Chauncey DeVega

Chauncey DeVega
Chicago, Illinois, USA
September 11
A (Sometimes) Respectable Negro
Editor and Founder of the blog We Are Respectable Negroes He has been a guest on the BBC, Ring of Fire Radio, Ed Schultz, Joshua Holland's Alternet Radio Hour, the Burt Cohen show, and Our Common Ground. His essays have been featured by Salon, Alternet, the New York Daily News, and the Daily Kos. The NY Times, the Daily Beast, the Utne Reader, Washington Monthly, Slate, and the Week (among others) have featured his expert commentary and analysis on race, politics, and popular culture.

Chauncey DeVega's Links

Editor’s Pick
JULY 23, 2012 2:10PM

Questions Unasked: James Holmes and White (Male) Privilege

Rate: 16 Flag

The Colorado "Batman Movie" Shooting Massacre will generate many narratives among the public and media. This tragedy will be one more opportunity to reflect on the United States' gun laws. The relationship between popular culture and violence will be a hot topic as well. Others will focus on questions surrounding access to mental healthcare, and what if anything could have been done to prevent James Holmes from committing his murder rampage during the debut of The Dark Knight Rises.

However, there are several conversations that will likely not occur. It is unlikely that the aftermath of the Colorado shooting rampage will be a moment when we as a country reflect upon the relationship between masculinity and violence. There most certainly will not be a "beer summit" about how accused shooter James Holmes is one more entry in a long list of mass killers who are white, male, and young.

When viewed through the white racial frame, there is nothing in his deeds on last Friday night that reflects upon the behavior of white people, generally, or white men in particular. From this perspective, his dressing up as The Joker, and killing more than a dozen people, and wounding many more, are the actions of one sick person.

As folks have worked through many times before in the common "what if?" game of race in America, if James Holmes were black or brown this would be one more signal to the existence of a "pathological culture" among said group. If James Holmes were Muslim American the Colorado shooting would be a clear act of "terrorism," and an example of the Islamic bogeyman next door who has occupied the dreams and nightmares of the "heartland" since September 11th.

These narratives would be accepted as common sense; few qualifiers or critical interventions would be offered by the mass media, the pundit classes, or the general public.

Consider the following list for a moment: with a few exceptions, most of those men who have committed mass shootings in the United States have been white.

July 12, 1976: Edward Charles Allaway, a custodian in the library of California State University, Fullerton, fatally shot seven fellow employees and wounded two others.

Aug. 20, 1986: Pat Sherrill, 44, a postal worker who was about to be fired, shoots 14 people at a post office in Edmond, Okla. He then kills himself.

July 18, 1984: James Oliver Huberty, an out-of-work security guard, kills 21 people in a McDonald's restaurant in San Ysidro, Calif. A police sharpshooter kills Huberty.

Aug. 1, 1966: Charles Whitman opened fire from the clock tower at the University of Texas at Austin, killing 16 people and wounding 31.

Oct. 16, 1991: A deadly shooting rampage took place in Killeen, Texas, as George Hennard opened fire at a Luby's Cafeteria, killing 23 people before taking his own life. 20 others were wounded in the attack.

April 20, 1999: Students Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, opened fire at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., killing 12 classmates and a teacher and wounding 26 others before killing themselves in the school's library.

March 10, 2009: Michael McLendon, 28, killed 10 people – including his mother, four other relatives, and the wife and child of a local sheriff's deputy – across two rural Alabama counties. He then killed himself.

The freedom to kill, maim, commit wanton acts of violence, and to be anti-social (as well as pathological) without having your actions reflect on your own racial group, is one of the ultimate, if not in fact most potent, examples of White Privilege in post civil rights era America. Instead of a national conversation where we reflect on what has gone wrong with young white men in our society--a group which apparently possesses a high propensity for committing acts of mass violence--James Holmes will be framed as an outlier.

That is a mighty comfort to have--all of one's deficiencies are ignored as those of an individual; all of one's abilities and gifts are taken as positive attributes and credits to one's race.

As comedian Louis CK has joked, it sure as hell is good to be white and male in America! If given a choice to re-up every year, who the hell wouldn't sign up to be white again?

In America, folks often ask, "what the hell is wrong with black people?" In the aftermath of the Colorado Movie Massacre, Columbine, and many other incidents, we need to ask, "what the hell is wrong with young white men?

Sadly, that question will not be asked on a national stage. White privilege is blinding. In the case of James Holmes, it also mutes a much needed national conversation about the ties between (white) masculinity and violence.

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
I'm not sure what's going to come out of this. This guy is white. He's from an upper middle-class socio-economic background with both parents "professionals". He's acknowledged to be highly intelligent. And yet, I don't think anybody would argue that's he's absolutely nuts--in some shape, form or fashion. It will be interesting to me to see what ultimately shakes out on the "why" of his behavior.
Let's speculate for a minute Chauncey--a young black man; from an upper income (somewhere between $150K and $200K) family; well educated (high grades in high school and college--in a PHD program in the "hard" sciences); a bit athletic.
OK, and this young black man with this background commits an atrocity like this in a pretty upscale commercial center like Aurora. Would the focus be on his blackness? Or on his actions?
Let's say there's a young man with an "Arabic" name--same scenario--yeah, the immediate speculation would be "terrorism".
And if it were an Oriental young man, in a PHD program who did this, then there may be a skewing of attitude towards "Chinese geek going bonkers".
And what if it were a 24 year old white female? Black female? Arabic female?

I don't know these answers. You don't either. I can only hope that we would focus on the acts and on the nature of the perpetrator rather than on the ethnicity. And eventually let's take a look at just how damned easy firearms are to secure--especially weapons other than for hunting or "personal" protection.
i would add jim jones to this list.
"Sadly, that question will not be asked on a national stage. White privilege is blinding. In the case of James Holmes, it also mutes a much needed national conversation about the ties between (white) masculinity and violence."

I think it's an important discussion to have; especially in light of the fact that violence is de rigueur more often that not when it comes to solving problems, individually, nationally and internationally. What is it about the status quo that makes it so? What does it mean when an entire generation grows up seeing violence (war) as the solution to problems? They end up being held accountable for their individual actions but the culture of violence that bred them is let off the hook. At what point do we start pointing the finger in the right direction?

I have seen bloggers on this site equate young black males with criminality, and defend it. We have all seen debates over the validity of whether or not the President is Muslim, but rarely an acknowledgement that the question is not even valid irrespective of the conclusion. Recently I have seen slurs of Trayvon Martin as being a thug, and that defended. Eventually we may see black male victims of the Aurora shooting described as "thugs." I would not be surprised.

The concept of privilege fascinates me. I thought it could be enlightened with discussion. In some cases it can, but there are hard cases. Beneath the surface there are some that suffer from an irrational obstinacy which can't be plumbed. There is ignorance, and there is illness. It is a compound problem.
That's not really a hundred per cent true, as in law enforcement circles it is assumed all serial killers are usually white, which is a limited subset of murderers, and actually not always true, like that Atlanta guy, which was an investigative problem, as they didn't look quickly enough, if statistically speaking that kind of racial profiling, like the mass shooter, or rampage killer (known to the shooter being the difference). So people in fact do know that.
its a strange world in which the latest event is not considered "terrorism". we spent trillions of dollars to defend ourselves from that & I guess the Warmachine wants a free pass
see also america the beautiful/ugly.. on living in aurora/US
Walter: I know you're a good guy, but Chauncey is absolutely right. Anyone who is not mainstream "white" in this country "gets" this argument all the way. Just look at the whole "illegal immigrant" issue. There is a national propensity to judge an entire racial/ethnic group based on the actions of a subset of people. Listen to the hate-mongers as they rail against "aliens" and use other pejorative terms (and, yes, I know "alien" is an official term, but our generation has seen it spun into a euphemism for "Mexican") to describe Latin Americans, especially Mexicans.

Even journalists in newsrooms are prone to asking this question as soon as they learn of a heinous crime: What was the guy? White? Black? Hispanic? I can tell you this: As soon as Hispanics rule out that the suspect is NOT Hispanic, we expel a huge, collective sigh of relief. Why? Because we know that if he had been Hispanic, it would have opened up the doors to a freefest of hate by some people (not the decent ones like you), and a blanket indictment on all Hispanics. It's just the way it is in our multiracial society. I don't know if things will ever change, frankly.
The freedom to kill, maim, commit wanton acts of violence, and to be anti-social (as well as pathological) without having your actions reflect on your own racial group, is one of the ultimate, if not in fact most potent, examples of White Privilege in post civil rights era America.

I wish I could have written that statement. It is what I have been thinking about since the shooter was identified. It is something that has annoyed me for my entire life. Thank you, Chauncey, for stating the obvious, which few white people ever notice.

Yeah, Don Rich, when we hear about mass murderers - especially if they're using guns - we assume it is a white man. Before they caught him I was absolutely certain that the Belt Way Sniper was a white gun nut who couldn't get laid. I was really surprised to be off, at least by the white part, and I think a lot of other people were too.
This isn't a race thing. consider the sudan. Did race play a part in those massacres? Sure the U.S. has a lot of white murderers. Let's take a look at the inner city..who's responsible for the murders there..ohhhhh black on black...not media worthy.

Look, we all know it's not over...we get it... whitey still rules the media.

Wait 50 years...I'm sure hispanic violence will dominate the airwaves, once that demographic rules in America...

and yet we will all miss the point.

We are all one, and need not wipe ourselves out.

Of course, we'd have to grow up first, which isn't going to happen any time soon.
An entire article promoting racial stereotyping!

Here's another conversation that is unlikely to occur: Three of those that died were WHITE MALES who were protecting their girlfriends from bullets.

When was the last time that a black male did that? Or better yet, when was the last time that a female died protecting her male friend?
Chauncey - Again with the racism stuff. Do you have anything better do in life. I don't know how much you write here and I don't care to look. Maybe you write about a lot of things. What I do know is that I have not seen in my time here a front page post of yours that isn't about racism.

You may be right about white males involved in these crimes. And if he was on the run you can bet the expert profilers would assume is is white. Are they racist.

Bill - your assertion is just pure BULLSHIT. There is no way on earth any victim of this crime of any color/race is going to be called a thug. Get a life.
This is so true. And when a white man commits a shocking crime, he is immediately labeled "insane". If it were a man of color he would not be as likely to get that "free pass" of insanity. No, it would be more like "cold blooded killer".
onislandtime - it is not that simple. Not all these white guys can get off on an insane plea nor does the public assume them to be so. It depends on the crime and the motive.
How about those 2 white bank robbers in L.A. I think, with body vests that killed all those people. They were just criminals out for monetary gain. White or black no insanity privilege. Same goes for a drive by in the hood.

Same goes for the OKC bombing. I didn't hear any insanity claims there. Because he had a clear motive. So white guys don't just get off with insanity. Goetz did not get off on insanity. Some thought innocent or guilty. None said insanity nor did he.

So your statement is just not true. Many schoking crimes are committed by whites and they are not assumed insane.
I don't know whether this is flippant or not. I like it either way. The idea that Whites should be profiled is something that should be said, just so everyone understands what it means to be profiled.

According to Tim Rice, possibly the best writer on race I know, a higher percentage of Whites than of Blacks uses illegal drugs, so the police should in theory be pulling over White drivers to check their (our) cars for drugs.

Profiling is profiling. Let everyone understand what it entails.

And I get the whole bit about hoping whoever committed the latest crime isn't from your group. As someone Jewish, I certainly get that. It's still the first thing we ask.

When I heard about this crime my first assumption was that it was done by a white male in his early 20s or late teens. Statistically, mass shooters are. I've heard this discussed in more than one commentary and I haven't been watching/reading much more coverage than I couldn't avoid.

When I read, if he had been Hispanic in Deborah Méndez Wilson's commentary I felt a little twinge, a tiny but actual physical reaction because it just seemed so impossible. There is no crime that is as exclusively black or Hispanic in my mind as shooting up a large group of people is angry white male. I'd probably have reacted with more belief if she had written that he had 3 pinkie fingers and a couple of eyelids growing off his left ankle.

And his actions don't represent the whole race because he looks like the power structure - white privilege. No one gives up power willingly - didn't MLK say that? That's not just a white thing, it's a human thing. If history was turned on its head, if black people had the power and wealth that white people have, they would be just as oppressive. It's not a white thing, it's a power thing and a human thing.

But white power isn't universal or inviolate - Kate O'Hehir's comment illustrates that nicely. It will go away hard but it will eventually go away. The powerful are creating for themselves such a strong position that by the time they are overcome the human race may no longer be viable on this planet but that's a bigger issue than I can manage.

It's probably part of the pathology of white privilege/power that the crime that is most singularly associated with white males tend to be very individualistic and meaningless - meaningless in that the criminal has absolutely no chance of gaining anything real or substantial from his crime.

This is just a series of rambling reactions and, in the end, about all I'm really saying is I agree and disagree and these are some of my reactions.

Finally, I want to ignore that Daniel9's single contribution but, exercising superhuman civility and restraint, I have to point out that it is a pitiful piece of shockingly moronic, stupid, ignorant shit that doesn't deserve this attention.
I totally agree with you that it's somehow verbotin to assume this type of violent assault has any bearing on the status of young white males ... were it any other race/ethnicity/gender the curtain would be brought down in an instant on the whole population, for the 100 millionth time.
I think you're right (and Walter a little optimistic). A shoot-em-up by a black guy would produce a whole lot of talk of Race War and such.

And Kate - I don't think this is an innate matter of white getting off the hook (of being *representative*) except in the U.S. It's the matter of the NATIONAL MAJORITY believing its nut cases are not *representative*. I get a whiff of white privilege in both these responses (sorry, I like you both, and what do I know).

Deborah - chuckling. "Snowbacks" (illegals from Canada, at least of the white variety) don't get any notice or cause a blowback. WHITE INVADERS FROM THE NORTH, gotta secure that damned border...nah, don't ever hear that.

Daniel9 - wow. A living example!
The first thing I assumed when I heard about this was that it was committed by a young white male. In my mind, this crime is definitely reflecting on his social group.
Exactly. Everybody should act like good little wage slaves and bow down before the bankers. And if any of those black, or white, people act up, send Bill Cosby in there to wag his finger at them. Heathens.

(geez, what a...)
@Myriad: I LOVE Garrison Keillor, and I nearly died with laughter the first time I heard him use the term "frostbacks" to describe Canadians who had settled in the United States w/o papers. :)
We don't know enough about Holme's life, but in my opinion he is a part of society that we tend to overlook. Because no one would think of him as being from a disadvantaged background, he probably would not get the extra attention others might get (from teachers, from organizations) and yet society still expects him to have the burdens that come with so-called privilege. This is what can make some snap in some way: a feeling that society demands much from them -- in fact even blames them for past sins of society and history in general -- and yet is to quick to discount them as being in need of any help or guidance of any kind.

Seeing the world in terms of race in my opinion only contributes to this problem. We need to get over that and see people as individuals.
I love reading the comments, the way people react so defensively at any mention of race or privilege (especially the white people). I thought it was fairly clear that all you did was make note of the fact that Holmes's race is invisible in any discussion about him, which in a perfect world where everyone's race is invisible wouldn't matter, but in this world, in this country where everyone who isn't white is exactly that - not white - and, as such, is racially visible, this is problematic. The solution, ultimately, is not to focus on the whiteness of the white, but to stop focusing on the non-whiteness of the non-white. When a black man kills people, all the white people scream for black blood; they blame an entire group of people for the actions of one man and do everything in their power to make everyone who looks like him miserable. And what do they do when a white man kills people? They blame rap music. Black people just can't win.
I think your basically hinting at the fact that Sociology as a western discipline is framed from the perspective of white males. We're the "norm." It's hard to separate that from the data when it's so culturally entrenched.

However, white males have also held political power, which makes them the "majority," which also renders them the social norm. If the founding fathers had been black and the majority of congress black, then whites would be the minority, and we'd be asking ourselves after this tragedy "what went wrong with white youth."

In the end, knowledge as we understand it can't exist without this little bit of racism.
From the pen of Chauncey One Note: "In the case of James Holmes, it also mutes a much needed national conversation about the ties between (white) masculinity and violence."

I think the staggering and disproportionate amount of violence committed by black males, particularly in Obama's home town, would suggest that your statement would be more pertinent and less racist without the parenthetical material.
So how come when a middle class or upper middle class young white man goes on a rampage 90% of the reaction is, "He must have had a psychotic break from all the pressure". Really? So huge school loans are more pressure than long term unemployment, not having medical care, or even living in a high crime area? How come when a person of color goes on a crime spree people don't immediately say, "Oh, the pressures of this man's life must have caused him to crack."
So how come when a middle class or upper middle class young white man goes on a rampage 90% of the reaction is, "He must have had a psychotic break from all the pressure". Really? So huge school loans are more pressure than long term unemployment, not having medical care, or even living in a high crime area? How come when a person of color goes on a crime spree people don't immediately say, "Oh, the pressures of this man's life must have caused him to crack."
Well, we don't have to ask what would happen if an Asian committed a similar atrocity. Seung-Hui Cho had a rampage at Virginia Tech five years ago. He killed 32 people and wounded 25 others. As I recall, the media focus was on how his behavior had become more threatening and how badly the school handled it. Not a focus on his race.

The really sad thing is that shootings are so common we've all forgotten it.
72% of the country is white and 12% black, meaning in any randomly distributed event, you'd expect to see mostly white people.

Your list had 7 events and 8 people. Add in Seung-Hui Cho of the Virginia tech massacre (32 killed) and John Allen Muhammad, the beltway sniper (16+ killed) and you get 10 or 11, depending on how you count. That breaks down to 7 or 8 white, one Asian and one black, which is what you'd expect statistically if race made no difference to anyone's tendency to pick up a gun a shoot into a crowd of people.

We don't talk about mass shootings as a failing of white men because there's no evidence that ethnic origin or color of one's skin makes a difference.
Another racial aspect that has been ignored is the victims. What if the victims were black? We see lots of stories on missing little white girls, but not missing little black girls. The police murder black and brown young men on an all too often basis, yet it rarely makes the national news. The murder of 21 young black men in Chicago has not started a national discussion on inner city violence. Wasn't it black communities in Chicago that wanted to restrict hand guns to reduce the violence, but it was struck down by the Supremes. Obama murders black and brown people every day, yet no one seems to care. Kill some lilly white people, and its a media frenzy. We need to find out every detail of their lilly white life and get to know their stories. Trayvon Martin would have gone by without any media coverage if it wasn't for a determined family to get that story out to stop future injustices.
As a teacher, I can think of about ten or so kids over the twenty years of whom it would not be a total shocker to hear that they "snapped" in an act of random public violence. All white boys. All mad at the world for not giving them enough. All emotionally stunted and so full of entitlement there wasn't any room for anything else. You hit the nail on the head with this one, my friend. Great post.
bravo - thanks for tackling the dangers of male hormones, especially when compounded by substance abuse.

no please put down that beer and set a better example.
"thanks for tackling the dangers of male hormones, especially when compounded by substance abuse."

No, no, according to our poster, the compounder is white skin.

I must say it takes guts for a resident of Chicago to get all twisty about WHITE male violence.
Being a white Southerner, I am aware of the existing racial tension between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and other races the same. As the old Civil Rights petitioners and activist die out, new generations is bringing forth understanding and knowledge, progress and healing. Every day I am blessed to see people being people. This was no form of racial violence or terrorism. James Holmes is a disturbed boy seeking attention and fame, knowing media loving Americans can provide just that.
Why the Fort Hood gunman is a terrorist, and the Aurora cinema gunman is not.

In deference to the pop-media-PC-mush-heads, There are good reasons tobelieve that the Fort Hood gunman a terrorist, and the Aurora cinema gunman is not.

It seems that whenever a tragedy, like this, occurs, the agenda-driven are all over the pop-media to politicize the event. So it's not surprising that the race-card players, and Islam apologists, are all over this, with article like this.

But the truth is: the 9/11 killers, and the Fort Hood killers, are not called "terrorists" just because of their race, or religion. They are considered terrorist because they have ties to terrorist Muslim organizations, and because they are targeted specific groups – i.e. those they considered to be enemies of Islam.

From wikipedia:
> According to eyewitnesses, Hasan had taken a seat at an empty table and bowed his head for several seconds when he suddenly stood up, shouted "Allahu Akbar!" and opened fire.
> He [Fort Hood gunman Nidal Malik Hasan] also handed out copies of the Qur'an, along with his business cards which listed a Maryland phone number and read "Behavioral Heatlh [sic] – Mental Health – Life Skills | Nidal Hasan, MD, MPH | SoA(SWT) | Psychiatrist". According to investigators, the acronym "SoA" is commonly used on jihadist websites as an acronym for "Soldier of Allah" or "Servant of Allah", and SWT is commonly used by Muslims to mean "subhanahu wa ta'ala" (Glory to God). The cards did not reflect his military rank.
> Investigations before and after the shooting discovered e-mail communications between Hasan and Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki
> The U.S. later classified Anwar al-Awlaki as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, and the UN considered Awlaki to be associated with al-Qaeda

This is very different than cases like the Tucson Arizona shootings, or the Aurora cinema shootings. In each of those cases: the shooters seem to be suffering from some serious mental defect, the shooters were not tied to any sort of organization, the shooters were not targeting people of any particular race or religion. The Aurora shooter, and the Tucson shooter, did not seem to see themselves as soldiers in any sort of religious, or political, war.

There may be similarities in these rampage shootings, but there are also some very significant differences. The 9/11 attackers, and the Fort Hood slayer, are clearly terrorists. The Tucson killer, and the Aurora killer, are just crazies.
Mark Ames, in his book Going Postal (review: ), hypothesizes that these mass murders, or "rage murders", represent little rebellions against an oppressive, cutthroat culture. He believes that the reason the majority of these rage murderers are white people is because white middle class Americans tend to buy into and deeply invest in the dominant cultural lies (the land of opportunity, makers vs. takers, land of the free, etc.) much more so than, say, inner city minorities (who I imagine have few illusions about the BS our elites feed us), and therefore the effect of having those illusions decisively shattered tends to hit white people harder.

I don't know if this dynamic applies to James Holmes or if he's genuinely nuts, but it's food for thought.
Pah! What polemics, which alas is what all this talk of white privilege comes down to: vapid polemics. And this is a shame because there is a valid conversation to be had, but the nutsos dominate the conversation.

1) I think it is well established and expected for this type of killer to be white. John Allen Mohammed was presumed to be white before he was caught.
2) While the "profilers" stand by this assertion, it is a bit of clap trap at least when it comes to serial killers; The fact is that for too long, no one cared when black people would disappear (as we know, most often, criminals prey on people of their own ethnicity). The cops would ignore it. I am constantly flummoxed when I hear people make this white-people-as-serial-killers kant just to make a bogus point whereas it is this attitude that has left too many disappearances ignored.

This article is a strung together thread of the laziest thoughts on race in America.
@Seer - That is just patently untrue. For decades, race height and approximate age have been standard first practice police info gathering. What the media HAS done in recent years is to take the police report and take out the ethnicity reference altogether.
I want to point out some patterns I have been aware of in the media for years-
When a white person commits a crime, we ALWAYS hear about their background & how everybody is sooo surprised, they never saw this coming, he was such a GOOD person, awwww....
When a person of colour commits a crime, we never hear ANYTHING about their upbringing....ONLY about the crime.
This is obvious when you follow this for years.
Recent case in point, the Sikh Temple shootings. Did we hear ANYTHING about the individual victims, who they were, their lives, as we did with the shooting victims of Aurora? Nope, all the media focused on was this WHITE SUPREMACIST & his step-mom, talking about what a good little boy he was, as we all saw the pix of him in his 'lil league uniform, smiling out at us as though this was an anomoly which couldn't be explained.....yet, she ALSO said he came out of the army like that in the early 90's....hmmmm, racist for nearly 15 years, but this was outta character for him?...yeah, right....see HOW much I know about this fool?? Yet I do NOT know the name of ONE victim, one Sikh who was killed, because the media focused on the poor white kid turned nazi....where was the focus towards the victims? NOwhere in site was the focus on the BROWN victims like it was for Aurora or ANY other mass killing.....however, we did learn ALL about the nazi shooter, as if that was even merited????

I must say, as a Native Amerikan woman living in a country stolen from my people with acts of mass violence, mass genocide & reprehensible acts of violence committed against my family, I fear WHITE men in the USA MORE than ANY "terrorist" oversea in a country far removed from MY daily life here. With road rage almost always angry white dudes, mass killings-angry white dudes, planes into IRS buildings-angry white dudes, bulldozers into town halls-VERY angry white dudes, tractor smashing & obliterating the vehicles of the ENTIRE police force-super-duper angry WHITE dude!!...why is the dept of 'homeland' (hey, facist regimes called their countries HOMELANDS, too!) security attempting to make amerikans FEAR what we can't see, instead of concentrating on WHAT IS???
And that is that the privileged white males are very angry & we have more chances of being done in by THEM here in the good 'ol us of a than by ANY "terrorist" (freedom fighter).
yup, yup, yup, I fear whites more than ANYBODY, they have this bloodthirsty lust to conquer, on small scales, on world scales.....& they AIN'T done yet.....mideast anyone????