Undercover NASCAR?

I just love headlines with FEAR in them. Editors do too, apparently.

The first paragraph of the L.A. Times story titled "Fear over U.S.-born extremists" follows through with the de rigeur adjectives "deadly" and "chilling" and the resurrected "sleeper" concept (which one might have thought had been disproven, with something like 70,000 extrajudicial detentions and almost no significant convictions).

When security cameras captured four young Britons sauntering into the London Underground before detonating their deadly backpacks last month, the chilling images raised questions about whether such homegrown sleeper terrorists could be plotting attacks in the United States.

The first question that struck me: Home-grown terrorists in America—this is a new thing?

In this story, from early June a former FBI undercover agent discusses a wonderfully American double-standard: where swarthy Islamists are involved, the conspiracy is massive, and there are sleeper cells operating out of every mosque or halal grocery.

When it's a native-born American, he's a "lone wolf" and a bad apple, in spite of ample evidence of many extensive networks of domestic violence-espousing groups. (See the Southen Poverty Law Center's Map of 762 active hate groups here.)

Below, a detail from my home state:

It's true. Terrorism perpetrated by White Christian Men (racial profiling anyone? How about undercover at NASCAR?) has been around for quite some time in America, and is doing quite well today, thank you very much.

Interested parties might want to have a look at the SPLC's latest report, which states that there have been no fewer than 60 rightist terrorist plots since 1995 (not that you'd know that from the Department of Homeland Security—their biggest domestic terror threats are animal rights and environmental groups!):

These [plots] have included plans to bomb or burn government buildings, banks, refineries, utilities, clinics, synagogues, mosques, memorials and bridges; to assassinate police officers, judges, politicians, civil rights figures and others; to rob banks, armored cars and other criminals; and to amass illegal machine guns, missiles, explosives, and biological and chemical weapons.

It only sorta/kinda fits with this post, but I don't know how to wind it up and I HAVE to get back to work, so herewith I take the liberty of reproducing my favorite-ever example of post-911 awful writing, the Peggy Noonan WSJ column of October 19, 2001:

Tourists? It was a funny time of day for tourists to be videotaping a landmark – especially when the tourists looked like the guys who'd just a few days before blown up a landmark.

They stared at us staring at them for a few seconds, and then they began to videotape Rockefeller Center. We continued watching, and I surveyed the street for a policeman or patrol car. I looked over at the men again. They were watching me. The one with the camera puts it down for a moment. We stared, they stared. And then they left. They walked away and disappeared down a side street. Let me tell you what I thought. I thought: Those guys are terrorists.

The title of Noonan's piece: Profiles Encouraged. Oh, I get it now!