Can a one off act be called terrorism?
Imho in order to terrorise a population there needs repetition so anxiety is caused.
When my brother-in-law farts, it is an act of terrorism, so yes, in answer to your question.
As George Carlin once said, "It is not the smell, it is the burning of my eyes!".
Under no definition have I ever heard that terrorism HAS to be repetitious. Besides these mass killings are becoming repetitious. Just not coordinated, more radicalized lonewolf. A slightly different trend that we are used to seeing. Terrorism none the less.
An Iraqi or Syrian bomber, which are separated by similar sects but different group affiliations, and are not much different than the El Paso shooter. He has similarity to other shooters of other white nationalists ideology. Just because it's our country doesn't mean Americans can't be terrorists. We are not that special, nor innocent.
Perhaps, but the El Paso shooter was linked into a website that is kind of an underground website that encourages one another act on ideology. He also referenced the New Zealand manifesto. It's a lose knit group on the media that sow their hatred and goad each other on. It is an ideology that is shared, that makes their acts, acts of terrorism.
Not sure why calling these white supremacist terrorists is difficult to accept. In the 1960's the Weatherman Underground were called terrorist. In the late 60' the SLA (Siambanese Liberation Army) of patty Hearst fame were called terrorists. The Bader Meinhoff of Germany were called terrosists. The Red Army were called terrorists.
Granted each were more cohesive as an identifiable group, but they were organized around a fringe ideology. White supremicists, just like European Islamic lone wolves, all act upon a common ideology just like our white supremacists. And the Islamic lone wolves are called terrorists.
250 some mass shootings this year pretty much fits the definition of repetition.
Their central affiliation is right wing extremism. It's not a series of accidents, it's a product of a culture of fear where they lash out to try and instill thier fear into others.
So yeah, it's terrorism. Aren't we supposed to be fighting a war against it, BTW ?
@powder well thats just dumb.
So lemme guess, they aren't brown skinned or darker so they can't be terrorists. That the actual root of your question?
Also, this: [thebulwark.com]
H/T chalupacabre
I think the quantity is immaterial...the anxiety produced is the criterion. The uncertainty and apprehension of where and when an attack may happen, especially when a known network has signalled that it intends to kill certain groups of people. The fact that this network is not an organised terrorist cell or group, but just individuals who act on their own after espousing an ideology proliferated on the Internet, makes it all the more frightening, because we never know where or when someone will decide to act.
@Haemish1 Thoughts and prayers is not a response it’s a non response.