I recently read an article in the March 23-25 edition of Metro
which I found disconcerting. The story, “Cops on hunt for armed-robbery suspects,” detailed how Toronto police have begun asking for the public’s help in identifying two bank robbers who held up a Bank of Montreal on Lakeshore Blvd. on February 23.
These fly dudes
The part of the article which troubled me was the remarks from Toronto Staff Inspector, Mike Earl. And I quote:
“These individuals are urban terrorists. They need to be taken off the streets before another robbery like this occurs.” –Mike Earl .. not sure if stupid or trolling
Urban Terrorists. Think about that for a sec. Now I realize it must take some doing to vilify bank robbers who didn’t kill anyone and who only robbed an institution which most people, on some level, feel robs them every day…
I’ll just leave this here
… but urban terrorists?? Let us examine the various levels at which this ill-wrought comment betrays its stupidity.
First and foremost, the inspector has confused the names fo two vastly different crimes. Terrorism and Robbery.
terrorism |ˈterəˌrizəm|nounthe use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
robbery |ˈräb(ə)rē|noun ( pl. -beries)the action of robbing a person or place : he was involved in drugs, violence, extortion, and robbery | an armed robbery.• Law the felonious taking of personal property from someone using force or the threat of force.• informal unashamed swindling or overcharging.
This is an egregious misnomer which attempts to whip up public sentiment by hearkening back…
To attempt to play on people’s emotions like this is a cheap and disingenuous ploy which is frankly insulting to anyone who has ever lost a loved one to
bank robbers terrorists.
Not to paint an unwarranted sheen of nobility on a bank robber, but they’re not all necessarily mass murderers, and as far as crimes go some are less severe than others.
Second, and this is a trifling point, but to call someone an “urban” terrorist seems a tad redundant. Would there by corollary be rural terrorists? I don’t think so simply by virtue of the fact that there isn’t as much shit to blow up in the countryside…
…except these decadent western bitches and their cows.
Methinks this “urban” distinction was related to the “unique Rocawear hoodie” worn by one of the suspects, which was explicitly mentioned in the article. So “urban apparel” (code-word for clothes made by black people and marketed to white people) such as Rocawear automatically bestows the appellation urban to whatever criminal activity the wearer participates in? What if Al-Qaeda, Hamas, the PLO,
the IDF or any other terrorist organization decided to rock Rocawear, Wu-Wear, FUBU, et al?
Urban Jihad, nigga!
The third and final point I would like to make relates to the title of this post. Certain words…we’ll call them sexy words, have gotten too sexy for their own good and have become overused to the point of inanity. Here is a brief, inexhaustive list:
Terrorism, Freedom, Liberty, Democracy, (The Creation of) Jobs, (Suffering from) Exhaustion, 9/11, and the list goes on.
These words had a meaning, then at some point it got blurred, and in some cases these words now mean the opposite of their original definition.
Oh yeah, that “freedom” we were fighting for…
My homie, George Orwell kinda predicted this liberal use of the English language
a while back, but its still sad to see how right he was. I can’t help but tune out these words when I hear some talking head say them on television. Furthermore, I automatically assume that the person who says these words is lying somehow about something.
To get back to Staff Inspector Mike Earl, I really wish he could use his powers of inspection to find better and less misleading words. It reflects poorly on him and the police force when he uses the word terrorist in an alarmist way to drum up feeling in the hopes of solving a cold case. To those who find this criticism harsh I would respond that if you want to wear the fancy hat and the shiny badge you gotta hold yourself to a higher standard.