After watching these latest tragedies occur I couldn't help but notice that no one used the word "terrorist" to describe Lanza. Clearly it was an act of terror and I have no doubt in my mind that if someone from the Middle East had committed those crimes there would be massive sh*tstorm against all of the people who practice the Islamic faith. Do you guys think that word "terrorist" has cometely associated itself with Muslims/brown people/Middle Easterns?

Obviously, this answer is yes. It is a fucking shame too.

Mostly yes, but the definition of terrorism is along lines of using deadly means to further a political objective for a political entity. Yet, illegal wars are not state terrorism. Strange world.

Sadly when a white man does it, its because he was mentally unstable yet when a brown man does it, it was because of what his religion taught him. It is truly wrong.

And its sad how the media manipulates these matters and horrible for the people who suffer.

There is a difference between one sole lunatic and members of islamic terror organisations such as Al-Qaeda though. I find it hard to imagine that all members of that organisation are mentally unstable.

But yeah, it is indeed sad when the media manipulates these matters to push their agenda.

because terrorism is associated with religious/politcal motivations.

people like Tim Mcveigh were terrorist because he was politically motivated.

Islam is associated because people who attack in its name do so for political/religuous reasons.

what most people in this thread are saying is already complete nonsense.

someone already said if a brown man had did it it would be a shit storm, yet we have case after case, where the media does everything it can to hide the fact that "this brown man" did in the name of allah. Major Nadal Hassan is a perfect example, we had all the proof in the world he did it for political/religuous purposes (from him chanted Allah akbar, to saying he was a soldier of allah, to him telling people about his jihad) uet the media did everything to hide it, even openly stating they wish it were a white man, and or Christian. they pushed it under the rug, labeled it work place violence.

Nobody every uses the term terrorist for "domestic" terrorism.

Generally i wouldn't call someone a terrorist unless they had a goal that was political or religious nature.

Like say.... the Unibomber i'd say was a domestic terrorist.

Well there are over a billion muslims in this world, most of whom are just average people living their lives, while terrorist organisations like Al-Qaeda contain numbers probably in the thousands. They are atleast less than 1% of the entire muslim population, just like these rogue lunatic killer represent a percentage of the total population that is completely insignificant. So using a minority mindset to represent an entire population isn't right.

While I agree. I still believe If it was an Arab American who comitted this domestic crime it would be labeled as terrorism -which in the end is the OP's whole point. Terrorism is now only associated with Islam. We can argue on the forums that we know better and we can separate domestic crime and terrorism, we can throw definitions all around, but in the whole scheme of things the media is doing a shitty job not making it look like Terror=Islam.

Fair enough.  Yeah I suppose if it was an Aram American the first thing the media would do is throw out there that it might be related to some terror incident.  Then when it turned out to just be some crazy asshole admonish people for the idea that it's a terrorist even though they put it in everyones heads.

I don't think the Beltway sniper guy was called a terrorist.

Though oddly, he was convicted of terrorism despite his motive being to cover up a murder he wanted to comit.