What Does Terrorism Mean in 2013? An Interview with Glenn Greenwald
VICE: What do you think about the media reaction to the Woolwich murder?Glen Greenwald: Media outlets reacted pretty uniformly to the attack. They reacted the way that media outlets typically do to these kinds of incidents, which is by simply stating that it was a terrorist attack and channeling outrage about the unprecedented, barbaric act that everyone saw take place.
Do you think it was a “terrorist” attack?What the word terrorism typically means in reality, functionally, when it’s most commonly used by our media, is that the perpetrators are Muslim, and that they are driven by either religious or political motivations. I think that when it became clear that the perpetrators were Muslim (they said “Allah Akbar” during the attack), then media outlets instantly said that this was an act of terror, and politicians sort of did at the same time. The premise here is that if the violence is perpetrated by Muslims against the West, for a political cause, then by definition it’s terrorism, but not the other way around. It’s very typical to call this a terrorist attack without including all sorts of acts of violence that the US and UK has routinely engaged in over the last decade.
Continue

What Does Terrorism Mean in 2013? An Interview with Glenn Greenwald

VICE: What do you think about the media reaction to the Woolwich murder?
Glen Greenwald: Media outlets reacted pretty uniformly to the attack. They reacted the way that media outlets typically do to these kinds of incidents, which is by simply stating that it was a terrorist attack and channeling outrage about the unprecedented, barbaric act that everyone saw take place.

Do you think it was a “terrorist” attack?
What the word terrorism typically means in reality, functionally, when it’s most commonly used by our media, is that the perpetrators are Muslim, and that they are driven by either religious or political motivations. I think that when it became clear that the perpetrators were Muslim (they said “Allah Akbar” during the attack), then media outlets instantly said that this was an act of terror, and politicians sort of did at the same time. The premise here is that if the violence is perpetrated by Muslims against the West, for a political cause, then by definition it’s terrorism, but not the other way around. It’s very typical to call this a terrorist attack without including all sorts of acts of violence that the US and UK has routinely engaged in over the last decade.

Continue

Notes:

  1. loukask reblogged this from bigbongdongsolong
  2. bigbongdongsolong reblogged this from vicemag
  3. drasky reblogged this from vicemag
  4. jigsawparts reblogged this from vicemag
  5. willwilkinson reblogged this from vicemag
  6. fuckyeahglenngreenwald reblogged this from vicemag
  7. taiwilson reblogged this from vicemag
  8. witnessortizle reblogged this from vicemag
  9. ravisinghbeats reblogged this from vicemag
  10. somanysubgenres reblogged this from vicemag
  11. alexmovingbackwards reblogged this from vicemag and added:
    Sometimes Vice is really on point.
  12. nohehsaywhat reblogged this from vicemag
  13. theanswerswillfindyou reblogged this from vicemag
  14. jayarhess reblogged this from vicemag
  15. introvertedart reblogged this from vicemag
  16. ubuntuliberation reblogged this from vicemag
  17. mrpotatohead77 reblogged this from vicemag
  18. petieritisme reblogged this from vicemag
  19. nextfryday reblogged this from vicemag