Saturday, February 20, 2010

Fight them here so we don't need to fight them there

After having been harassed in places as far-ranging as Hong Kong, America and Korea for being a potential terrorist, I have had enough. Clearly, all this time treating everybody as equal has been a waste. What needs to be done now is that white American males between 18 to 65 years of age need to be treated as potential victims. They need to be searched thoroughly and subjected to whatever extra-judicial, illegal treatment that dull-witted reactionaries currently propose for those with the wrong skin colour.

News emerged today of two acts of terrorism perpetrated by white men, which, to be serious for a second, is getting surprisingly little attention. What attention it gets is amazingly benign. A man crashes a plane into a government building in America. Nine times out of ten it would be an act of terrorism. That this time the killer was a white English speaker means that it's not an act of terrorism, or even murder, but an "intentional plane crash" according to Wikipedia.

Elsewhere, the FBI closed its investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks, concluding that an army scientist was behind it all. This really wasn't an act of terrorism, which is a term that increasingly loses meaning as those of all political persuasions continue to use the word as an all-purpose slander. Many people, for example, consider America to be "the biggest terrorist" or something of the sort, but simple war, even if it kills millions of people, isn't terrorism. It's war.

The lack of panic over the Texas plane crash is indicative of some form of bizarre racism. The attempted explosion in Detroit last December might not have killed anyone even if successful, but it generated weeks of hysterical, panicked responses and added yet another layer of meaningless cavity searches to air travel. One man was a black African and killed nobody, while the other was a white man who did kill somebody. There are no hyperbolic statements demanding answers on how a deranged man was able to access a plane and fly it into a building, or pointing out that others could do this with cars, rocks or paper airplanes. Instead, we can print a sweet apology from his wife.

Meanwhile, no one has considered the chilling security gap exposed by this act. The reality is that with rare exceptions, buildings in America as well as Canada are simply not able to withstand a direct hit from an airplane. In our post February 18 world, it is imperative to retrofit the facades of our homes, offices and, most importantly, our children's schools with some material able to withstand a direct hit from a jumbo jet.


Stiverton said...

It scares people more when an incident is more random I think. This guy used a personal aircraft and was targeting specific people for specific reasons, whereas blowing up a 747 would target random people, making people believe more readily that it could have been them.

Shane Gilman said...

There is a difference between Terrorism, which is meant to terrify large groups of people for no other purpose than to gain attention for your self and cause, and murder. In the instance of Feb. 18 the man was attacking specific people. In the U S & A we are much more tolerant of our own citizens attacking our country than we are of outsiders doing to claim attention for reasons we frankly don't give a fuck about. Feb. 18's attack used a small lightweight aircraft, did not hold hostages, and was aimed at a government building holding an agency that most Americans hate anyway (bad argument I know but it;s the truth). Being from Oklahoma I am well versed in Home Grown Terrorism, the Murrah Building Bombing, and Timothy McVeigh a white male who killed 168 people. However, it is a highly documented that that over 97% of fatal Terrorist type acts are committed by those of Middle Eastern descent.
However, if you feel that you have been targeted for more security checks, screenings, etc... by officials you can file suit for restitution based on the ban on Racial Profiling signed in 2003.