I have no problem if people want to call the ex-KKK psycho shooting in Kansas an act of terrorism. It is exactly that. It’s designed to intimidate people going about their normal affairs, congregating with their coreligionists and other members of the community, and otherwise doing no harm to anyone. I expect the White House to issue a solemn condemnation, which is more than appropriate. But I have to wonder, why did the same White House go so far out of its way to deny that the act of Nidal Hasan was not the mere act of a lunatic, but rather a religiously and ideologically driven act of terrorism at Fort Hood, in stark contrast to the more recent one, which appears a mere act of insanity by someone who was arguably insane?!?
- anonymous on Eric Holder and Obama Have Incited a Riot
- Svar on ATF Getting Aggressive Again
- Rick Darby on Eric Holder and Obama Have Incited a Riot
- This Week in Reaction (2015/03/13) | The Reactivity Place on Eric Holder and Obama Have Incited a Riot
- This Week in Reaction (2015/03/13) | The Reactivity Place on ATF Getting Aggressive Again
- 9/11 Affirmative Action afghanistan al qaeda Angela Corey Arizona Bailout Bush Conservatism Constitution counterinsurgency Crime Criminal Law debt democracy democrats Diversity Economics Economy Egypt Election elections fbi Federal Reserve foreign policy freedom gun control History Housing Crisis Immigration Inflation IQ Iraq islam Israel kosovo law Liberalism Liberals Libya Louisiana marines McCain Media Media Bias Mexico Military Multiculturalism Muslims Nationalism navy Neoconservatives obama Petraeus Philosophy political correctness Politics Racism realism Recession Republicans Rhetoric ron paul rumsfeld Russia Statistics Steve Sailer strategy tactics Terrorism Trayvon Trayvon Martin Vietnam War Zimmeman
Feeds and Statistics