If the person who killed 90+ people in Norway was a Muslim, the Press would have declared him as terrorist and the act as terrorism. For now, he is just an "Assailant", "Attacker" (Reuters), "Gunman" (BBC, CNN & Al Jazeera). Looks like "Terrorist" is a name reserved for Muslims. The US Dept of State calls it an "Act of violence" (not an "Act of Terrorism" ).

Bingo. Bill Maher mentioned it on his show and he called everyone on their double standard. This is an act of terrorism, it is terror. And it is Christian terrorism. In what most news organizations call Muslim Terrorism, the person may not mention Islam. But as long as there is a link between him/her and Islam, it's Muslim terorrism. This guy actually wanted to start "a Christian onslaught against Muslims" (see Crusades)

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/642038/bill_maher%3A_why_is_the_ft._hood_shooter_a_%22muslim_terrorist,%22_but_the_norwegian_murderer_not_a_%22christian_terrorist%22/

Teeth.i was referring to the Press, and the US Government

There is a bias. What happened in Norway was a terror attack.
The same bias exists here on NL. What all the anti GEJ vampires are doing to us is terrorism, but the mods condone it.

@Poster,Unless you are about to declare that we consider every murderer/serial killer etc. a terrorist, I suggest folks spend some time researching the meaning of words, and their correct application. If not, then I might as well consider the student who decides to shoot some of his classmates, and then himself, a terrorist, simply because he used to attend church at one time in his life and maybe wanted the school to serve more pudding but was refused.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism

I saw the particular Bill Maher show on this, and I disagreed with much of what he proclaimed on this as he seemed to be in his ANTI-GOD state of mind yet on that day! What he ought to announce is that the media uses the word unnecessarily these days, if anything.

That's life.

Kobojunkie,

I read your response. I lkike your posts because I see you as someone fair minded and balanced. I am shocked at this response.

If the school kid commited acts of terror then so be it he is a terrorist.

You did not attend to the OP's concern, vis - is terrorism a designate for moslems only? There are moslems arrested, tried and convicted of terrorism and in prison on charges that were far less in scale than this Norway terror, yet no one has seen fit to designate him terrorist. It will be different if he was moslem. Do you not agree?

Negro_Ntns:

If the school kid committed acts of terror then so be it he is a terrorist.

I don't agree with that. I almost witnessed one particular case -- a student came into school, shot his gal friend and then shot himself. We were in terror -- the school was in panic, but I would not necessarily class the student as a terrorist. A murderer, yes! A Suicide, sure! A Terrorist, Nah!!! A Christian/Muslim terrorist? NAH!
Here are some similar stories you might remember
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre
I think the question should be ‘what are these acts of terror?’ – so we can better identify them and apply the word more appropriately, rather than assuming everything that terrorizes anything qualifies. I remember overhearing two neighbors arguing and the one started calling the other a terrorist for causing him to fear for his life. ROFLMAO!!

Negro_Ntns:
You did not attend to the OP's concern, vis - is terrorism a designate for moslems only?  There are moslems arrested, tried and convicted of terrorism and in prison on charges that were far less in scale than this Norway terror, yet no one has seen fit to designate him terrorist. It will be different if he was moslem.  Do you not agree? 

There are Muslims arrested, tried and convicted around the world not as terrorists but simply as criminals of one kind or another. I mean if you checked the DATELINE archives, you are bound to find one or two stories of a Muslim man/woman who murdered person(s), and was not considered a terrorist as a result.

The way I see it, the word is applied wrongly more often than not --- at least since 9/11 and we probably need to pull back from that. 

On what happened in Norway, I have honestly not taken serious time to read up on that -- much of what I have on what happened are bytes from various news networks and not much reading on my part. I am not certain he could be classified as a terrorist -- and we ought not to make this a religious thing either. The man, from what I have heard, was an extremist -- tried to align himself with various groups but in the end, went solo(even though he claims he had others working on the plan with him). I can honestly not speak for or against that particular case.

I did listen to the Bill Maher talk on this (it was painful to sit through), and I disagree with his analysis of the use of the word "terrorism". Bill Maher makes sense when religion is not involved, but he somehow dragged that in and  . . . the conversation deteriorated from there on.

And no,I don’t think it is applied only to Muslims as the poster assumes. Since 9/11, the media continues to apply it flippantly to most every situation imaginable. Even some members of congress have gone as far as to label the other side “terrorists” on occasion . . . ROFLMAO!!

Nope. Terrorism has not been monopolized.

I've read cases of Muslims, Christians, atheist etc terrorizing the human population. It's just that, when Muslims terrorist and Media propaganda are inseparable.

<quote>

I think the question should be ‘what are these acts of terror?’ – so we can better identify them and apply the word more appropriately, rather than assuming everything that terrorizes anything qualifies. I remember overhearing two neighbors arguing and the one started calling the other a terrorist for causing him to fear for his life. ROFLMAO!!

</quote>

Until the review and categorization you advocate what is the crime designation?

Look, Allen Iverson, NBA player was arrested and charged for terroristic acts after beating his wife and threatening her.

The bias in its designation cannot be denied.

Terrorism is for Blacks and moslems. Whites and christians are good, just misbehave or suffer from mental problem from time to time but they are not terrorists.

A black mosque here in Atlanta was shut down and the Imam arrested for terrorism charges because they remit money to charities which govet said was using donations to launder funds.

H "rap" Brown, former Black Panther member converted to Islam and lived in Atlanta was arrested after he defended himself when police went to arrest him and opened fire on his house, I think he shot one or two of thhe cops and escaped. He was charged with terrorism when they caught him in Alabama.

Until recently Mandela was listed as a terrorist.

Sit there waiting for an amendment. There's miscarriage of justice by those who promise their values on human liberty and justice.

Oh!! Now it is a black and muslim thing?? ROFL

please read this

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=14556

I'm only sharing the facts with you. What did Mandela do to qualify as a terrorist but this guy in Norway is not? What was the scale of Allen Iverson's offense to qualify for the charge but a mass murderer is not?

Let's use wisdom when its called for, everything has its place and there is a proper place for academic analysis and defense of abject insult.

It is insukting to the conscience that a mass murderer is not a terrorist but a wife beater is, not defending that as a good thing but knowing that a provision of the law covers that adequately without the need for a bump up.

Negro_Ntns:

I'm only sharing the facts with you. What did Mandela do to qualify as a terrorist but this guy in Norway is not? What was the scale of Allen Iverson's offense to qualify for the charge but a mass murderer is not?

umm . . . more like you are sharing manufactured facts. Allen Iverson getting tagged a terrorist but an Egyptian, possibly black Muslim, not getting the same for even worse crime(in my opinion) blows that conspiracy of yours out of the water, don't you think

Negro_Ntns:

Let's use wisdom when its called for, everything has its place and there is a proper place for academic analysis and defense of abject insult.

I am for using wisdom but we need to understand when OUR WISDOM does not agree with that which is really know.

Negro_Ntns:

It is insukting to the conscience that a mass murderer is not a terrorist but a wife beater is, not defending that as a good thing but knowing that a provision of the law covers that adequately without the need for a bump up.

Insulting to the conscience, yes, but reason enough to push the claims that the word is reserved for Muslims and Blacks? NAHH!!!!!!

You dodged the primary concern.

In Europe a moslem goes on killing rampage after his cohorts had blown up a building minutes earlier and was later found to be advocating a jihad against christians.

What label would it carry in the news and government reports?

Its funny how people think.if the Norway guy isnt a terrorist,who then is a terrorist?PLS WHAT MAKES ONE A TERRORIST?