Get PJ Media on your Apple

Roger’s Rules

Calling a Spade a Spade in Boston

April 18th, 2013 - 4:58 am

One of the curious, but also most predictable, responses to the Boston Marathon bombings from the Left has been the fervent expression — amounting nearly to a prayer — that the perpetrator or perpetrators of this act of mass murder be “homegrown,” preferably white, male, Christian, and conservative.

Why? Why does the Left prefer to have its terrorism served up by Timothy McVeigh rather than Durka Durka Mohammed Jihad? It’s an interesting question. That the Left exhibits this prejudice is, like Falstaff’s dishonesty, “gross as a mountain, open, palpable.”

David Sirota, writing at Salon, gives almost comic expression to the genre in an essay with the really special title “Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American.” Why does Mr. Sirota wish that the Boston murderer of 8-year-old boys be a white American? Because a spectral quality called “white male privilege” operates insidiously behind the scenes. If Timmy McVeigh blows up a government building, says Mr. Sirota, only he is blamed. If Mohammed does it, Muslims are likely to be “collectively slandered and/or targeted with surveillance or profiling (or worse).”

What do you think of that argument? I think it’s hooey. For one thing, categories like “white male privilege” are a sort of Leftist version of phlogiston: hypothetical explanatory devices that have the unfortunate attribute of not actually existing. For another, there’s plenty of “collective slander” of Christian fundamentalists (you know, those “bitter” small-towners who “cling to guns or  religion”) going around.

A full anatomy of David Sirota’s hope for a great white villain would fill many pages. What I want to note at the moment, however, is how consonant it is with President Obama’s often noted reluctance to employ what Andrew McCarthy calls the “T-word” when commenting on episodes of mayhem and murder.

He doesn’t want to say “terrorism” when bombs go off and people die because, well, because people these days have an inexplicable tendency to think “Muslim outrage” when bombs explode and innocent people are maimed or murdered.

It is very odd. Most people are just not as Hume-ian as the president when it comes to discerning a link between “A” and “B.”  Hume famously attacked the idea of causation, pointing out that just because “B” regularly has happened after “A” does not mean that “A” causes “B.” There might be a conjunction, Hume allowed, but to speak of causation is to speak presumptuously.

Logically, Hume had a point. But when it comes to what actually happens in the world, most people are, and rightly are, very imperfect Hume-ians. They observe connections. Then they draw conclusions. They observe (to take just a few recent examples):

  • the 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing in Saudi Arabia, perpetrated by the Islamic Jihad Organization (63 dead, 120 wounded).
  • the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, masterminded by Razmi Yousef (6 dead, 1000 wounded).
  • the 1993 Bombay bombings, perpetrated by “underworld criminal groups affiliated with Islamic groups” (257 dead, 713 wounded).
  • the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, courtesy of Hezbollah (20 dead, 372 wounded).
  • the 1997 Luxor attack, perpetrated by pals of the conspirators of the first World Trade Center bombing (62 killed and mutilated, 26 injured).
  • the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, brought to you by Osama bin Laden and friends (223 dead, 4000+ wounded).
  • the 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, more friends of Osama bin Laden (17 American sailors killed, 39 injured).
  • the destruction of the World Trade Towers and attack on the Pentagon on September 11, 2001: you know all about that (nearly 3000 dead).
  • the 2002 bombing of a Bali nightclub, perpetrated by al Qaeda and affiliates  (202 killed, 300 injured).
  • the July 2005 London bombings, perpetrated by “four Islamist home-grown terrorists” (52 killed, 700 injured).
  • the 2009 Fort Hood shootings, sole suspect, Nidal Malik Hasan (13 dead, 30 injured).
  • et very much cetera.

People (but not people like David Sirota or Barack Obama) observe these events and they draw conclusions. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but these days, if you are a terrorist odds are pretty good you are a Muslim.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Remember the Beltway Sniper? The narrative--a narrative of some certainty, smugly announced--was a white guy, probably rural, gun owner and so on. Two black guys, one who changed his name to Muhammad, and the young guy who sat at a table during his trial writing "jihad" and drawing pictures of airplanes flying into tall buildings were in fact the perpetrators. Desperate to make the tenets of their religion become truth. As it is, it is only dogma, but it gives these strangely focused people some explanation for their lives I suppose, if not some explanation for their smugness.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Sirota is a privileged white guy playing the great white savior role complaining about white male privilege. Privilege that doesn't exist now, if it ever did. Fewer white males in college, law school and medical school. Declining incomes for non-college educated white males, etc, etc.

Sirota is a bigot hating, based oni skin color, those like himself and those less fortunate than himself. Reminds me of David Chappell's Black White Supremist, except not funny.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=404_1334081078
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"It makes a mockery of all his columns."

And yet he'll keep trotting out the same narrative every time something like this happens. So will the SPLC. So will the President. Talk about bitter clingers. They cling to their comfortable assumptions about How Things Are In America, all evidence to the contrary.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (87)
All Comments   (87)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I'm still amazed, (freaked out actually) that a majority of Americans elected Obama, and re-elected Obama as President. Whether they like it or not, they're an embarrassing bunch of fools who need come to grips with the damage they have done. Just calling a spade a spade.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Christians do not encourage Christians to kill or bomb other religions or cultures.

Islam states to be a good muslim you must kill Christians and Jews and to die killing Christians and Jews you will go to paradise with 72 virgins.

Islam is a cult, it is not a religion,
a cult only sick perverted, obtuse cultures could embrace.

Muslims should not be allowed in this country.
The world is up-side down, because of the liberals, and I muslim like Buckwheat Obama is now the president.

No good will ever come from his presidency, not even his billion dollars spent on lavish personal vacations.
52 weeks ago
52 weeks ago Link To Comment
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the now-dead Boston Marathon bombing suspect was a student at Bunker Hill Community College and a Golden Gloves boxer who trained at Wai Kru mixed martial arts gym in Boston and competed in a national Golden Gloves competition. He also described himself as a “very religious” Muslim. Warning: I'm an old white guy who belongs to the Tea Party and owns a gun.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Please count the number of Muslim related violence that has occurred throughout the world in the last 20 years. The figures are astonishing. We ignore the evidence at our own peril.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
First, I agree that the 'report abuse' feature seems to have morphed into a game of tag. Read some and saw nothing wrong in(most of) the comments.

Second, the FBI is, after all, dometically focused and its emphasis narrow. I'm not sure how we get a totality of 24 incidents and 23 domestic---is that worldwide? I don't think I'm reading you right.

Thirdly, I would caution anyone to question the percentage strength of the data being offered. To wit, Nidal Hassan, assigned to 'workplace violence.' I'm afraid that information is no longer a tool, but a weapon for manipulation.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There are so many dang reported comments down below that I can't keep the discussion straight. I also can't reply to a reported comment. C'mon people, free speech means FREE speech.

To the commenators down below who are throwing around statistics....
An FBI report looking at the period between 2002 and 2005 said that 24 recorded terrorist incidents happened in this period, and 23 of them were domestic. Of these 23 incidents, all but one “were committed by special interest extremists active in the animal rights and environmental movements.”

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005

Other FBI data: from 1980-2005 perpetrators of domestic terror were:
Latino 42%
Communist 15%
Islamic 6%
Jewish 7%
Left wing groups 24%
Other 16%
This data doesn't match yours. Where'd you get it, Random?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
As per the earlier (reported) post:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/16/opinion/bergen-bombings/index.html

Bergen provides refs for his work; you just have to inquire, read his article for bootnotes, etc. He's the expert, not me. You'll have to make your argument with him.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
ddcan -- this new site and the report button has brought the children out.

But back to your valid points. Before 2001 criminal statutes defined "terrorist' crimes differently. After 2001 terrorist crimes were expanded in the criminal statutes to include crime types that were not previously defined as such. For example, in the data you cited above you will not see the Right Wing groups involved in trhe abortion clinic bombings and homicides or the olympic bombing in Atalanta included in the data. Today, they would be included.

On another note from you citiation. The "left Wing" groups terrorist activities generally do no include terrorist acts against human life. Their crimes do in fact, correlate more to the literal defininition of a terrorist to intimidate and influence behavior and or policy making. They generrally go after certrain economic sector industries disrupting the normal course of business and yep, even can be, destructive towards property and equipment. Then theres a pretty good history of the underground and militant militias. Theres some unclassified data and a ton of classified data on their activities, having been inflitrated so many times. They're not the sharpest knives in the drawer but have plenty of big plans on the table ant any given time.

Then there are the rouge groups like the Army soldiers at Fort Stewart, GA who are currently in the trial process for orgainizing to overthrow the government in addition to killing one of their own and his girfriend, and the leader having killed his wife for insurance to further finance their big plans. Likewise, another soldier was just sentenced to life for planning to makes bombs to kill his fellow warriors. So much going on in the purely 'domestic' realm but so much of it goes unreported by the media or just a fleeting pass by the story. All this perpetuated politcal hate and division is going to come home to roost one day! :(
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
In the liberal mind set, putting the cart before the horse, the disdain before the evidence, means white privilege, which can't be proven, exists. It exists because liberals want it to exist, they have willed it into existence.

By the same token, a clear trend of Islamic terror one is reminded of every time one goes into a ball game in Cleveland or an airport in Athens or a mall in Delhi doesn't actually exist for a liberal. 9/11, the Mumbai attacks and thousands of others are willed out of existence and white militia terrorists are willed into existence.

The Dem Party, the greatest institution supposedly against racism in America, are the greatest purveyors of it. It is like an anti-prostitution pimp.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What is meant by white privilege is simple: poll a workplace and see how many Britneys or Justins get management level interviews compared to Lequondas or Shaquilles. Don't take my word for it. There's a lot of stuff written about this. Go look it up. Well documented. White privilege exists, starting with white sounding names.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I think you have stumbled over a solution, but I have no doubt you will get up and walk away as though nothing happened. Namely, if black people start naming their kids Justin and Britney, instead of Laquonda or Shaquille, voila! The end of white privilege, which as you state above, apparently starts with "white sounding names". Gnome sane?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well you generally have to be nuts to hire a Lequondas or Shaquilles. Why? Not too many middle upper class black people name their children in that manner, so you're likely dealing with a lower class black person whose qualifications are minimal. Often its a law suit waiting to happen. Either because you didn't hire them or if you do you'll have to climb Everest to fire them. Like it or not your name says a lot about your origins and upbringing. Take Billy Ray Earl Smith for example. What does that name bring to mind? White? Southern? Redneck? And to RE's liberal perspective RAAAAAACIST!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I don't know that I'd give a Britney or a Justin an interview because it indicates that their parents were so into popular culture as to be dumb enough to name a kid after Britney Spears or Justin Timberlake and the dumb might run in the family. On the other hand every hiring manager knows that a Lequonda or a Shaquille showing up on the applicant list is more likely than not a pre-prepared lawsuit. The reality is that blacks these days have a ways to go to prove that any credentials they might have are based on merit rather than affirmative action, and certainly a white male manager who'd hire any sort of "Studies" major, no matter the race or sex, is simply nuts.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And of all places take a good look at some of the media. FNC for example is predominately blond, leggy and white on the female side and I supose debonair to obnoxious and white on the male side in front of the camera. Heck, that purported moralighground cable channel even has what they call the "leg chair" reserved just for the female guests with short skirts, on that idiot Greg Gutfelds Red Eye nonsense.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Yeah it would be a lot more honest to have unattractive, poorly dressed, inarticulate persons on TV. No doubt this would be reflected in sky high ratings. All news channels seek to maximize profits and use visual stimulation to do so, and don't pretend otherwise. In any case they are all only peddling the common narrative. They all drove that Boston Bombing story like a Cadillac in a parade, so don't think you are cooler because you watch one brand of propaganda over another.

By the way, calling a person with whom you disagree an idiot, while offering no evidence or even suggestions contrary to his arguments, informs any reasonably intelligent person that you haven't got a leg to stand on logically or rhetorically. Do you really think RedEye is influencing anybody? It's a midnite news/entertainment show for insomniacs. Not that they don't make some points now and then, but come on! Here you have a world wide forum and the best you can think of is "Greg Gutfield is an idiot"?

And by the way, so you've been watching RedEye lately. Trouble sleeping? Something on your conscience?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
There are two black female reporters, one black male reporter and one Indian woman reporter on Fox News. Yes, it's true that they are all very good looking, but their professionalism and talent outweigh their looks. There are also countless black contributors. And then there's Fox Business with lots of diversity. Not that it matters - I don't think any of them have been hired as "tokens".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Well of course and probably 16 black hispanic females in accounting and 27 more blacks and hispanics in janitorial. The point was and remains, There are only two or three who get any degree of camera time and lets see now, how many blacks are hosting FNC shows. I can't speak to FoxBiz as I've never watched it or any other cable biz news. The fact is, TV networks and cable channels has a serious and obvious lacking of race, political and religious balance in front of their cameras and in their executive positions. They're essentially run and managed on partisan political ideologies.

There is no such thing as professionalism and knowledge talent in TV news. They either apprenticed in some big name law firm or are has been lawyers, the children of some political hack types, has been political figures or friends of friends oh, or a beauty pagent queen. Losing ones temper, yelling, speaking over others, making assulting type hand gesters and genuine insulting comments to guests, cherry picking self serving news content and misrepresenting facts, etc., is hardly a standard of professionalism. Then theres plenty to be said about an audience who follows that kind of nonsense! TV and Radio news and commentary is nothing but propaganda contributing noting worthy for the nation and its people.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Would it surprise you to know it's just about 13%, coincidentally also the proportion Blacks in the US populace?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
"If Mohammed does it, Muslims are likely to be “collectively slandered and/or targeted with surveillance or profiling (or worse).”

The difference being that the "prophet" Mohammed TOLD HIM TO!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"If Mohammed does it, Muslims are likely to be “collectively slandered and/or targeted with surveillance or profiling (or worse).”

The problem with that statement is that for an accusation to be slander it has to be FALSE.
In cases of slander "truth is a complete defense." and as you said Mohamed told them to do it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
" If Timmy McVeigh blows up a government building, says Mr. Sirota, only he is blamed. "

Doesn't anyone remember the attempt to parlay McVeigh's atrocity into an in indictment of conservatives in general, including the militia movement which had rejected McVeigh?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And remember, not Talk Radio, but, "HATE Radio."
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There was no such attempt. Imagining so is part of your persecution complex. There were questions about returning war vets though, whether or not there was adequate help transitioning to civilian life.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
McVeigh is rarely portray by liberals as a lone wolf or an anomaly. I should think the George Zimmerman/Gulf of Tonkin incident would make that clear.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Funny, I recall the MSM trying to blame Talk Radio and the militia movement before it finally settled on the "lone wolf" explanation.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Come on, the MSM tried and failed again and again to pin McVeigh as some sort of pent-up Conservative finally backlashing. In many circles they still do (look at his Wikipedia entry which sadly is thee go-to for many people's 'factual accounts' in a myriad of matters.

The Illiberal news cycle tried for the GOP angle with McVeigh being a registered Republican in the 80's, his being upset with the tax structure and his complaint letters being their 'proof'. His being a 2nd Amendment supporter etc.,

Though what the MSM 'accidentally' brushed over was McVeigh's admiration of 'The Turner Diaries', Naziism. His being Atheist etc.,

As for vets transitioning to civilian life, being a vet myself from the mid-late 90's the V A at that time had more than adequate facilities for body, mind. Whereas those resources have only exponentially improved since that time.

The V A getting the raw deal is ridiculous in of itself. Their facilities, staff for a drifter-like vet is superb all things considered.

It's up to us as individuals (or observant family, friends) to seek help if, when needed.

The passing the buck excuses and some bourgeoisie, out of touch pol demagoguing said institution they've NEVER set foot in other than for a video/ audio presser has gotten old and insulting.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
A radicalized anti-government activist, whether a Timmothy McVeigh or any of the many underground militant militias and their sympathizer population can hardly be aligned with the democrats far left wingers. The leftists and anarchists generally take their fights directly to those involved in their cause(s) such as industries in varioius economic sectors and NGO organizations, etc. While they may become rowdy and sometimes destructive, they rarely are organized resorting to bombing and homicide tactics. Do a thorough research and study of the 'history' and violence, planned or implemented by the U.S. militias -- without any doubt connected more too the 'conservative' brand of politics.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Weathermen, Symbionese Liberation Army, and Black Panthers ring a bell?

The Left tries to pin racial violence in The South in the '60s on "the right" but I'll guarantee you that every member of the KKK who was registered to vote was registered as a Democrat. Since the late '60s, the only violence from anyone arguably on the right has been Rudolph and McVeigh, both "lone wolves" not really associated with any group or political movement.

There really aren't many "underground militant militias" and most exist mainly in the minds of the media and mind-numbed lefties. Just as was the case with the KKK, people know better than to be involved with militias because if you go to a meeting the odds are that the guy sitting beside you is FBI or BATF. As little use as I have for Muslims, I'm still troubled by the extent of law enforcement penetration of Muslim groups because I think the infiltrators come perilously close to inciting the violence they are charged with preventing. There was extensive penetration of leftist groups in the '60s and not a little inciting to violence by infiltrators. The Kennedy Administration extensively penetrated conservative/Bircher militias in the early '60s. There is a significant "black helicopter" tradition here and there is the persistent belief that many of Alaska's militant sorts are the progeny of Patriots in Action and other Texas militias that N. Bunker Hunt helped to escape Bobby Kennedy's FBI by financing moving them to Alaska. The reality in America for a very long time has been that groups thought threatening to peace and order or to the government itself WILL be penetrated so almost the only successful acts of violence have been by loners.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Are you familar with the old House, Un-American Activities Committee which was later renamed the House Internal Security Committe in 1969 and later terminated in 1975? In my time, there was over 170 activity files being monitored by the relative departments and agencies for whom reported to that committee. and the Senat Ingternal Security Committee. Because of their vast range of foreign and domestic policy shaping and making, few if any stones were left unturned.

I'll be very short. Of the active files I was familar with, they crossed 'all' lines of partisan, geopolitical and strategic specific ideologies. Just as a side note, The former corruption of the committees was completely eradicated with the seating of the 83 congress when Jim Eastland took over the chair and it remained so until the committe was disband. Partisan politics was immediately sniffed out and dealt with. That meaning, investigative implications flowed factually. I suspect that today, just as then, the majority of activities are conducted by individuals and groups the average citizen has never heard of and knows nothing about. Most of the activities known by the general public were those investigated primarily by the DOJ-FBI and not the other agencies. Unless by some phenomena, I suspect there are similar numbers and similar investigative implications across all lines.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Bill Clinton himself did it....and parlayed it into a 2nd term.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
These smug idiots are blinded by their identity politics and moral relativism. Instead of spending time hoping it is a white male, why don't we focus on catching the perps? I know the lefties will want to coddle them and worry about their diet, I say enhanced interrogation techniques should be on the table from the get go.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All