They are trying to take the lead in national security, but tell me, how are they going to stop terrorists when all they're doing is COVERING UP attacks by individual terrorists!!!
Here is an insightful email from a coworker of mine:
Liberals always say: "Don"™t jump to conclusions! Wait for all the facts before reaching a conclusions!" In actual fact liberals have no problem with jumping to a conclusion as long as you jump to a conclusion that the liberals like. Back in the 1990"™s a Muslim man entered the US, bought a handgun and went to the observation deck of the Empire State building where he shot as many people as he could before being shot himself. Immediately the left-wing mayor of NYC, Rudolf the Red Guilliani, went on national TV and told the people of NYC and America that the Empire State Building incident was not an act of Islamic terrorism but was simply the work of a mentally disturbed man. Normally when there is an incident of this type Guilliani would tell people not to jump to conclusions, to wait for the facts. When Guilliani made his national broadcast he had already been provided with a translation of a manifesto that was hanging from the Islamic gunperson"™s neck stating that the killings were meant to redress American crimes against Muslims. Why didn"™t Gulliani at least inform the American people of this fact so that they could draw their own conclusion whether this was an act of Islamic terrorism? When the teenage son of an Arab immigrant flew a plane into a high-rise Tampa office building, the media attributed to his act not to Islamic terrorism but to the adverse effects of pimple medicine that the teenager had been taking. The media blamed the US drug industry for the incident. Left unsaid by the main stream national media was the fact the Arab teenager left a suicde note claiming he flew the plane into an American building in order to do his part for Ossama Bin Laden. When the American-born son of Pakistani immigrants went into a Jewish center early this month and shot at Jewish workers, the liberal media declared it not to be an Islamic terrorist act but rather the act of a deranged man. There seems to be a pattern on the part of liberals to declare any terrorist act committed by a lone Islamic terrorist to be the result of mental illness and not Islamic terrorism. Yesterday"™s SUV attack by a Muslim in left-wing San Francisco seems to fit the pattern. Why did the San Francisco police immediately declare it not to be an act of Islamic terrorism? Why are the liberals not telling us not to jump to conclusions? Why aren"™t the Frisco police waiting to do an investigation before announcing their conclusion? See article below which agrees with me.
A woman claims she heard the man who drove into 14 people, killing one, in a violent hit-and-run rampage in San Francisco yesterday refer to himself as a terrorist.
KTVU-TV San Francisco reporter Rob Roth told WND the witness at the scene of Omeed Aziz Popal's arrest heard the 29-year-old man say, to no one in particular: "I'm a terrorist, I don't care."
Popal, of nearby Fremont, Calif., recently returned from Afghanistan where he married an Afghan woman in an arrangement by his family.
Roth said the witness would not give her name and didn't want to go on camera. He pointed out a woman next to the witness nodded in affirmation as Popal's words were recalled.
San Francisco police, however, came to a quick determination yesterday that Popal's 20-minute drive of carnage in his Honda Pilot SUV "“ said by relatives to be completely out of character "“ was not an act of terrorism.
Sgt. Steve Mannina, a spokesman for the San Francisco Police Department, told WND he had not heard the woman's claim about Popal and could not confirm it.
Mannina said the department's command staff released a report last night determining it was not an act of terrorism. He could not provide details as to how the department arrived at that determination and how it came about so quickly.
Just to play the Devils Advocate, if these recent incidents are terrorism, then doesn't that refute the right wing's assertion that we have been safe from terrorism since 9/11 because no terrorist attacks have occurred in the U.S.?
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
it was a crazy mentally derranged halla mah halla zebbalah terrorist dude...terrorists can take meds too ya know.......yeah that's right, yeah it was the meds...yeah that's the ticket...
Maybe its not meds they need. Have you ever noticed that the societies that lean more toward suicide attacks are the one's that don't allow alcohol. That could be the key to peace in the Middle East. Introduce them to Budweiser, then introduce them to football as an outlet for aggression. Problem solved.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
I think he was a Democrat when he was the NY District Attorney, later changed to Republican in order to get elected Mayor. Still harbors Leftist views on Gun Control.
i imagine determining whether an incident is an act of terrorism is largely linked to:
a) whether there are demonstrable ties to an an organized network of terrorists, or
b) whether it's some whackjob acting out his terrorist fantasies independently of any organization.
likely a) is the paradigm most law enforcement agencies operate under. these are the kind of attacks that the US (under W's leadership, I might add) and other western nations have a decent, if not perfect,track record of foiling in recent years. if it's the latter, not much anyone can do. kinda like the guy who goes to the town square with a deer rifle, except this one's doing it for allah, or bin laden, or whatever. but if it comforts anyone to blame it on a liberal conspiracy (Guilliani????? he wasn't at any of the meetings. and last i checked florida was a red state...) who am i to rob someone of the warm, comforting blanket of delusion.
Liberals lying about terrorist attacks
