A lot of heated rhetoric surrounding the Austin bomber--who thankfully won't be hurting anyone anymore--and whether or not he was a terrorist. I teach classes on terrorism, and here's a thread why it's unclear (based on what we know now) and why the classification matters. 1/x
-
-
That being said, I share the criticisms many have against Trump and his spokespeople who insist the Austin bombings have no connection to terrorism. We've seen them jump to that conclusion with nonwhite killers (especially Muslims), and they likely would've done so here. 6/x
Show this thread -
The evidence is clear: America has a problem with white nationalist terrorism. As
@peterwsinger has pointed out, more Americans were killed in the last decade by white nationalist terrorism than Islamic terrorism. Past time we took it seriously as a national security problem. 7/xShow this thread -
Trump has directed national counterterrorism resources away from white nationalism and focused them entirely on jihadism. He has downplayed or ignored the former while playing up the latter. But both threaten Americans, and both deserve counterterrorism attention. 8/x
Show this thread -
The Austin bomber was a young white man and the two people he killed were both black, suggesting it may have been racially-motivated terrorism. Perhaps he was part of the white nationalist movement. But we do not have sufficient evidence yet to reach that conclusion. 9/x
Show this thread -
Just because other people misuse the word terrorist to fearmonger with the worst form of identity politics doesn't mean you should too. Even (especially) if the person misusing the word is the president of the United States. (END)
Show this thread -
UPDATE: Police say the Austin bomber left a 25-minute video confession on his cell phone. Describes bombs' construction in detail, but they still don't know his motive. That indicates it's probably not terrorism. If he was trying to make a political point, he'd do it there. u1/x
Show this thread -
Charleston church shooter described hoping to ignite race war in online videos. San Bernardino attackers pledged allegiance to ISIS on Facebook. Bin Laden formally declared war. McVeigh wrote letters. Because their attack is political, terrorists want people to know why. u2/x
Show this thread -
Austin bomber took the time to make a 25-minute video, but didn't include a political statement. When it comes to political views, we know little. Reports say he wrote a blog post in 2012 opposing gay marriage and abortion. That tells us nothing about why he sent the bombs. u3/x
Show this thread -
More could emerge. But based on what we know now, Austin bomber was a serial killer, not a terrorist. The distinction matters because strategies to stop them are different. Politics plays a role in terrorism, which means it is, in part, a political/national security problem. u4/x
Show this thread -
If you're pointing out that many, including Trump, would jump to conclusions and incorrectly label the Austin bomber a terrorist if he were Muslim, you're right. And that's a problem. But the solution isn't incorrectly labeling him a terrorist because he's not Muslim (END UPDATE)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A bomber that can paralyze a city like Austin is more than likely a terrorist.pic.twitter.com/dxURPxXDRx
-
Not necessarily. The DC sniper had a similar effect, over a longer amount of time, and was trying to extort money. Son of Sam in NY is another non-terrorism example. Not saying Austin bomber is definitely not a terrorist. Just that we need to know more.
-
DC sniper really was paralyzing. Millions of people changed their habits and schedules. Every time there was a shooting, there’d be traffic jams 10 miles in every direction. I kinda suspect it’d be called terrorism now for no other reason than the guy’s name was Muhammad.
-
It was crazy. The sniper attacks lasted about as long as the Austin bombings (3 weeks) and killed more people (10 compared to 2). You're probably right that the attacks would get called terrorism due to Muhammad's name. But it wasn't. They demanded $10m. Criminal, not political.
-
I had to look it up just now to check that it was really less than a month. It felt much longer.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm no expert in Criminology, but I once read that all serial killers are by nature, sexual criminals. Ted Bundy raped the corpses of his victims. Even serial killers who didn't raped their victims, they often fantasized/masturbated before/after killing people.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Great thread, but did you have to bring Ted Cruz into this?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.