|
||
Unitarian Church Shooting is Terrorism
The shooting at the Unitarian Church in Knoxville, TN on Sunday that left two adults dead and seven wounded was an unequivocal act of terrorism.
Though the international community at the UN General Assembly has been unable to come up with a common definition of terrorism as it applies to existing groups there are broad elements of a definition that are widely held.
An act of terrorism is violence by a civilian or civilians against unarmed civilians for a political motive. Al-Qaeda attacking US servicemen in the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, or in the USS Cole, or in Iraq or even in Fort Dix, New Jersey is not terrorism. It is a guerilla attack. Al-Qaeda attacking civilians in US embassies in Africa or at the World Trade Center is indeed terrorism.
So is suspect Jim D. Adkisson's attack on civilians in the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church. Police found a letter in Adkisson's car expressing his " hatred of the liberal movement."
Even if this man hopefully acted alone it is chilling to all progressive people and groups, like the Unitarians. Are we free to express our views, indeed to allow our children to perform in a church play?
Adkisson must be tried on terrorism charges and the White House and Congressional leaders must speak out against this form of domestic terrorism too, not just the inflated threat from Islamic extremists that threaten American political and economic interests abroad and help drum up defense contracts at home.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
As a lifelong Unitarian Universalist, I am shocked and dismayed by the butchery committed in Knoxville. And the fellow who took a fatal chestful of gunshot to save his congregants is a hero whom I trust I shall never forget.
The labeling party being held here is, I suppose, understandable. That a joker could decide to shotgun something as utterly innocent as a UU congregation because they were "liberal" in a perverse way fills my heart with some guilty pride. Pride in our liberalism, such that even a loser from the other end of town like Adkisson could recognize this, which makes me in turn proud of my denomination. However, the guy is going to stay in prison for the rest of his life (a true UU would prefer this to the death cocktail, even in this case), so trolling for some term even more gratifying than "murder" is mere shadowplay. So what if he is found guilty of "terrorism" or "hate crime"? He already merits our strongest punishment, and shall receive it.
It's time to forget this jerk and go argue about meaningful matters.
Sounds to me that Mr. Adkisson was listening to conservative talk shows to much.
He won't, and shouldn't be, tried on federal terrorism charges for a simple reason: the statutes are ill-fitting for this particular crime (many are geared towards acts by conspirators or groups), would be somewhat difficult to prove, and would provide ample opportunities for appeals about the nature of the crime and whether the feds had jurisdiction to charge him.
On the other hand, local prosecutors have an absolutely iron-clad case against him on first-degree murder and attempted murder charges. He'll get a quick trial and be put away for decades, probably exhausting his appeals within a year or two.
I agree with you I think it should be classified as terrorism and I suspect if its someone who said they hated capitalism and free market it would be classified as such. I dont see how you can classify hatred of liberalism as a hate crime over terrorism. Liberalism is a political ideology and its too broad to be defined as a hate crime and since thats the case there must be another umbrella under which it fits and terrorism sounds like a good fit to me.
Carol
Carol,
Terrorism is systematic and ongoing.
In 1986, James Huberty walked into a San Ysidro McDonalds and killed 22 people. I was on duty that day.
Now, suppose Huberty had screamed out, "I HATE MCDONALDS!!!" before he started brutally gunning down people.
Would that have made it a case of terrorism against McDonalds?? Of course not.
With the church shootings, there is no evidence of conspiracy or ongoing hatred against liberals. Nor is there any evidence that shows that Adkisson had planned a campaign against liberals, a'la Eric Rudolph...
This was simply a nutjob who got fed up and decided to make some people as miserable as he is...
This isn't terrorism in any WAY, SHAPE or FORM..... There is some doubt that it's even a hate crime, as investigations are bearing out..
Regardless of that, this incident is a LOT closer to a hate crime than it is to terrorism....
Michale.....
Sorry to disappoint ya'all...
Police investigate church shooting as hate crime
http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=61360&catid=2
With the utmost respect to the author of this commentary, this crime was not an act of terrorism.
As I stated above, terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons for the purpose of furthering a political or ideological agenda.
The only thing that this incident has in common with terrorism is that there was a violent attack against innocent civilian persons.
These are the facts..
Michale.....
Well if a Muslim (or any brown man for that matter) had done the same thing he would be instantly sent to Gitmo as a terrorist. I guess people in the USA don't think terrorist can be white.
Terrorism has behind it the purpose of influencing the behavior of others after the act is committed. Think of those that bomb abortion clinics. The goal, even beyond killing, was to make those who worked there fear for thier lives and quit. Sometimes, these bombers even set thier bombs off in the middle of the night because they wanted to instill fear, not to kill. That's terrorism.
As terrible as this act is, it wasn't terrorism. His goal was simply to kill those with whom he disagreed theologically. He act was no larger than just this church, just this incident.
May God comfort those who have lost loved ones.
Very well said...
Nice to see a little logic and rational thinking amongst all the hysterics...
Michale....
Wishing doesn't make a thing so. Adkisson's "disagreement" wasn't simply theological. He also referenced gay folk and a particular political party (Democrats), stating that since he couldn't "get" the "leaders," he would "get" the ones who put them in office. He identified TVUUC as being emblematic of those groups whom he hated.
As such, your argument fails.
As infrequent vistor to my local UU, my heart and warmest condolences go out to the families. I can't imagine anyone hating people who talk the talk and try to walk the walk as sincerly as those in the UU family.
As for Terrorism, all violence is terrorism. This was a hate crime, but terrorism is unlikely.
This is the FBI's deffiniation of terrorism:
There is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)
While the shooter wanted to kill liberals, he made no demands to them. "Killing liberals" isn't a social objective as much as a one man mission for an ideological genocide (yah, a bit strong but you get the point). A social or poltical objective would be for him to have demanded they desband the church and stop running for office. Of course, since no one can agree on terrorism, a lot of you will say I'm wrong, and that's okay.
As a Unitarian Universalist for over 30 years, I have two conflicting responses:
First, I lament the bloodshed, and my heart goes out to all the TVUUC. and fellow UU, congregants and everyone affected by this senseless tragedy. After some time, as I work through this event, that includes the perpetrator, and more especially, his family, relatives, and those who loved him.
Second, I have a reinforced understanding that I am a member of a very small minority called upon to stand up to the potential tyranny of a short-sighted majority. This country was founded on respect for minority views. Unitarians have counted for (at least) 5 of our 44 presidents, and have disproportionately (but only numerically) shaped tis country into a moral monolith - a monolithic status we now risk losing, in the shadow of a dark regime that mistook political and presumed military power for moral high ground.
I am called to stand truth to power. And like the TVUUC hero who threw himself in front of the gunman (as much a hero as any GI who ever threw himself on a grenade), I am ready to defend, as well as to attest.
I wonder if the NSA and their contractors had a profile on this guy. Who did he call, who did he email, how often did he listen to Limbaugh and Fox News or some other wingnutter? This is the kind of stuff they say they need to gather in order to fight terrorism. For you bullwinkles that don't think this is terrorism, how safe would you feel if someone brought a gun into your business or places where you congregate? God bless the heroes who overpowered him and held him for the police to arrest.
So, NOW the only requirement for to be labeled a terrorist is to be armed??
So, EVERY person who carries a gun is now a terrorist???
Don't you people see the inherent illogic and hysteria of your position??
Michale.....
The man killed two people in a church known for its views and had literature clearly stating his hatred of such people. If I did the same thing and I had Bin Laden literature in my house stating that the Liberal Infidels must die, it would be considered a terrorist case open and shut. So why this defense of a murderous ideologue?
Not every person who carries a gun, obviously, is a terrorist. People who go into places of worship and slaughter other people for political motives, now THEY are terrorists. Even if there was no conspiracy or other plotters, this guy should rot in jail for the rest of his miserable life, as a convicted TERRORIST.
After Va. Tech. All the righties were upset that no one stood up and stopped the gunman. How ironic that when it happens to liberals, in a church no less, they rush the guy before he could kill too many people. This guy just help blo up 3 inaccurate stereotypes regarding liberals at once.
The word terrorism has a specific meaning: it's the threat or use of violence against civilian populations as a political strategy to achieve political ends.
This is a tragedy. But PLEASE - don't exploit it for purposes of advancing your own political agenda.
Well said...
Logic and rational discussion amid all the hysteria, both feigned and real...
Nice to see...
Michale.....
Sounds like it fits the definition to me.
Please explain how your comment does NOT equate to "terrorism". Do you think the "liberal" epithet is not political? Is gunfire not a strategy, but only a tactic? Is the annihilation of perceived enemies not a political end?
Please explain. You seem to have provided an argument that proves the point opposite to what you imply.
Yes, it is a tragedy. But it is also terrorism.
JustAProgressive: Please explain
===
Sure. You're either not reading the news, or you fall a bit short in the capacity to make critical discriminations about this terrible story.
Adkisson is clearly mentally ill, just like the shooter in the Virginia Tech tragedy. Both were filled with rage, and created terror. But neither of them were terrorists.
In fact, Adkisson looks like a MICA person - mentally ill and chemically impaired from chronic alcoholism.
Just because a paranoid schizophrenic babbles on in political terms, that doesn't make him a terrorist. Terrorists - real terrorists - are a sub-species of warrior: very focused in their life mission, very clear about what they're doing and why.
Same thing with people who do hate crimes against gays, black, jews or whomever. If it's a one off by a disgruntled nut job or two, it's not really terrorism. If it's done in a thoughtful, strategic and deadly fashion, it is.
Words mean something. And these days - in the aftermath of the Bushco fiasco - we should choose our language around this particular topic with great precison - and (once again) not use it to promote our partisan agendas.
BTW...I'm a progressive, too.
No need to thank me. I'm here to help.
Your definition appropriately describes this act of violence.
"This is a tragedy. But PLEASE - don't exploit it for purposes of advancing your own political agenda."
This was a hate crime. We (and by 'we' I mean all liberals) have experienced decades of being demonized openly and publically by republicans and 'centrist' democrats alike.
Incidents like this are one form of the backlash. How dare you accuse others of exploitation when we try to talk about this state of affairs?
Oh, and there's no agreed upon definition of 'terrorism'. Ironically, your definition of terrorism could just as easily be applied to certain 'pro-life' groups and certainly to fundies like Eric Rudolph.who, unlike some of his victims, is still alive.
Terrorist - gettin carried away calling every crime one by a terrorist is going overboard.
A note at the town office here in Stewartstown Pennsylvania states that anyone yelling at the town clerks will be charged for using terroristic threats.
Book em Daniel.
Get a life folks and grow up - stop the fear mongering.
Remember to vote all.
:-)
Pray for all the troops.
At the risk of being nit picky....
That would be "Book 'im, Dano".....
Movie/TV quotes is kinda a hobby of mine... :D
Michale.....
It is an apt observation.
Quoting Michael Franti from Bomb the world (into pieces but you can't bomb it into peace):
"Fight terrorists wherever they be found?
Then why you not bombin' Tim McVeigh's hometown?"
You failed to remind readers of the repeated calls by conservative HATE RADIO FOR JUST THIS KIND OF ACTION. Why did the guy need 76 rounds and why is FOX news not covering the press conference on this. Will republicans renounce and reject this and the words of conservative hate radio calling for the kind of stuff? The guy was a former member of the 101st airborne division whose food stamps were just cut off. Those in hate radio should be ashamed, jailed and penalties applied for hate speech this man took seriously and acted on. It is an act of terrorism.
I think that most of us Unitarian Universalists right now are not immediately concerned with how Mr. Adkisson should be punished. I think we're grieving that such an act of violence could happen in one of our congregations, communities of faith that are typically so life-affirming. We have been using our energies to work for justice and equality for hundreds of years. This horrible murder is yet another reminder that we must continue to work on the side of love. Our church in Charlotte, NC will hold a vigil tonight for the victims of the tragedy and we hold all of those affected by the murders in our thoughts and prayers.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
