Any reason why the man who killed 32 students in Virginia Tech has yet to be referred to by any reputable news media as a terrorist?
He had firearms, he was deliberate and systematic, he had a clear social agenda that he outlined in written documents, and he committed suicide after finishing his crimes.
Usually when that happens, the perpetrator is automatically labelled a terrorist and treated as such.
Instead, a scant two days after the catastrophe, we already have compassion for this person. This morning as I was watched CNN World, one of the students who was a first-hand witness to the rampage was being interviewed. This student was in one of the classrooms that the gunman entered, and had somehow managed to survive with minor injuries only, although not before he witnessed with his own eyes multiple killings. During the course of his interview, the student voluntarily and without any prompting said that he’s forgiven the South Korean gunman for his crimes. Answering his interviewer’s surprised look, he said the gunman was obviously disturbed and that he felt bad for him, that he needed to be helped. Only two days after the crimes, I found this kind of open-heartedness remarkable, but at the same time a little unsettling in its implicit double-standard.
I’ll clarify what I mean by rephrasing my initial question. Is there a particular ethnicity or religion or set of politics that one must have in order for media and the public to think it suitable to connect him to terror?
Because it seems to me that unless you’re Arab, Muslim or a little lukewarm to Western political ideology, even killing 33 people doesn’t make you a terrorist.
