Popular Liberal Mag Says We Should Stop Using The Word ‘Terrorist’
In the wake of the assassinations of five police officers on the streets of Dallas during a Black Lives Matter march, popular online magazine, Slate, says the word “terrorist” should not be used to describe the sniper who fired upon them while they were trying to protect protesters.
In a long, convoluted piece, Adam Ragusea argued that although the assassin’s actions were meant for the sole purpose of creating terror in the hearts of police “in the way that he felt arbitrarily terrorized by them,” the use of the word “terrorist” by journalists and media is – no surprise – racist and has religious connotations.
Ragusea, an assistant professor at Mercer University’s Center for Collaborative Journalism and contributor to liberal NPR (National Public Radio), admits that the 25-year-old sniper who killed five officers and wounding another nine, as well as two civilians, “clearly” fits the definition of the word.
But he claims, “the fact that almost nobody is calling the Dallas sniper a terrorist —like almost nobody called Dylan Roof (the Charleston, South Carolina church shooter) or the Oregon wildlife refuge occupiers terrorists—demonstrates how uselessly arbitrary and loaded that word has become.”
And although the assistant professor claims that the “right-wing media” jump to use the “T” word to describe Islamists, he concedes, “that’s partly because Islamists have been doing a lot of terrorism.”
Instead, he claims that the media doesn’t describe Roof as a “terrorist” because he does not have an Islamic last name that conjures up religious connections.
Even more bizarrely, Ragusea says, “ISIS uses terrorism as a tactic, but that doesn’t make everyone who fights for ISIS categorically a terrorist.” Excuse me?
Apparently, however, even his Twitter followers found his argument laughable, tweeting other phrases that could be used instead of the racist “T” word, including, “drone strike candidate,” and “explosive-murder-suicide-enthusiast.”