General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsformer CIA director Woolsey is a jerk. He is being interviewed on Bloomberg, and the first thing
out of that assholes mouth is that Obama delayed calling it a terrorist attack for 2 days. It is because of these types of jerks that the country has had a disservice done to it
Obviously he has some agenda
madokie
(51,076 posts)Its coming you can bet on it
hughee99
(16,113 posts)he's responsible.
JHB
(37,128 posts)...Malkin, freepers, etc., before a fellow of his fine stature (inside the Beltway) can move into the "some say" zone.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)It really means something to Republicans, but I'm not sure what. Do they feel that labeling a violent act as terrorism becomes an admission that Obama is a failure at keeping us safe (black mark on his record), or do they just want that old foreign-enemy thrill they used to get from AQ?
n2doc
(47,953 posts)It isn't like the police and FBI were just sitting around afterwards, going 'Well, it might be a sewer gas explosion so we will just sit on our butts unless Obama calls us up"
I wish that someone had asked the dirtbag "Why does that matter? Weren't the FBI already on the case? Why are you going out of your way to criticize the president in this time of emergency?"
madokie
(51,076 posts)How can you not understand that?
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)any such event MUST BE DEFINED as terrorism. The immediacy of the definition is of vital importance, and I don't know why.
madokie
(51,076 posts)You may proceed to rake me over the coals now
Ganja Ninja
(15,953 posts)When did that become necessary? Oh yeah Benghazi, Benghazi, fucking Benghazi! How stupid are these people? Once a gas explosion is ruled out and a bombing as the cause is decided upon do they really need someone to say "terrorist attack"? Bombing - terrorist attack! Seems pretty self explanatory to me.
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)Unless big news has emerged this A.M., we still don't have a claim taking responsibility for the bombing from anyone, nor do we have a clue who did it. The circumstances of the attack don't make it transparently clear what the motive was. Just because innocent civilians are attacked and killed doesn't by itself make it terrorism. There has to be a recognizably political motive and context. If you have a lone nutcase who is merely angry with the world and wants to kill a bunch of people, that is not a recognizably political motive. If Adam Lanza made bombs, he might have placed them on the Marathon route or at some other large public gathering. Many would be injured, but the motive doesn't become political because of the public nature of the attack or the lingering fear it might inspire in the public. It's not trying to affect policy or make the state or the people pay a price for some policy. Lanza's motive was presumably 100% personal - the first victim was his own mother. Unless there is something known this morning that wasn't known last night, this could still be the work of a lone nut with personal demons.
City Lights
(25,171 posts)A nasty piece of shit.
boston bean
(36,186 posts)I saw Obama on the news yesterday morning (which was Tuesday, Marathon was on Monday) and he called it an act of terrorism. but no one knew if it was domestic or foreign.
These people can go pound sand.
They want us all running around like scared little chickens with our heads cut off.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Anyone willing to bet that the RW noise-machine wouldn't go there?
MrYikes
(720 posts)spinbaby
(15,073 posts)...if you call it terrorism, then it must be them dirty foreigners that did it and not some upstanding gun-toting American named Billy Bob.
still_one
(91,946 posts)Olympic bombing, but then quickly said he did not think so
Which only demonstrates what an irresponsible person he is