Introduction

            During the past couple years, the world has experienced several shooting massacres motivated by different political agenda that left behind hundreds of dead and injured people. Those lucky ones who survived these attacks will live forever with the memory of going through this terrible event, and those who died will forever be missing in the hearts of their families and loved ones. The shootings I will be focusing on in this project were committed by extremists and are sometimes considered and labeled as acts of domestic terrorism. This type of violence is due to the recent rise of extremist groups, especially right-wing extremist groups who target different outgroups. The FBI’s take on attacks like these is following, “… a majority of the domestic terrorism cases that we’ve investigated are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacist violence, but it does include other things as well.”[1]

            It is difficult to look for a good reason which could lead someone to commit such a horrible crime or a reason which would explain or try to justify an action like this. However, some of the attackers wrote down manifestos sharing their thoughts and they shared these with the world. The existence of these manifestos may help us see the reasons, see what was going on in the shooter’s head and they may also help us try to analyze the rhetoric of the attackers, which may sometimes be surprisingly similar. The main goal of this project is to analyze some of these manifestos and try to say more about the attacker’s rhetoric and use of demagogic discourse. Through this analysis see how they use different demagogic strategies to for example justify their actions, persuade their audience, or how they encourage the readers to feel part of a group and maybe even move them to action. After analyzing the manifestos, I will try to look for some similarities and differences among them.

For the analysis, I chose three specific manifestos. Firstly, I will analyze the manifesto of Dylann Storm Roof, who is an American shooter and white supremacist responsible for the Charleston church shooting that happened on June 17, 2015 in the state of South Carolina.[2] Secondly, the manifesto of John Timothy Earnest, who is a gunman responsible for the Poway synagogue shooting that occurred on April 27, 2019 will be analyzed. Lastly, I will analyze the manifesto of Patrick Wood Crusius, as he was accused from the mass shooting which occurred at a Walmart store in El Paso, Texas on August 3, 2019.

To be able to analyze the manifestos, I will use two main articles as the primary sources which will serve as lenses to look at the manifestos through. As for the first one, I will use the Patricia Roberts-Miller’s “Characteristics of Demagoguery” for the main analysis of the manifestos. In her book, she offers different specific characteristics of extremist and demagogic rhetoric to show presence of certain recurrent elements in the rhetoric of attackers. Thanks to that, we can find similarities and differences in speeches of many shooters. Secondly, The Daily Stormer’s playbook will be used to deliver certain attributes of the rhetoric and mainly prove the words of the shooters depict them as white supremacists. The playbook is supposed to provide guidelines for writers who want to compose white supremacist texts.

In the following sections, I will shortly introduce each of the events, analyze the mentioned manifestos and try to look for some similarities and differences among them. I chose to analyze the manifestos as the topic of my final project mainly because I consider it very relevant and I think it is the topic we all should care about. From my point of view, thanks to the analysis of the manifestos we can spot the similarities and usual topics that are brought by these attackers. By paying more attention to these, maybe we can read between the lines and see the real message behind the words.

Manifestos Analysis

                To begin with, I consider important to clarify what a manifesto is and what exactly I am looking for. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a manifesto is “a written statement declaring publicly the intentions, motives, or views of its issuer”,[3] which means that I will analyze original texts written by the shooters themselves. In this project, I am looking for specific demagogic features of the attackers’ rhetoric. By demagoguery we mean a “polarizing propaganda that motivates members of an ingroup to hate and scapegoat some outgroup(s), largely by promising certainty, stability, and what Erich Fromm famously called “an escape from freedom”.[4]

1. Manifesto of Dylann Storm Roof

            I would like to start with the manifesto of Dylann Storm Roof. Dylann Roof is an American citizen born in 1994 who is considered a white supremacist and is convicted for perpetrating the Charleston church shooting on June 17, 2015 in the state of South Carolina. During his attack, which occurred at the time of a prayer service, Dylann Roof killed nine people including the pastor and injured one other person. All the people killed were African Americans and he himself later confessed that by the shooting, he wanted to ignite a race war.[5]

            His manifesto was discovered three days after the shooting at his own website called The Last Rhodesian, where Dylann Roof was posting photos of himself posing with symbols of white supremacy and neo-Nazism. In 2017, Dylann Roof was sentenced to nine consecutive sentences of life without parole after formally pleading guilty.[6]

            To begin the analysis, one of the main elements that can be found in the manifesto is polarization. Roof’s manifesto is divided into several sections – Blacks, Jews, Hispanics and East Asians which shows he polarizes people into several groups. In the manifesto, there is obviously one “in-group” which is considered the good one, and this group consists of the white people. All the other mentioned groups are considered the “out-groups” which, according to Roof’s words, cause problems. He uses exactly these words in the section where he talks about “Blacks”, where he mentions that they are “the biggest problem for Americans”. The same words he uses when talking about “Hispanics”, and when speaking about “Jews”, he labels them as enemies. The only group he does not consider as bad as the others are “East Asians”, where he mentions that he has great respect for the East Asian races and mentions that they could be great allies of the white race. Even though Dylann Roof does not consider this group bad, it certainly is not another “in-group”. When talking about the white superiority complex, he even says “I don’t deny that we are in fact superior” and later he speaks about segregation in a positive way which was, according to him, “a defensive measure…(which)…existed to protect us from them”. He also describes white people as “White beauty”.

            The manifesto of Dylann Roof includes a lot of demonizing and dehumanizing words which are targeted at the mentioned out-groups. In the very first sentences in the section about “Blacks”, he says “Niggers are stupid and violent” and several sentences below, he explains the racial awareness by using an example of a dog beaten by a man which substitute the roles of black and white people. He demonizes black people when he says they behave obnoxiously in public and that due to current situation, this type of behavior is expected of them. Another example of dehumanization is when Roof speaks about segregation and says that “integration has done nothing but bring Whites down to level of brute animal”, where “brute animal” replaces the black people. In another paragraph, Dylann Roof demonizes black people when saying “negroes have lower Iqs, lower impuls control, and higher testosterone levels in generals. These three things alone are a recipe for violent behavior”. Few sentences later, he discusses the similarity of black and white people on an example of a horse and a donkey, when he says “A horse and a donkey can breed and make a mule, but they are still completely different animals. Just because we can breed with the other races doesn’t make us the same.”,which could be considered as dehumanizing. Roberts Miller describes the act of dehumanizing and demonizing followingly, “the outgroup or opponent may be demonized, and sometimes even associated explicitly with the devil. Outgroups or opponents may be described in dehumanizing terms, through comparison to animals, filth or disease”.[7] In Roof’s words, there is an obvious use of terms corresponding with this definition. Additionally, all the mentioned examples are very close to the rhetoric of hate and disgust at the same time.

            In the section when talking about black people, Roof mentions the past and history. He speaks about slaves and “historical lies” which I would consider an oversimplification because of the incompleteness of the historical context. He says, “I wish with a passion that niggers were treated terribly throughout history by Whites, …, it would make it so much easier for me to accept our current situation. But it isn’t true.” This part obviously oversimplifies history without any deeper look into what was happening in the past. This part mentioning historical lies could be also considered a use of conspiracy theories since tension between the historical North and the South. The concept of oversimplification would apply in the paragraph discussing “Patriotism” where he mentions that he does not “blame the veterans of any wars up until after Vietnam” for the current situation when he says we fight for others while white people are being murdered daily in the streets. By mentioning this Roof also uses the rhetoric of victimization since “the Whites” are being victimized by a situation in which they are being forgotten for a fight for someone else.

            The manifesto of Dylann Roof presents a motive of the attack. Even though it should probably not be considered a motive but rather an impulse, at the very beginning Roof mentions the Trayvon Martin case after which looking this up, he says, “I have never been the same since that day”. Trayvon Martin was a young student from Sanford, FL who was shot by George Zimmerman. Martin was unarmed when he was shot and even though Zimmerman was charged with murder for Martin’s death, he was acquitted at trial after claiming self-defense. This incident was reviewed by the Department of Justice for potential civil rights violations. Though Roof claims in his manifesto that “It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right.”, and that it brought him to ask more about crimes of blacks on Whites. As was mentioned before, by shooting he wanted to ignite a race war which was obviously provoked by this case. In the manifesto he mentions that he believes that white people can “take (the world) back completely. But by no means should we wait any longer to take drastic action.”.

            Lastly, there is a concept of victimization present in the manifesto. As can be even seen from the part when talking about demonizing and dehumanizing the out-groups where he lists and explains all his problems with the groups, he justifies his action by putting the white people (including himself) as victims who should do something. At the very end, he quotes a film and says “I see all this stuff going on, and I don’t see anyone doing anything about it. And it pisses me off.”, then he continues “Even if my life is worth less than a speck of dirt, I want to use it for the good of society.”, by which he justifies his action to, in his eyes, make the world a better place and sees himself as a hero who is defending his race. He also mentions that “someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me”. He simply justifies his action by victimizing himself by the situation. The use of this strategy can be found even in earlier mentioned words, for example when Roof talks about defensive measures that existed “to protect us from them”. Therefore, it is obvious that some of these rhetoric strategies go hand in hand.

            To compare Dylann Roof’s manifesto with The Daily Stormer’s playbook, it is obvious that Roof’s words and topics match the white supremacists’ ones. For example, in his manifesto he includes Racism, Jews, or Multiculturalism, which are the topics that, according to the guide, could be an impulse to start a race war. Roof also uses different terms for the word “Nigger” which, as the playbook says, “is okay to use sometimes, but shouldn’t be used constantly”.

2. Manifesto of John Timothy Earnest

            Secondly, I would like to analyze the Open Letter written by John Earnest. John Earnest is a gunman born in 1999 in San Diego, CA who, armed with an AR-15 style rifle, fired shots inside the Chabad of Poway synagogue in Poway in April 2019. The attack occurred on the last day of the Jewish Passover holiday, which fell on a Shabbat.[8] During the shooting, one woman was killed, and three other people were injured, including the synagogue’s rabbi.[9]

The Open Letter was signed and published by John Earnest shortly before the attack on 8Chan, the imageboard website and a discussion board for extremists. After shutting this website down, it was newly reborn as 8Kun later. The date for Earnest’s trial is scheduled for June 2, 2020 when he may be sentenced to death.

What is obvious in the Open Letter are the elements of polarization. John Earnest generally divides people into two groups – European race, which is the “good one” and therefore in the text stands for the “in-group”, and Jews who represent the “out-group”, “bad group”. He also generalizes and calls the European race the “White people” or “White men”. In the letter, according to John Earnest’s words, the White men are the honored people who should not let “God’s creation (themselves) be corrupted and destroyed by the Jew”.

Exactly as Dylan Roof did in his manifesto, John Earnest uses the strategy of demonizing and dehumanizing the out-group, in this case, the Jews. This concept is most obvious in the third paragraph of the letter, where he claims “Every Jew is responsible for the meticulously planned genocide of the European race. They act as a unit, and every Jew plays his part to enslave the other races around him—whether consciously or subconsciously. Their crimes are endless.” From this statement it is obvious he puts all the blame on Jews and automatically connects them to making crimes. After declaring this statement, Earnest lists several concrete examples to support and defend his claim. He explicitly connects the Jews with the devil and describes them in the worst possible way. At the end of the paragraph he states “Every Jew young and old has contributed to these. For these crimes they deserve nothing but hell.”. This can be viewed as part of demonizing the group and also, according to Roberts Miller description of the rhetoric of hate and disgust: “The outgroup may be compared to disease and filth and associated with treachery or effeminacy. Such rhetorical moves may make listening to the claims of opponents pointless or even dangerous.”, as this type of rhetoric. This is even more obvious from blaming the Jews for the European genocide and murders, as the Roberts Miller take on the rhetoric of hate and disgust continues, “Acts of genocide or mass violence are often associated with such language.”. This part of the manifesto should be also considered a rhetoric of victimization by which he explains and justifies his action and puts himself, as a part of the ingroup, in a situation that is victimized by the actions of the outgroup.

Next, John Earnest uses a lot of God terms and loaded questions. He justifies his own position by claiming that he was blessed by God for taking the action, and also to declare and justify the position of white men, which he says, “are the greatest race that our God has created”. As for loaded questions, he asks many of these to evoke emotions and share his thoughts which may lead to readers’ confusion or the feeling of controversy. In the first page, he always asks a question when starting a new paragraph which he tries to answer in following sentences. For example, he asks “What value does my life have compared to the entirety of the European race?” which make readers think and maybe find Earnest in a little bit more understandable position. Therefore, it could be said that Earnest uses these questions to trick the audience to try to picture himself in a better light by trying to picture himself as an individual sacrificing his life for the good of the society. Supposedly, he asks these questions to make people think he puts the good of the whole society first and that he is aware of its importance.

In the open letter, there are many aspects of victimization. By using certain words, he puts himself in a position in which he “willingly sacrifices his future” for the race and to prevent “the doomed fate that the Jews have planned for his race”. He puts himself in a position of victim, a voluntary victim, when he claims that he is the one who “is willing to take a stand against the injustice that the Jew has inflicted upon him”. He tries to justify this position by constructing a sense of righteousness when trying to persuade the audience that he was made to kill the Jews, even though he did not want to. More than that, he compares his action to a concept of self-defense when he claims “It is unlawful and cowardly to stand on the sidelines as the European people are genocided around you. I did not want to have to kill Jews. But they have given us no other option. I’m just a normal dude who wanted to have a family, help and heal people, and play piano. But the Jew—with his genocidal instincts—is insistent on poking the bear until it tears his head off….”. Every single sentence of this paragraph contains a rhetoric of victimization when he tries to explain that it was the only right thing to justify his action. He even tries to picture himself as a normal, peaceful person who just did not have any other option. The victimization could be considered the main strategy of his Open Letter.

To compare the Open Letter with The Daily Stormer’s playbook, he uses similar strategies as Dylann Roof in his manifesto. As he talks about Jews, Racism, Multiculturalism or Antisemitism, the topics, as well as the topics of Dylan Roof, match the white supremacists’ ones. His words also follow the prime directive mentioned in the playbook which says “always blame the Jews for everything” as his primary target were Jews who Earnest blames for making white people victims and causing death by murders and genocide.

3. Manifesto of Patrick Wood Crusius

            The last manifesto I would like to analyze is the manifesto of Patrick Wood Crusius. Patrick Crusius is an American citizen born in 1998, and it is a person responsible for a mass shooting at a Walmart store in El Paso, Texas that occurred on August 3, 2019. During the attack, 22 people were killed, and 24 people were injured.[10] The shooting is considered the deadliest attack on Latinos in modern American history.[11]

            His manifesto, titled The Inconvenient Truth, was posted on the online message board 8Chan shortly before the attack.[12] It is the same website that was used by John Earnest to share his Open Letter. On February 6, 2020, Patrick Crusius was charged with 90 federal charges, and on February 12, 2020, he waived his federal bond hearing during his first federal court appearance.[13]

            The manifesto of Patrick Crusius is slightly different from the two previously mentioned ones. Patrick Crusius begins his manifesto with the statement supporting the Christchurch shooter and his manifesto which occurred in March 2019 and when 51 people were killed and another 49 injured.[14] He opens up his manifesto with giving the general idea why he committed the attack and divides his manifesto into several categories where he talks about himself, political reasons, economic reasons, the gun that he used, reaction and his personal reasons and thoughts.

            The manifesto and the attack itself was directed mainly against the Hispanic people living in the United States, therefore, it could be considered a polarization where on one side, there is the “good in-group” which is supposed to be native Americans, and on the other side, there is the “bad out-group”, Hispanic population. However, the principle of polarization is not as clear as for example in the previous manifestos. Patrick Crusius himself mentions that “Actually the Hispanic community was not my target before I read The Great Replacement.” According to his words, he stands against all the immigrants and corporations who because of whom Americans lose and will lose their jobs. Crusius talks about the Hispanic population mainly in connection to the Democratic party which, he says, intends “to use open borders, free healthcare for illegals, citizenship and more to enact a political coup by importing and then legalizing millions of new voters”, meaning the Hispanics. Because of this fact, the Hispanic population might be considered as the main “out-group” even though he fights against the immigration in general.

            In this matter, the Hispanic population is scapegoated. Hispanic people are in his manifesto standing in the front line responsible for most of the problems, and despite the fact he talks about economic immigrants in the United States, he mentions that “This is an encouraging sign that the Hispanic population is willing to return to their home countries if given the right incentive. An incentive that myself and many other patriotic Americans will provide” and in the next part that “Hispanics will take control of the local and state government of my beloved Texas, changing policy to better suit their needs. They will turn Texas into an instrument of a political coup which will hasten the destruction of our country.”, from which is obvious that he blames Hispanics for all the problems.

            I also consider mentioning The Great Replacement, white nationalist far-right conspiracy theory stating that white population is, through mass migration and demographic growth being replaced by non-European peoples, a use of conspiracy theories, by which Patrick Crusius was inspired to commit the attack.

            To me, there are two surprising elements in this manifesto. First, Patrick Crusius does not use that much rhetoric of hate and disgust. He mainly tries to show and prove his words right by explaining the political and economic situation which, from my point of view, may psychologically lead to the fact that his words will find more supporters than if he only used the rhetoric of hate. The use of his rhetoric is very different from the two previous manifestos also because he uses similar language about immigrants as used by the president Donald Trump.

            The second surprising element is the part where Patrick Cursius mentions the environmental problems. He says “The American lifestyle affords our citizens an incredible quality of life. However, our lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country. …… Everything I have seen and heard in my short life has led me to believe that the average American isn’t willing to change their lifestyle, even if the changes only cause a slight inconvenience. …… I just want to say that I love the people of this country, but god damn most of y’all are just too stubborn to change your lifestyle. So the next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources.” First, I consider interesting that he mentions environmental problems in his manifesto but more importantly, it is all the Americans who he blames for all the problems, it is definitely not only the “out-group” of Hispanics. Despite his words are not meant directly against the Hispanic population, few paragraphs below he mentions “Even if other non-immigrant targets would have a greater impact, I can’t bring myself to kill my fellow Americans.” by which he explains choosing his target. He also mentions that all non-white Americans cannot be blamed for the problems when he says “the idea of deporting or murdering all non-white Americans is horrific. Many have been here at least as long as the whites, and have done as much to build our country”. This statement also excludes the use of ultra-nationalism in his rhetoric.

Crusius, as well as the other attackers, uses victimization when he says “I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion” by which he puts himself in a position of a defender. He concludes his manifesto by saying “Many people think that the fight for America is already lost. They couldn’t be more wrong. This is just the beginning of the fight for America and Europe. I am honored to head the fight to reclaim my country from destruction.”. By declaring this statement, he justifies his action to fight for America and tries to encourage others to do the same move.

Patrick Crusius does not consider himself a white supremacist which can be seen in the last paragraph of the manifesto where he says “I know that the media will probably call me a white supremacist anyway”, however, not only he seems to be a white supremacist from what he says but also his words are in compliance with The Daily Stormer’s playbook. For example, he talks a lot about immigration and he also discusses racism. In one part of the manifesto he says, “I am against race mixing because it destroys genetic diversity and creates identity problems.” and talks about different generations of Hispanics. That could be considered as something what The Daily Stormer’ playbook calls “flirting with white supremacy”.

Conclusion

            In this last part of the project, I would like to summarize the main similarities and differences between the three manifestos showed by the analysis in the previous part.

            Firstly, I would like to focus on similarities of the rhetoric of the attackers when analyzing the manifestos. Proven by the analysis, the main similarity found between the manifestos is the use of the rhetoric of victimization. This strategy was clearly used by all the three attackers and therefore, plays the biggest role in composing a manifesto explaining why an attack was committed. All the attackers tried to justify their actions by putting themselves in a position of defenders and putting the white people in shoes of victims. In the manifestos, all the attackers used this strategy to picture their decision as the only option and themselves as the brave ones who defend the country and sacrifice their future for others and for the country. By this rhetoric, the attackers also put the blame on others and basically point that they were made do it even if they did not want to.

            Another obvious strategy used in all the manifestos was the rhetoric of polarization. All the attackers used the method of creating an “in-group” and “out-groups” who the “in-group” fights against. Even though the “out-groups” differ in each manifesto, since for example Dylann Roof creates “out-groups” of Blacks, Jews or Hispanics, John Earnest mentions Jews as the “out-group” and Patrick Crusius makes the “out-group” of Hispanics, there is one important similarity in all of these, and that is the “in-group”. The “in-group” of all these manifestos is composed of white people, white men. Although it was previously mentioned the polarization in the manifesto of Patrick Crusius is not that clear, he still points out white Americans. For this reason, not only the strategy of polarization was proved to be used but we could also say that the similarity found in the use of this rhetoric is that all the attackers should be considered white supremacists. This statement could be supported by showing the similarities of each manifesto with The Daily Stormer’s playbook which, as was previously mentioned, provide guidelines for writers who want to compose white supremacist texts. Another sign of showing symbols of white supremacy is the fact that two of these manifestos were posted on the website called 8Chan which is a platform for extremists.

            There is one more similarity considering the three manifestos, and that is the rhetoric of demonizing and dehumanizing, which, most of the times goes hand in hand with the rhetoric of hate and disgust. Both, the manifesto of Dylann Roof and the Open Letter of John Earnest use this strategy when they dehumanize and demonize the mentioned “out-groups”. In both cases, the attackers describe the “out-groups” as responsible for all the evil and put them in a position when they blame them for all the problems. Unlike these two manifestos, the manifesto of Patrick Crusius is a little different since it does not use this strategy at all. Instead of that, he uses a completely different rhetoric which is surprisingly similar to the rhetoric of Donald Trump.

            When it comes to differences, all the attackers use a unique way to describe their thoughts and express their opinions. In the first manifesto, I pointed out that Dylann Roof uses the rhetoric of oversimplification and conspiracy theories. Even though the similarity of using the strategy of conspiracy theories was found in Patrick Crusius’s manifesto, the use of it is very different since mentioning The Great Replacement by Patrick Crusius could be considered a main inspiration.

            In the Open Letter of John Earnest, there is a significant use of God terms and loaded questions that were not found in any of the other two texts. Earnest even expresses that he finds himself blessed by God to commit the action.

            Lastly, the manifesto of Patrick Crusius is unique in a way it uses the rhetoric of scapegoating. Despite the fact John Earnest put the blame on Jews, the use of scapegoating in the last manifesto is very different. Crusius is aware of the fact that the blame is not only on Hispanics or all non-white people, he even mentions the Hispanic population was not firstly his target, however, in the end he decides to blame them for everything and chooses them as the main objective responsible for the problems he mentions.

            Considering all of the mentioned above, it is obvious that the main problem causing shootings and terrible deeds are motivated by polarization. White supremacy seems to be the main reason and motive of these shootings which the shooters try to justify by the rhetoric and strategy of victimization. By knowing this strategy, we can be more careful when reading or listening to words similar to these used in the manifestos and reveal their true meaning.

Sources

“Accused El Paso Mass Shooter Charged With 90 Counts Of Federal Hate Crimes”. 2020. Online. Reuters. 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-texas-shooting-idUSKBN2002PK.

Blankstein, Andrew, and Minyvonne Burke. 2019. “El Paso Shooting: 20 People Dead, 26 Injured, Suspect In Custody, Police Say”. Online. Nbc News. 2019. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/active-shooter-near-el-paso-mall-police-responding-n1039001.

Feinberg, Ashley. 2017. “This Is The Daily Stormer’s Playbook”. Online. Huffpost. 2017. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/daily-stormer-nazi-style-guide_n_5a2ece19e4b0ce3b344492f2?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009.

Chalfant, Morgan. 2019. “Fbi’s Wray Says Most Domestic Terrorism Arrests This Year Involve White Supremacy”. Online. Thehill.com. 2019. https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/454338-fbis-wray-says-majority-of-domestic-terrorism-arrests-this-year.

“Charleston Church Shooter Dylann Roof Pleads Guilty To State Murder Charges”. 2017. Online. The Guardian. 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/10/charleston-church-shooter-dylann-roof-pleads-guilty-murder-charges.

“Manifesto”. 2020. Online. Merriam-Webster. 2020. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manifesto.

Manifesto of Dylann Roof, 2015

Manifesto of John Timothy Earnest, 2019

Manifesto of Patrick Wood Crusius, 2019

“Police Thwarted At Least Seven Mass Shootings And White Supremacist Attacks Since El Paso”. 2019. Online. The Guardian. 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/20/el-paso-shooting-plot-white-supremacist-attacks.

Roberts-Miller, Patricia. 2020. “Characteristics Of Demagoguery, Revised”. Online. Pbworks.com. 2020. http://sbruner.pbworks.com/f/RobertsMillerCharacteristics_Demagoguery_smb.pdf.

“Turkish Citizen Hurt In Christchurch Attacks Dies, Nz Death Toll At 51: Minister”. 2019. Online. Cna. 2019. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/christchurch-terror-attack-new-zealand-death-toll-new-11497782.

“Us Synagogue Shooting Victim Who ‘Took Bullet For All Of Us’ Hailed A Hero”. 2019. Online. The Guardian. 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/27/san-diego-police-shooting-synagogue-poway-reports.

Waters, Dustin, and Mark Berman. 2016. “Dylann Roof Found Guilty On All Counts In Charleston Church Massacre Trial”. Online. The Washington Post. 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/12/15/jurors-begin-deliberating-in-charleston-church-shooting-trial/.

“Woman Killed, 3 Injured In Shooting At California Synagogue”. 2019. Online. Cbs News. 2019. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poway-synagogue-shooting-suspect-john-earnest-in-custody-after-1-dead-3-injured-today-live-updates-2019-04-27/.

“22 Dead, 24 Injured In El Paso Shooting: Texas Officials”. 2019. Online. Nbc Washington. 2019. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/el-paso-cielo-vista-mall-shooting-photos/131895/.

---

[1] Chalfant, Morgan. 2019. “Fbi’s Wray Says Most Domestic Terrorism Arrests This Year Involve White Supremacy”. Online. Thehill.com. 2019. https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/454338-fbis-wray-says-majority-of-domestic-terrorism-arrests-this-year.

[2] Waters, Dustin, and Mark Berman. 2016. “Dylann Roof Found Guilty On All Counts In Charleston Church Massacre Trial”. Online. The Washington Post. 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/12/15/jurors-begin-deliberating-in-charleston-church-shooting-trial/.

[3] “Manifesto”. 2020. Online. Merriam-Webster. 2020. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manifesto.

[4] Roberts-Mille, Patricia. 2020. “Characteristics Of Demagoguery, Revised”. Online. Pbworks.com. 2020. http://sbruner.pbworks.com/f/RobertsMillerCharacteristics_Demagoguery_smb.pdf.

[5] Waters, Dustin, and Mark Berman. 2016. “Dylann Roof Found Guilty On All Counts In Charleston Church Massacre Trial”. Online. The Washington Post. 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/12/15/jurors-begin-deliberating-in-charleston-church-shooting-trial/.

[6] “Charleston Church Shooter Dylann Roof Pleads Guilty To State Murder Charges”. 2017. Online. The Guardian. 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/10/charleston-church-shooter-dylann-roof-pleads-guilty-murder-charges.

[7] Roberts-Miller, Patricia. 2020. “Characteristics Of Demagoguery, Revised”. Online. Pbworks.com. 2020. http://sbruner.pbworks.com/f/RobertsMillerCharacteristics_Demagoguery_smb.pdf.

[8] “Us Synagogue Shooting Victim Who ‘Took Bullet For All Of Us’ Hailed A Hero”. 2019. Online. The Guardian. 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/27/san-diego-police-shooting-synagogue-poway-reports.

[9] “Woman Killed, 3 Injured In Shooting At California Synagogue”. 2019. Online. Cbs News. 2019. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poway-synagogue-shooting-suspect-john-earnest-in-custody-after-1-dead-3-injured-today-live-updates-2019-04-27/.

[10] “22 Dead, 24 Injured In El Paso Shooting: Texas Officials”. 2019. Online. Nbc Washington. 2019. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/el-paso-cielo-vista-mall-shooting-photos/131895/.

[11] “Police Thwarted At Least Seven Mass Shootings And White Supremacist Attacks Since El Paso”. 2019. Online. The Guardian. 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/20/el-paso-shooting-plot-white-supremacist-attacks.

[12] Blankstein, Andrew, and Minyvonne Burke. 2019. “El Paso Shooting: 20 People Dead, 26 Injured, Suspect In Custody, Police Say”. Online. Nbc News. 2019. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/active-shooter-near-el-paso-mall-police-responding-n1039001.

[13] “Accused El Paso Mass Shooter Charged With 90 Counts Of Federal Hate Crimes”. 2020. Online. Reuters. 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-texas-shooting-idUSKBN2002PK.

[14] “Turkish Citizen Hurt In Christchurch Attacks Dies, Nz Death Toll At 51: Minister”. 2019. Online. Cna. 2019. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/christchurch-terror-attack-new-zealand-death-toll-new-11497782.