I realize there are other threads on the New Orleans M's-Day parade shooting, but this topic only deals with it in part, and this thread is meant to
deal with matters in a more general/holistic way.
Although it just happened less than a day ago and on a Sunday, i.e. not a major news day. This attack in N.O. appears to be attracting far less media
coverage than the Boston Marathon bombing, and the authorities seem to be quick to claim that this is not a case of terrorism. 19 people shot and
apparently three accomplices involved, but the authorities are just calling this "street crime." I guess terrorism is only perpetrated by Muslims
and immigrants or foreigners.
What is terrorism? The general definition is: "The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes."
Okay. So the Boston bombers were terrorists supposedly, or so the news media and the government. Why is this? Because they may have had
affiliation with terrorist groups in other countries? Apparently, at least in part. Could it be because it was in reaction to US actions in Muslim
countries? Seems like.
But now we have learned that these two brothers may have been responsible for a grisly triple murder a few years ago, which appeared to involve making
a statement about marijuana use and selling -- three persons stabbed/mutilated and 7 lbs of Mary Jane dumped on them. Could this be a drug-gang
thing? Possibly. But it could also be a statement about zero tolerance for drug usage and selling. Since it appears to have involved the two
bombing terrorists, was this also an act of terrorism, or was it just a street crime?
So back to the New Orleans shootings. Three shooters, apparently shooting up a parade? Were they aiming at specific targets or just raising hell?
Who knows. Let's say it was some kind of gang turf war, well wasn't it still a matter of violence being used to intimidate? If so, then it still
falls under the rubric of terrorism. How can one say that this attack wasn't aimed at America as much the the Boston Marathon bombing? Senseless
violence against the general public seems to be aimed at America in general, so why isn't this being treated as terrorism?
At this time, I am not aware of a massive manhunt on the scale of the search for the Boston bombers. Why not? It seems like three people shooting up
a Mother's Day parade is every bit as disturbing and dangerous as setting off a couple of primitive home-made bombs at a marathon. Now I know of no
other specific details of this attack, but that it happened in New Orleans makes me suspect that it may have occurred to a crowd that was largely
African-American. And nobody was killed. And the perpetrators are believed to be Muslim. Are these three reasons the feds aren't as involved, and
why the media is expending as much effort covering it? Seems likely.
I'm saying the government and the media -- and society in general -- have a very narrow definition of terrorism, and when it happens they squawk the
term to the high heavens and generate hysteria over it, but when equally violent acts are perpetrated by people we don't consider "terrorist
material", we treat it much differently and make much less of a deal of it.
My second point is that this may be part of a new class of "raise-hell" violence, which has been happening for a while with the growing number of
mass shootings, and which I would include the Boston Marathon bombing in: disgruntled, alienated individuals -- and now small groups of individuals --
who want do effect some horror-show ultra-violence on the general population.
This is a rising societal issue, and it is not just one about gun control, as there are millions of guns in the US and people who want to get them
will get them (although I think some level of gun control and background checks will mitigate shootings to some extent). It is about American society
and the culture of violence that is romanticized, propagandized, and monetized by various interests -- political, governmental and corporate (the
latter being weapons producers and the entertainment industry). I think it also has to do with corporate pharmaceutical interests and the
psychotropic medication of a significant portion of society. It also has to do with our depersonalized, quasi-virtual society in which a large
segment of society just doesn't have strong connections to many or any other people.
America really needs to look at itself at all levels -- and this certainly includes the government and the military/industrial/security/prison
complex. We've become a culture of death, violence and nihilism, and denial just ain't cutting it, folks.
Here's one little example/anecdote: When I was in high school, there was a very primitive electronic game that modeled US energy consumption,
production, research and development, which a science teacher brought in to let students play with in order to develop consciousness about this issue.
I thought it was really cool, and would love have access to simulations like this.
Are there many games on this or about realistic real-life economic issues that kids AND adults can play and analyze and learn from? Not that I am
aware of. There are things like Sim City, but they aren't terribly realistic. The vast majority of games are shoot'em-uppers, and such, with sports,
flight simulators and misc. other things, including cheesy farming and pretending to be in the mafia, as well as mindless, mind-numbing games like
Tetris, Mario Bros, etc, taking up the slack. Realistic economic, ecological and political games? Not so much.
We need to rethink our priorities and encourage useful thinking, rather than cater to primitive prurient and violent interests, and escapist crap.
Otherwise we're all going to be mini-Neros, fiddling as the Earth burns.
edit on 13-5-2013 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)