or anti-democratic, rhetoric helped trigger Jared Lee Loughners shooting spree, then the people making those statements should pay with their political careers. But so far, at least, there is no such evidence. Of course, Sarah Palin should stop using hunting metaphors to discuss her political opponents. She should stop doing that, and a dozen other idiotic things. But just as Tea Partiers are wrong to promiscuously throw around terms like communist and death panels, liberals should avoid promiscuously accusing people of being accessories to attempted murder. Thats too serious a charge to throw around unless you have the goods. I want Barack Obama to derail the congressional Republicans as much as anyone. But not this way.
Candles and flowers are placed outside the office of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona on Jan. 8, 2011 after Giffords and others were shot outside a Safeway grocery store. (Photo: Chris Morrison / AP Photo)
The Giffords shooting doesnt prove that Sarah Palin has blood on her hands. What it does prove is that when it comes to terrorism, people like Sarah Palin have a serious blind spot. On the political right, and at times even the political center, there is a casual assumptionso taken for granted that it is rarely even spokenthat the only terrorist threat America faces is from jihadist Islam. There was a lot of talk a couple of weeks back, youll remember, about a terrorist attack during the holiday season. And theres been a lot of talk in the last couple of years about the threat of homegrown terrorists. Well, weve just experienced a terrorist attack over the holiday season, and it was indeed homegrown. Had the shooters name been Abdul Mohammed, youd be hearing the familiar drumbeat about the need for profiling and the pathologies of Islam. But since his name was Jared Lee Loughner, he gets called mentally unstable; the word terrorist rarely comes up. When are we going to acknowledge that good old-fashioned white Americans are every bit as capable of killing civilians for a political cause as people with brown skin who pray to Allah? Theres a tradition here. Historically, American elites, especially conservative American elites, have tended to reserve the term terrorism for political violence committed by foreigners. In the early 20th century, for instance, there was enormous fear, even hysteria, about the terrorist threat from anarchist and communist immigrants from Eastern or Southern Europe, people like Sacco and Vanzetti. In the aftermath of World War I, large numbers of immigrant radicals were arrested and deported. Nothing similar happened to members of the white, protestant Ku Klux Klan, even though its violence was more widespread.
Similarly today, the media spends the Christmas season worrying how another attack by radical Muslims might undermine President Obamas national-security credentials. But when Jared Lee Loughner shoots 20 people at a Safeway, barely anyone even comments on what it says about the presidents anti-terror bona fides. And yet Loughners attack is, to a significant degree, what American terror looks like. Obviously, jihadists have committed their share of terrorism on American soil in the last couple of decadesfrom the attempted bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 to the 9/11 attacks to Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasans murder of 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009. But there have been at least as many attacks by white Americans angry at their own government or society.
For almost two decades, culminating in 1995, Unabomber Ted Kaczynski sent mail bombs to people he considered complicit in industrial Americas assault on nature. (A surprising amount of recent American terrorism comes from militant environmentalists.) That same year, Timothy McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, the second-largest recent terrorist attack on U.S. soil after 9/11. In 1996, Eric Rudolph bombed the Atlanta Olympics to protest abortion and international socialism.
According to the FBI, opposition to abortion also played a role in the 2001 anthrax attacks (you know, the ones Dick Cheney were sure had been masterminded by Saddam Hussein). In 2009, Wichita, Kansas, abortion doctor George Tiller was murdered. (He had already been shot once, and his clinic had been bombed.) That same year octogenarian neo-Nazi James Wenneker von Brunn shot a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. Last February, a man angry at the federal government flew a small plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas.
When Jared Lee Loughner shoots 20 people at a Safeway, barely anyone even comments on what it says about the presidents anti-terror bona fides.
Its true that none of these incidents rivals 9/11 in scale, but the evidence suggests that al Qaedas U.S. attacks are becoming more and more like those perpetrated by right-wing nutcases like Rudolph or McVeigh. Because increased homeland security has made it harder for jihadist terrorists to get into the United States, and harder for them to conspire, al Qaeda has been forced to rely on lone, poorly trained, assailants like Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, whose attacks, even if successful, cannot kill as many people.
The commentators most worried about jihadist terrorism sometimes say that doesnt matter; even if al Qaeda cant kill many Americans anymore, it can sow panic that costs the U.S. economy billions. But it can sow that panic, in large measure, because of the way those commentators respond. The extent to which Americans fear terrorism has a lot to do with the way the media discusses terrorism, and that discussion differs radically depending on the ethnicity and religion of the terrorist. Perhaps the next time al Qaeda tries something in the U.S., we should all stop, take a deep breath, and pretend its Jared Lee Loughner.
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, is now available from HarperCollins. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook.
