The young white man behind a string of bombings that killed two people and injured four others this month in central Texas was a "domestic terrorist," the city's interim police chief acknowledged Thursday.

Chief ­Brian Manley had avoided that label last week when he called Mark Anthony Conditt "very challenged," but not a terrorist. Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas) had also faced criticism for saying Conditt was "disturbed" but that the the bombings were "not terror-related."

On social media, debate flared about whether Conditt would have been called a terrorist had he not been white. Some said the way he was described reflected white privilege.

In his comments last week, Manley said Conditt had not mentioned terrorism or hate in a video confession. Investigators initially believed Conditt was targeting people of color, given that the first three victims — two of whom died — were black or Hispanic. Two white men were then injured when another bomb exploded alongside a road.

What exactly may have motivated Conditt remains unknown.

In New York, the suspect was an Uzbek immigrant and allegedly inspired by the Islamic State. In Las Vegas, the suspect was white and without a clear ideology or motive.

The Huffington Post detailed the difference in the labeling of suspects:

Federal prosecutors have wide latitude to go after individuals who affiliate with designated foreign terrorist organizations, a list mostly filled with radical Islamic groups. Pretty much any behavior in support of a designated foreign terrorist organization ― [including] retweeting
— tweets or

The debate about race extends to victims, too. News organizations were quick to forget that the Las Vegas massacre was not, in fact, the deadliest mass shooting, or mass killing, in American history. As my colleague Valerie Russ pointed out:

Take the Wounded Knee Massacre, where at least 150 and possibly 300 Native American men, women, and children were killed in South Dakota in December 1890.