What Is Terrorism? Oregon Standoff Reveals Blatant Double Standards

by
editors
The Internet is ablaze over tepid media coverage and U.S. government’s reaction – or lack thereof – toward the militia standoff situation in Oregon.

A protest held in support of Oregon ranchers facing prison time for arson turned ugly after a large group of armed men broke in and occupied a U.S. government building.

Dozens of gun-toting protesters, many carrying assault rifles and other semi-automatic weapons, seized the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge on Sunday. However, despite the fact that these men are still occupying a federal property, U.S. government has refrained from calling the militia domestic terrorists. And while the FBI has said they are aware of the situation, the police are reportedly keeping their distance from the armed men.

Ammon Bundy, the rancher whose family appears to be leading the militia, has called on more supporters to join him in order to take a stand against (what he feels is) government oppression.

While the self-titled “freedom fighters” continue to occupy the wildlife management headquarters, U.S. media outlets are struggling with how to refer to the people involved — inadvertently exposing the blatant double standards when it comes to white citizens wielding weapons.

Reuters called the group "self-styled militiamen" while The New York Times has sufficed with “armed activists.” Other variations include “protesters” and “freedom fighters,” but no one has actually called them out for what they actually appear to be: domestic terrorists.

The reaction from authorities  or lack thereof  has also led to an online debate where social media users are arguing if the perpetrators had been Muslims or black, things would have been very different. The hashtag #OregonUnderAttack has sparked a discussion on the role of race, religion and the suspicious lack of media coverage when the occupation first began.

Twitter users have also highlighted the noticeable absence of National Guard, which was deployed during Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson and Baltimore.

Recommended: One Tweet Sums Up How Homegrown Terrorism Is The Real Threat

“White privilege” and “white supremacy” also became much-debated topics among social media users:

Many also wondered what would have happened if these ranchers, who are apparently fighting for their rights, had been Muslim.

The way American officials and most media outlets differentiate between black and white people with guns, is clearer than ever following the Oregon standoff. Not to mention, the entire situation would have probably gone unnoticed if the social media hadn’t highlighted it  especially when some media companies initially called it a “peaceful protest.”

Many online users believe if the Bundys weren’t white, there would have been accusations of terrorism and a military operation would have been well underway by now. Whereas, as of writing this piece, there have been no reports of a law enforcement raid on the building.

While the situation between the Oregon ranchers and the U.S. government is a different matter altogether, the question here is that what exactly distinguishes terrorism from an armed takeover of a federal building?

Read More:  Dallas Mayor Is Right To Fear White Men More Than Syrian Refugees

Carbonated.TV