Or, when does a suicide bomber become a terrorist? Hip-HopDX’s the Ambassador goes in on the recent hostage drama at the HILLARY RODHAM-CLINTON campaign offices.
I have finally realized exactly who that line was directed to – Hillary Clinton. Not in the sense that Mrs. Clinton is a bitch, and not even in the sense that I think that she throws down like that between the sheets. Fuck all of that. That line was made for Hillary because some random guy seemed like he wanted to bomb(or as of recent reports, road flare?) her pussy(and his own ass in the process) to bits. I guess this is what happens when you get poon running for Prez.
Perhaps while Bill was getting blown by Ms. Lewinskeet back in the good ol’ days, Hillary was out getting some carnal revenge of her own on her husband. Could it be that this was a past flame of Hillary’s who was pissed that she didn’t leave her husband for him because she indeed possesses a bomb ass pussy?
Ha! OK, for serious now – let me stop. That’s unfair of me. Speculating that sort of nonsense ain’t a good look. But if it comes out that it was true…don’t forget who said it first.
Real talk though, there was a fact that emerged in this hostage drama situation, that although left unsaid by most, has been running rampant through my mind. I have not heard one media outlet refer to the hostage situation caused by the aforementioned guy with the shit strapped to his chest (who was identified as Leeland Eisenberg), as an instance of terrorism. It pains me to have to admit this, but it feels like the American media is at the point that to report something as being an act of terrorism, a person hailing from the Middle East (or at least that has a name that sounds like it was picked out by the local Imam) has to have been behind the act in question.
I began to wonder if perhaps my definition of “terrorism” was just skewed. This is where online dictionaries come in handy, and not just because I’m too lazy to walk across the room and pick up one of those heavy, bulky-type dictionaries. Even though I really am that lazy sometimes… Anyway, type the word “terrorism” in at dictionary.com, and this is the first definition you will be presented with:
“ter-ror-ism. [ter-*uh*-riz-*uh* m]. –noun. 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.”
Let’s review this a little bit. Eisenberg strapped a bomb-like device to his chest with duct tape. That’s pretty intimidating, if you’re going to go storming into places and showing it to people while taking them hostage. Furthermore, he was using that intimidation to coerce people (to allow him to talk to Hillary personally). Was he violent? Well, I’m not sure of details as to how he detained the hostages, but walking around with devices capable of igniting in some way, shape, or form, would imply that you intend to be violent. That leaves the last part of the definition to be dealt with – “for political purposes”. Well, this was a candidate’s campaign office, and he wanted to speak with a political figure for whatever reason. That seems like a pretty damn political purpose to me. He fucked up politics for the day in the process anyway; what with the Democraps’ most notoriously dysfunctional couple cancelling all of their public appearances, and causing two other democratic campaign offices to be evacuated as well. So…how is this not terrorism?
Oh, right. Eisenberg was just that. An Eisenberg. Not a Bin Laden or an Al-Mohammed-Ibrahim-Khaled-Ali-Baba-Abdul-Raheem, or some direct Al-Qaeda affiliate.
What is the difference between what Eisenberg did, and what a suicide bomber in Israel does?
Device to cause some damage? Check.
Duct tape to secure the device to yourself, ensuring a successful suicide? Check.
People nearby to blow up along with yourself? Check.
A goal in mind through all of it, even if it’s not necessarily going to make sense to anybody else but yourself? Check.
The only difference is that Eisenberg didn’t actually end up blowing himself up into a cloud of pink mist. He gave up and let the SWAT team have at him. But really? He scared the shit out of a good number of people, and the definition of “terrorism” said nothing about having to actually kill yourself or some other people.
Maybe this is just one of those fuck-ups of the English language that I just never understood. Kind of like how in the hell you get “colonel” to sound like “kernel”. Maybe I just don’t understand the concept of terrorism – I must have slept through the class periods in my government related studies when my professors talked about it. Although…maybe it’s not that simple. Or perhaps this observation is just a figment of my insomnia-induced imagination, and I’m just being an overly sensitive bitch who should stop complaining about the media (seeing as how my journalistic aspirations would benefit from having them on my side anyway…). I’ll leave that up to you to decide.
 |
The Ambassador says… “You say terrorism, I say terrific. Let’s call the whole thing off.” |
