Iām curious what fact would make this not an act of domestic terrorism. Do they have to find out the religion of the bombers to know for sure?
Bingo!
Or at least, thatās what theyād have to find out to decide whether to call it an act of domestic terrorism.
It helps the definers to know the race of the suspects too. White people just donāt register in the dominant consciousness/paradigm as āterrorists.ā
Thereās always the possibility of a disgruntled employee or something of the kind. Not that I think thatās very likely.
Wont the label of domestic terrorism have to come from a judge?
āThe FBIās primary suspect is a balding white male who looks about 40 years old.ā from the dailydot.com
Disgruntled employees of the NAACP, or the barbershop? I agree, āunlikelyā barely begins to describe it, but I guess itās possible.
Thinking about it a bit more, a more likely scenario (but still way less likely than terrorism), I think, is probably that it was a personal murder attempt - an abusive spouse or somethingā¦
Maybe technically, but the corporate media rarely hesitate to jump the gun with that term whenever it seems like the perp might be Islamic/Arab.
Hmm. That could describe me, and this IS actually where I live. Should I get my alibi ready?
All kidding aside, I am glad that the attempted bomber was severely incompetent. No real harm done that a coat of paint canāt fix.
It is funny though. It happened practically in my back yard, and I did not even hear about it until my wife mentioned it on the phone a couple of hours ago. I can understand it getting buried with what happened in Paris, though.
No. Itās terrorism if they were trying to terrorize people with the attack, regardless of specific laws that might have been violated.
If a prosecutor thinks thereās enough evidence of that, and has a suspect that can be linked to it, they can charge the suspect with terrorism, and a judge or jury could convict the suspect of that, or a judge who doesnāt believe the actions match the specific laws against terrorism could decide that the suspect is innocent.
Colorado Springs is home to a lot of extreme right wing Dominionist Christians who can make Al Qaeda look like a bunch latte drinking liberals.
We dont even know who did it, let alone their intentions. I think I prefer the word ābomberā in this instance, but of course Im not in the sensationalist biz so Im probably wrong.
I didnāt realize this was a thing. Huh. And Colorado Springs seems so laid back when I visited.
For reference, the USC definition of Domestic Terrorism is:
ā¦the term ādomestic terrorismā means activities thatā
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intendedā
(i)
to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii)
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii)
to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
So, it has to be illegal and intended to coerce.
A bombing is obviously illegal. That leaves motive, which they canāt really know unless the bomber left a note or gives some kind of statement.
I had not heard about this eitherā¦ and that should tell us something about the priorities of the ānewsā media.
Itās also not far from Gordon Klingenschmitt and his constituents.
Hmmm. I live here. No mentions of beheadings here. Really, most people here are nice ā even the Christians. If that isnāt your thing, head over the Manitou Springs, where people are just plain weird, but laid-back. You can rant as much as you want about the Christians, but a fanatic Christian usually just yells mean things at people. A fanatic Muslim often kills people.
And the convincing studies and stats on which you base this conclusion are . . . ?
The fact of mental illness.
