Because, You Know, He’s White

March 22, 2018 By: Juanita Jean Herownself Category: Uncategorized

Texas congressfool Mike McCaul, best known for marrying the fabulously wealthy daughter of Clear Channel Communications owner, being very good looking, and dumb as bean dip, went on Fox News and said it.

Asked if the Austin bomber was a homegrown terrorist …

“I think it’s clear from the confession that it’s not terror-related, although it did terrorize the city of Austin for the last month,” he said. “I think it was a disturbed young man, a mentally ill-type person.”

You have to be brown to be a terrorist.  I would think that if you terrorize a city, you’re a terrorist. But no, you’re a “mentally ill-type person.”

Yeah, it’s on tape.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=83&v=ib7-2hGWmNo

Thanks to SGray for the heads up.

 

Be social and share!

0 Comments to “Because, You Know, He’s White”


  1. I will bet you if his name sounded foreign…it would have been ‘he is a terrorist”!

    1
  2. And you just KNOW that if it were a brown person, Trump would be calling for more travel bans and to build that wall, now!

    I must say, too, that I was more than a little taken aback when the Austin police chief said that the phone confession revealed a young man dealing with “challenges” in his life. Everyone has challenges, but they don’t go out and leave bombs for random people on their front porches.

    2
  3. Old Fart says:

    If only brown skinned folk are terrorists, how do you explain the Baader-Meinhof Gang or the IRA?

    Dumber than bean dip? Does that include hummus?

    3
  4. He sure has that Ted Baxter look.

    4
  5. Yes!
    Keep talking congressman.
    I’d like to hear more about the difference between “terror” and “mental.”

    5
  6. @John

    Nice catch! He does look frighteningly like Ted Baxter.

    6
  7. Especially drawing in his chin like that. That’s a classic Ted Baxter “This is serious, Twin Cities” pose.

    7
  8. Don A in Pennsyltucky says:

    There was a time when terrorist and terrorism were well-defined. The IRA and the PLO and Al Qaida etc. constitute terrorist organizations that use terror tactics to achieve a political aim. Nowadays anyone who kills a lot of people for some neurotic reason of their own gets called a terrorist even when there doesn’t appear to be any goal or objective. By that definition, Charles Whitman was a terrorist. And yes, almost all of the IRA terrorists were white and Irish and Catholic.

    8
  9. maryelle says:

    Ted Baxter, maybe. I’d go with Chuckles the Clown.
    Where’s Mary, Murray and Mr. Grant when we need them?

    9
  10. Ted Baxter for sure.

    In America white male terrorists have killed more people than anyone else since 9/11/2001. American male culture needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up by men like the ones who comment here.

    10
  11. eyesoars says:

    Hummus… garbanzo beans, olive oil, garlic, and lemon juice. Sounds like (a) bean dip to me…

    11
  12. Cell phone tracking has been bothering me for quite a while. Orwell’s 1984 made most everyone fear government surveillance and manipulation, and because of that fear I think a resistance to it had an effect. It seems that private companies have done what the government couldn’t and everyone just went along with it.

    12
  13. …That said, it can have benefits, like catching the bomber. But so would a secret police force searching everyone at will.

    13
  14. JJ you malign bean dip. Even a so-so bean dip has more value than McCaul could buy with his wife’s money.

    14
  15. The translation is that once we call a white guy a terrorist the first time, it’s a slippery slope. Before you know it, skinheads, klansmen, neo-nazis, and all the other good ole boys will get tagged. And we sure as hell can’t have that.

    15
  16. twocrows says:

    Um, yeah. And is he saying that no one in Isis is a “mentally ill type person”?

    Look up the definition of “Extremist.” Then look up the definition of “Mentally ill type person.” You won’t find a sliver of daylight between them.

    But telling that to people who have their minds made up doesn’t work. They’ll just call you a terrorist or a fellow traveler — unless you’re white, of course. Then, you’re just misguided or mentally ill.

    But – but, this guy’s skin wasn’t brown and his name was not Mohamed! So OF COURSE he wasn’t a terrorist!

    smh

    16
  17. Remember when the R’s were bashing Obama? they claimed he never used the words Islamist or terrorist or put the two of them together. Now I want to hear it from the R’s on this waste of DNA!

    17
  18. Fred Farklestone says:

    What happened to McCaul’s neck?

    18
  19. Wow. Somebody Photoshopped the man’s head onto a stuffed shirt.

    Let’s parse this a little, with the filter that “thinking” is the same as “believing,” or faith-based:

    “I think it’s clear from the confession that it’s not terror-related, although it did terrorize the city of Austin for the last month,” he said. “I think it was a disturbed young man, a mentally ill-type person.”

    The only thing the man knows of the three assertions he spews is that Austin was terrorized, and yet he “thinks” it’s mental illness and not terrorism that’s behind the bombings. Terrorism was committed. Full stop. Despite the fact the guy was cray-cray, it’s still terrorism, and he is a terrorist.

    If he lit someplace up because of his mental illness he would be an arsonist, right? This isn’t that hard.

    I think that if you shine a strong light to the right of McCaul’s head, it will make a bright spot on the wall to his left.

    19
  20. maryelle says:

    He had his spine removed.

    20
  21. Linda Phipps says:

    If the bomber hadn’t blown himself up, he would have been eligible to buy an AR15.

    21
  22. We need a new official definition of terrorism that is based on the acts (building bombs in the basement…always terrorism because you build bombs in the basement to kill people with, and to “send a message. You don’t build bombs in the basement to make life better for your neighbors.) What’s wrong with the current definition (and it’s not the only one there’s ever been) is multifold:

    A) Requiring that a terrorist must be affiliated with, or connected to, a known terrorist organization means that someone who isn’t, can’t be labeled a terrorist. But someone can hold similar opinions, and build bombs in the basement to harm the same people that an organization wants harmed *without being a member of it, or ever having met a member of it.* Thank you, Internet, you made this possible. A “lone wolf” is still a wolf, even if most wolves come in packs.

    B) The current definition assumes that there is a complete list of all terrorist organizations, and that list is accurate. It’s not. It’s deeply biased in favor of white, right-wing organizations. As long as the KKK, the American Nazi Party, and the NRA aren’t on it…it’s as incomplete as a burger with no bun. What does a “terrorist organization” do? It pursues political ends by both legal (open) and illegal (clandestine) means and most importantly it attempts to frighten and pressure people into agreement (or silence at least) by shows of force…the kind of force that actually harms, kills, and definitely scares people. And it targets one or more groups for violent treatment. We have multiple right-wing organizations doing that, and yet Congress specifically forbade the FBI to look into right-wing domestic terrorism. So they aren’t on the terrorist watch list, and those who are either members or connected to them (e.g. electronically, reading their blogs and websites) won’t be considered terrorist even if they commit obviously terrorist acts. They may be called criminals, or “challenged” (nauseatingly) but they won’t be called terrorist. Meanwhile non-terrorist groups (remember last year’s women’s march? We were called terrorists by state legislators) will be called terrorist because ogodalmighty they’re *liberal*. Or organizations of people of color (the Black Lives Matter movement, La Raza, etc. A mosque in which the leader preaches hate is…ooh…terrorist…but a Christian church in which the leader preaches hate is…a church and therefore just fine. “Ever’body oughta hate them Jews/gays/trans/immigrants/libtards…” Our definition of “terrorist organization” should be broadened to include hatemongers of all types, because it’s out of those cesspools that the terrorists creep.

    C. Insistence on finding a connection to a known terrorist organization is also problematic because if that cannot be shown, then the act (and the actor) aren’t called terrorist. This has happened with terrorists who died and left no evidence behind (burned down their house, destroyed all their notes, didn’t leave a “manifesto” or “confession” like the guy in Las Vegas who gunned down all those at the concert.) It can also happen if someone is obviously mentally ill *in addition to being a terrorist.* If they are white and mentally ill, our national bias is to focus on the mental illness, not the acts themselves. This means that even when evidence exists that the person was radicalized *somehow*–his choice of targets lining up with known extreme organizations (not yet labeled terrorist), or exposure to extremist media like FoxNews, if he’s white law enforcement as well as the media will start looking for more sympathetic reasons for him to have done it. Unhappy family, teased in school, lost a job, can’t get a lover…whatever ordinary experiences most people have, and get over by adulting. They won’t look at the influences that led to his choice of targets…and those influences are nearly always there, when actually looked for. (“Well, yes, he used to complain a lot about X, Y, Z, but he wasn’t actually in an organization…”)

    D. We need to face (and insist on, in discussions) the fact that in today’s world nobody has to meet a Klansman in bedsheets to be aware that their views have a following and that they have committed violent acts and still want to. White supremacists are all over the media complaining about people of color: they drape flags off Interstate highway overpasses and that shows up on the news. Toleration of nonviolent but still terrorist activity is plowing the field and throwing out seeds…and some of those seeds come up without ever meeting the farmers. We have to face the fact that white people attending nominally Christian churches can be terrorists, and some of those nominally Christian churches radicalize their members and thus function as terrorist organizations.

    E. The mindset of a terrorist (any kind, anywhere) is very similar to the mindset of other abusive, controlling, resentful, and violent people. The gang that beats up on non-member kids to make them scared enough to follow orders is a miniature terrorist organization, in its effect. Bullies, domestic abusers (domestic abuse was the cause of 54% of the mass shootings from 2009 to 2016), control freaks, etc. are the singleton version of terrorists, and we’re not going to get rid of or prevent terrorism unless we deal with the social causes that lead to that mindset. Some domestic abusers become terrorists (if married, there’s always domestic violence in a terrorist’s background and some have been abusive to girlfriends and children.) In other words, we have to deal with sexism–male entitlement–racism, religious bigotry, etc. at the same time that we make the definition of terrorism inclusive enough to treat *all* such cases equitably. We cannot continue to talk about the “mental illness” and the “problems/challenges/etc” of white terrorists and pretend that what they’re doing isn’t terrorism. Because it is. We can’t continue to privilege right-wing extremist Christian groups who are being taught hate day after day, week after week, and pretend they are “Christian” and anything but a danger to the country. We can’t continue to privilege wealthy corporations influencing our governors, state legislators, and US Reps and Senators and the President when they too are getting richer by preaching fear, anger, and hatred of other citizens.

    And we need to stop all this talk about “Now it’s time to be afraid” and answer back that “Now it’s time to think, talk, confront, prepare, and act in the best interest of our nation.” Don’t be scared–be ready. Be ready to talk back. Be ready to march, to call your Congresscritter, your Senator, every one of them even though they don’t do a damn thing you tell them. Keep bugging them. (And vote against them.) Be ready to deal with coming emergencies–get yourself healthy, get your cavities filled, get fitter (I’m working on teeth and fitness myself) because if the mess blows up, you won’t have time or opportunity then. Make plans as if it were a hurricane/blizzard/long drought, etc. That stupid little list FEMA provides isn’t adequate. Because it won’t be 3 days, or 3 weeks until the government can help–it’ll be Puerto Rico on the mainland. And be generous. Be prepared to be the good Americans most of you (and us) are: set up to help your neighbors, to stand together to deal with whatever.

    As someone very famous said in 1776, “If we don’t hang together, we’ll all hang separately.”

    22