But I thought "terrorism" was one of those Islamic words!

OK people let's get the rules straight. When the perpetrator of a mass-killing in the county is sufficiently Muslim-y enough for our sensibilities then:

1) It's unquestionably considered an act of terrorism, particularly since such actions never fail to whip the public in a panic.

2) All Muslim people in the United States (and often, all over the world, since "those people" are suppose to have a hive mind as part of the Collective or something) must grovel in forgiveness of "mainstream America" whether they associated with the killer or not.

So alleged shooter, Dylann Roof (who's "merely" a racist and white nationalist) whose HORRIFIC brutal crime at a historically black church in Charleston was done to inspire terror in on the black populace will be condemned as a brutal terrorist with any white person judged for how much sufficient protest they put up before our concerned society considers them not part of the "radical whites.", right? (I'll wait until the crickets stop chirping before you start to get the picture.)

I'll let someone else do the heavy lifting explaining the hypocrisy and inconsistencies of America's use of this loaded term in regards to the Charleston hate crime (don't worry, he certainly has the mental strength to carry the load.) So, take it away, Glenn Greenwald!