Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Some Terrorism Scares Are More Useful Than Other Terrorism Scares
Particularly at those increasingly frequent times when our country experiences political violence and terrorism, it’s important to read David Neiwert, not least because his running list of domestic terror attacks demonstrates clearly that these are not isolated incidences.
– July 2008: A gunman named Jim David Adkisson, agitated at how “liberals” are “destroying America,” walks into a Unitarian Church and opens fire, killing two churchgoers and wounding four others.
– October 2008: Two neo-Nazis are arrested in Tennessee in a plot to murder dozens of African-Americans, culminating in the assassination of President Obama.
– December 2008: A pair of “Patriot” movement radicals — the father-son team of Bruce and Joshua Turnidge, who wanted “to attack the political infrastructure” — threaten a bank in Woodburn, Oregon, with a bomb in the hopes of extorting money that would end their financial difficulties, for which they blamed the government. Instead, the bomb goes off and kills two police officers. The men eventually are convicted and sentenced to death for the crime.
– December 2008: In Belfast, Maine, police discover the makings of a nuclear “dirty bomb” in the basement of a white supremacist shot dead by his wife. The man, who was independently wealthy, reportedly was agitated about the election of President Obama and was crafting a plan to set off the bomb.
– January 2009: A white supremacist named Keith Luke embarks on a killing rampage in Brockton, Mass., raping and wounding a black woman and killing her sister, then killing a homeless man before being captured by police as he is en route to a Jewish community center.
– February 2009: A Marine named Kody Brittingham is arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate President Obama. Brittingham also collected white-supremacist material.
– April 2009: A white supremacist named Richard Poplawski opens fire on three Pittsburgh police officers who come to his house on a domestic-violence call and kills all three, because he believed President Obama intended to take away the guns of white citizens like himself. Poplawski is currently awaiting trial.
– April 2009: Another gunman in Okaloosa County, Florida, similarly fearful of Obama’s purported gun-grabbing plans, kills two deputies when they come to arrest him in a domestic-violence matter, then is killed himself in a shootout with police.
– May 2009: A “sovereign citizen” named Scott Roeder walks into a church in Wichita, Kansas, and assassinates abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.
– June 2009: A Holocaust denier and right-wing tax protester named James Von Brunn opens fire at the Holocaust Museum, killing a security guard.
– February 2010: An angry tax protester named Joseph Ray Stack flies an airplane into the building housing IRS offices in Austin, Texas. (Media are reluctant to label this one “domestic terrorism” too.)
– March 2010: Seven militiamen from the Hutaree Militia in Michigan and Ohio are arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate local police officers with the intent of sparking a new civil war.
– March 2010: An anti-government extremist named John Patrick Bedell walks into the Pentagon and opens fire, wounding two officers before he is himself shot dead.
– May 2010: A “sovereign citizen” from Georgia is arrested in Tennessee and charged with plotting the violent takeover of a local county courthouse.
– May 2010: A still-unidentified white man walks into a Jacksonville, Fla., mosque and sets it afire, simultaneously setting off a pipe bomb.
– May 2010: Two “sovereign citizens” named Jerry and Joe Kane gun down two police officers who pull them over for a traffic violation, and then wound two more officers in a shootout in which both of them are eventually killed.
– July 2010: An agitated right-winger and convict named Byron Williams loads up on weapons and drives to the Bay Area intent on attacking the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, but is intercepted by state patrolmen and engages them in a shootout and armed standoff in which two officers and Williams are wounded.
– September 2010: A Concord, N.C., man is arrested and charged with plotting to blow up a North Carolina abortion clinic. The man, 26-year–old Justin Carl Moose, referred to himself as the “Christian counterpart to (Osama) bin Laden” in a taped undercover meeting with a federal informant.
Yesterday, he linked to an important Will Bunch piece, wondering whether the agenda setters in this country haven’t reported on the Spokane bomb attempt because of the right wing backlash to the coverage of the Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt.
In other words, [the Spokane bomb attempt is] what Joe Biden might call a BFD. But you wouldn’t know that if, for example, you visited the two websites that — in my own 30 years of experience as a journalist, for better or worse — do more than any other to set the agenda on national coverage in newsrooms across the country.
One of those (note I said “for better or worse”) is The Drudge Report, which ultimate Beltway insider Mark Halperin has said “rules our world.” In the 16 or so hours since the FBI went public with the “domestic terrorism” angle, Matt Drudge has spotlighted articles about things like a man arrested for taking photos at Miami airport, a blogger who may lose his firearms permit for a post related to the Tucson massacre, and laser incidents against airplanes — but nothing about the thwarted Spokane bombing.
OK, so that’s Matt Drudge — but the silence of the leading mainstream news website — that of the New York Times — is a little harder to explain. I’ve checked their home page at least a half-dozen times since last night, and I have yet to see a featured story on the FBI investigating “domestic terrorism” in Washington State. The lack of Times coverage may explain while for the most part, the coverage of this story on cable TV — the people who routinely hyped run of the mill car chases and blown-tire airplane landings — has been very minimal. I say for the most part because there have been a couple of exceptions. “The Rachel Maddow Show” on MSNBC featured the Spokane story as major breaking news at the top of its broadcast last night, and for a time it was the lead story on the Huffington Post. Major news outlets — but with a liberal orientation.
Which is why I can’t help but wonder if there’s a backstory here related to the past weeks coverage of the assassination attempt on Rep. Giffords, and the right-wing critique of some of that coverage.
[snip]
The former GOP veep nominee was savaged for using that charged term, but you have to wonder now if the pushback from Palin [about her crosshairs ad] is actually a case of “mission accomplished.”
That’s because with this new episode in Spokane, not only have the pillars of the mainstream media not raced to any conclusions, but they seem to be in a competition as to who can most ignore the story altogether.
As important as Bunch’s point is–that there’s an eerie silence surrounding this terrorist attempt–given Neiwert’s list of under-reported domestic terror events going back several years, I actually don’t think the non-coverage of the Spokane incident is a response to the Giffords assassination attempt and the ensuing media frenzy. Rather, it’s a reversion to the status quo, less than two weeks after that assassination attempt.
Because the press almost never covers these domestic terrorism incidents. And, just as importantly, our government doesn’t often (the biggest exception was the Hutaree bust) hold big press conferences to report on such events, partly is because most press conferences are about arrests, not unsolved crimes. Moreover, in spite of Neiwert’s and Bunch’s work, there is not one bogeyman, like al Qaeda, which the press can blame.
And without an easy and convenient bogeyman, terrorism scares don’t serve the same purpose for the press, or the government.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

15 Comments so far
Show AllWhy of course none of the above listed "incidents" were "terrorist" attacks. Read it again; not a Muslim name amongst them.
"Resentment toward government" i.e., protest of government policies, drone attacks, giveaways to the rich, is now labeled domestic terrorism, but we must pay no attention to white Americans who bomb, loot and shoot. That might confuse the people as to who the enemy really is.
That about sums it up. Good post, minitrue!
hey, Marcy!
which of the events you highlighted caused you the most personal terror?
why call events 'terrorism' if they don't cause terror?
isn't that just giving them the very power they crave?
are you in terror right now becuase of Spokane? I'm not...
why can't a crime be called a crime, and a criminal a criminal, and let the cops do their jobs and catch the guys?
911 didn't fill me with terror, it filled me with rage...
and suspicion...
sometimes, murder is simply murder...let us not flatter...
Sometimes the cops are creating the terrorism. I'm referring to incitement/entrapment.
It could be our economy is dependent upon the spending to "fight" terrorism. How many are employed in security theater, military and mercenary ranks? Seems like a bubble we don't break out of fear even if we are spending ourselves into slavery.
The response to 9/11 fills me with rage as well.
When white Americans do it they call it patriotism, not always openly though or so soon after.
I love Marcy Wheeler's work, but I am a bit perplexed by her conclusion that "there is not one bogeyman, like Al Qaeda, which the [mainstream] press can blame."
It seems to me there is a single, readily identifiable bogeyman linked to nearly each of the twenty-plus violent nationwide incidents catalogued chronologically in this article. Nearly each one involved someone whose political slant concerned sovereign Caucasion Christian citizenship rights to use guns, bombs, or a hijacked aircraft (in one instance) to dramatically strike back at a big bad government, or attack some minority group, in the name of frustrated true American patriotism.
Marcy concludes "without an easy or convenient bogeyman, terrorism scares don't serve the same purpose for the press, or the government."
Historically in America, violence-prone white supremacists have long been a difficult, inconvenient bogeyman to talk about in polite company, even in hushed tones. News accounts or scares about real acts of white racist violence may inflame the victims and make the government itself look bad.
This whole essay is really about the dog that is not barking - the news stories that receive less coverage, and less context analysis, than one would otherwise expect in major mainstream news.
I believe the phenomenon of lynching used to be covered pretty much the same way in this country too, once upon a time in the bad old days.
Bill from Saginaw
keen observation.
we all know that we know what this is all about but no one says exactly what it is about...
so we go round and round about gun control and mental health care.... more polite conversation topics...
Good post. How about this as the bogeyman? Pat Robertson.
"This whole essay is really about the dog that is not barking - the news stories that receive less coverage"
I don't live in the USA and had read of every one of the listed incidents.
It's easy, or convenient, to forget that feminism in the US took root via the KKK. That may help explain the reluctance of the media?
N.
Nibbly -
Of the hundreds of wonderful feminists I've known over the last forty years or so of my life, I've never met a single one who had roots or even passing affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan.
By all means, please educate me. How did the KKK facilitate the womens' rights movement in the United States? I find this comment and connection utterly mystifying.
Bill from Saginaw
Bill, it doesn't surprise me that you're surprised, which was my point really, that it's firmly pushed down the 'memory hole'.
In the early days of American feminism it was a (somewhat pointless and damaging) battle between "either" giving black men the vote "or" white women.
Of course it would have helped both sides, a lot, if they'd pushed for both but that's not what happened. The feminists in particular were adamant they had more of a right than them N-words. They jumped on the KKK bandwagon and used that as a platform, quite successfully in some ways, though not for the vote.
As I recall, black men still got the vote first but yes, feminism, as a force in society, rode on the back of the KKK. It's something modern feminists would rather not mention, and indeed most younger ones today probably just don't know.
I'm just wondering if perhaps that's why modern media tends to shy away from even admitting the KKK still exists as a political force?
Or perhaps they're so obviously in the wrong they just don't *need* attacking? I dunno, I just find it strange that, as the article shows, they are indeed out there, yet we hardly hear of them?
The Tea Party comes in for a lot of stick yet it's not Tea Party members that go on shooting sprees etc. KKK/White Supremacy types do, yet every time it's presented as the classic 'lone gunman' or 'lone nutcase?
Where are the KKK headlines?
N.
Never met a Klansman, let me introduce you to my neighborhood and my neighbor. I live in North Georgia and the NAZI flag flies on the outside of houses.
If you follow the link to philly.com, you get a nice sampling of the right wing rage in the comments. It has become ubiquitous in this society. What terrorism?
Derrick Jensen says that acts of violence by people lower on the pecking order against the more wealthy and powerful are considered shocking and outrageous and must be punished, but acts of violence by those with more power and wealth against those with less are not even defined as violence. I think that's what's going on here, although it's not about the socioeconomic status of the shooter or the victim--it's about conservative, white aggression against minorities or liberals not being worth mentioning or focusing on, while incidents in which the government foils supposed attacks by Muslims or ecoterrorists are big news, even if it turns out that FBI infiltators funded, organized, armed and carried out virtually all of the actions. News coverage by the "mainstream" (ie corporate) media is intended not just to titillate and generate pay for ads, but also to carry an agenda, best described as maintaining the status quo. The question therefore is why the exception in Tucson. Perhaps because this time they wanted to reap the initimidation mileage out of the event?
perhaps Tucson was an exception because it plays so nicely into the efforts of Congress to further insulate themselves from public access by equating such with imminent violent attack...
when one does terrible things to many for personal gain, it behooves one to expect, and prepare for, reaction...
Tucson, among other things, demonstrated clearly how easily one can target a member of Congress, if that member exposes themselves to society's elements...
Tucson reinforces the 'understandable' need of the 'public servant' to fortify their ivory tower, and even more carefully regulate, if such is possible, those in close proximity during 'events'...
as these are the gophers and key grips to the planet's powerful, protecting them from the masses is, as George Bush, Sr. might say, prudent...