Re: Do you disagree with this statement?
by
Gatewood
06/16/2009, 10:43 AM #
Currently our liberals – from their leadership to BOTF line
grunts – are struggling mightily to categorize all acts of murder and mayhem as
identical in value and intent. They have
their reasons for this and while some of them are sincere some of them are
being blatantly and self-servingly political in nature. For one thing they desperately want to get
away from the concept of a War on Terror for both ideological and political reasons.
If you consider in the sense of the term in which it has
been used for the previous eight years a terrorist is someone following orders –
like a soldier – then, no, a lone wolf neo-Nazi is not a terrorist. He is an insane maniac, which most terrorists
are not. Most terrorists are, after all,
following orders to meet what amounts to military objectives. Those orders are given by the representative
of a real organization with active and ‘more or less’ successful long term
plans of attack. Terror is as much of a
tool of war to them as cluster bombs and aircraft carriers are to the United States
and the terrorists themselves are merely the weaponry utilized.
Please note that the concept of a suicide bomber is
meaningless unless one know why he or she became a bomb blast. If the term suicide bomber is meant to be synonymous
with terrorist then, again, the existing definition set comes into play. A suicide bomber is a weapon of war directed
by an organization, NOT a lone wolf maniac.
Michael Savage [a rightwinger] has jumped on the bandwagon of hysteria that
the Holocaust Museum officials also boarded. In the Middle East? Yes, to be Jewish is a problematical existence. In the United States? No. On
the face of it, it remains far, far, more dangerous to work at a post office
than at a Holocaust
Museum. Are we going to begin calling disgruntled
post office employees launching a shooting spree terrorists?
Any maniac at any time can make an attempt on the president’s
life – and probably get stopped cold before he even gets close. A terrorist action against the president,
however, is something else entirely. A
terrorist is a terrorist and an insane maniac is an insane maniac and it is a
bit like comparing apples to oranges to maintain otherwise.
