Orlando: Hate Crime or Terrorism?

Politics of fear and divisiveness have been the primary tropes from the right side of the political spectrum for the last thirty years. Since 9-11, politicians have focused laser sharp on terrorism, but it seems only when it comes from disfavored religious groups. In South Carolina, the authorities refused to label the murder of nine Black churchgoers as terrorism when done by a young, white male. Yet his Facebook profile showed him wearing a jacket with patches that were flags of racist, white-minority regimes. He declared his hatred for Black people before opening fire and talked about a race war. The authorities labeled it a hate crime but refused to label it terrorism.

Yet in Orlando, when a Muslim shoots up a gay bar and kills over 50 people, it is immediately labeled a terrorist attack and while it was at first labeled a hate crime, authorities are backing off on that language to push an anti-Islamic agenda. The man appears to have been a “lone wolf” who was enraged by gay people but so far no connection to any “terrorist” activities has been found nor was any message sent by his act but hatred of gays. Yet it is the religious right and the Republican party who have been pushing the anti-gay agenda and ramping up the hatred of gays since the Supreme Court equality of marriage decision with their so-called “bathroom” bills and freedom to discriminate bills.

Likewise in San Bernardino, the shooting by a young Muslim couple was immediately labeled a terrorist attack though the shooter was an employee at the Inland Regional Center, he allegedly had an abusive and troubled childhood, only two weeks prior to the shooting he had explained to co-workers that Islam was a peaceful religion, he never discussed politics at work, and he didn’t leave any particular message about why he had done his actions which could just as well have been workplace retribution. As far as I know, no evidence has come forward to date showing he had any “terrorist” connections.

The federal definition of a hate crime in 18 U.S. Code §249 says:
(a) In General.—
(1)Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—
(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.—
(A)In general.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person—

Under this definition, it is clear that the murders in Orlando and South Carolina were hate crimes and were properly labeled as such.

However, the federal definition of domestic terrorism in 18 U.S. Code §233 says:
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

The South Carolina murderer made it clear that he had both intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population and a political goal. That goal was to support white supremacy and prevent Blacks from gaining power. His act also intended to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; and intended to affect the conduct of a government by assassination. His acts clearly fit the definition of domestic terrorism and the government should have had no difficulty applying that label. But in spite of agitation to do so, they refused.

No evidence has been shown thus far that either the Orlando or the San Bernardino shooter intended to influence the policy or conduct of the government. One could argue that the Orlando shooter did intend to intimidate or coerce a civilian population i.e. the LGBT community but this has nothing to do with his Muslim heritage; it has to do with the climate of hate and fear against the LGBT community being stoked not by any Muslim group but by the evangelical churches, right wing religious fanatics, and the Republican party including their presumptive presidential nominee.

Yet, the government was quick to label the Orlando shooter a terrorist. The government has labeled the San Bernardino shooting a domestic terrorist attack when it meets none of the elements of the crime. There was no political message before or after, there was no apparent intent to coerce the civilian population (it was not a random attack), and there was no intent to coerce the policy or conduct of the government. The only reason to call either crimes domestic terrorism was because the perpetrator was from a disfavored religion. But the violence of the Christian perpetrator in South Carolina, who clearly had a political intent and said so was not labeled terrorism. The discrimination by the government could not be more clear.

The term “terrorist” is tossed around far too easily by law enforcement authorities and used to drive yet another hate filled agenda. Environmental protesters are called terrorists, labor picketers are called terrorists, civil rights activists are called terrorists though all of these acts are clearly within our First Amendment protection and the heritage of this country. In our sorrow for the victims of these atrocities, Americans need to still be aware of the way these tragedies are used for hostile, political purposes and speak up or we’ll all be labeled one day.


* * *