Comments on: The FBI appears to have lost its collective mind

By: skeptic

skeptic — Mon, 26 Jun 2017 17:49:55 +0000

Neo: “Or perhaps it’s become a PC tool.”

The FBI is a corrupt Democrat party tool. See this article by John Hinderaker of Powerlineblog discussing the FBI’s involvement in a plot by the Obama administration to smear Trump in the runup to the election:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/06/democrats-fbi-collaborated-on-trump-smear.php

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Mon, 26 Jun 2017 02:43:20 +0000

Manju. In that case, Charles Manson would be a terrorist, as would various Symbionese Liberation Army analogs. I haven’t heard the term used there.
As Neo says, this is slippery. As a convention, terrorism is presumed to be performed for, by whatever connection, some organized operation. Like Isis, or Communists, or Hezbollah, etc.
It may be strictly true that Roof wanted to make a political change, but since he was working for himself, in a manner of speaking, as a convention, the term does not apply.
McVeigh killed, I believe, 158 people. His political point, as far as anybody knows, is revenge for the feds’ massacre of nearly eighty innocents civilians at Waco and the following lack of interest by the Usual Suspects who are ordinarily all over government overreaching.
He has not, as far as I know, been called a terrorist because political change was not his goal, or if it were, did not have a particular group in mind to take over.
Hodgkinso’s goal, insofar as we can figure it out, was to reduce the number of republicans in congress by killing some and scaring others out of public service. This would make it easier to move Bernie’s agenda. Strictly speaking, again, that isn’t terror because he wasn’t looking for a major social upheaval with revolution in the streets. You could call it tactical assassination.

By: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:23:55 +0000

[…] Neo Neocon discusses the FBI having seemingly to lost their minds […]

By: neo-neocon

neo-neocon — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 20:12:17 +0000

Manju, Richard Aubrey, et al:

The definition of terrorism is a tricky one, and much debated.

There is often a distinction made between terrorism and assassination. Is assassination a form of terrorism? Maybe. I happen to be of the opinion that Hodgkinson’s act was an assassination (the definition of the term is usually the killing of a prominent person in government). It is a politically motivated act, but perhaps not “terrorism” per se, although that’s the debatable point. Roof was a terrorist, however, and he definitely wanted to kill black people, which makes him a racist terrorist.

By: Manju

Manju — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 19:55:37 +0000

Manju
Roof got a pass because, as far as anybody knows, he wanted to kill people because he wanted to kill people

He wanted to kill black people.

Terrorism is designed to have a political effect, by definition.

He confessed to wanting to start another civil war and to supporting segregation. Unless you think Jim Crow and the Civil War weren’t political, I don’t see your point.

By: Dave M

Dave M — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 17:11:07 +0000

Here’s a link to FBI.gov that includes all of the statements in question. https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/washingtondc/news/press-releases/law-enforcement-shares-findings-of-the-investigation-into-the-june-14-alexandria-virginia-shooting

As a recently-retired GS1811 (Federal Criminal Investigator, NOT FBI, however) the spin on this release makes no sense.

FYI, the US Capitol Police carry Glock 22s in .40 caliber. There would be no difficulty in differentiating between their cases and the 9mm used by the shooter.

By: n.n

n.n — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 15:00:27 +0000

Random act. With this logic, there is only one crime that has an unambiguous attribution. Ironically, it was made legal in this society with the establishment of the twilight faith, selective, opportunistic, and unprincipled.

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:04:09 +0000

Manju
Roof got a pass because, as far as anybody knows, he wanted to kill people because he wanted to kill people. Terrorism is designed to have a political effect, by definition. Even if it’s lone nutcases stabbing cops and getting shot or arrested immediately. The organizing and radicalizing and encouragement from Terror Central–whichever one it is–hopes that even lone nutcases in sufficient quantities will have the desired effect.
What Hodgkinson wanted is unknown, except he wanted to kill republicans for being republicans. What political effect this would have is unclear, except if you consider it a coup. That’s difficult to figure since the governor of the decedent’s state usually appoints a replacement until a special election can be held, or a regular election if sooner.
So the political balance is unlikely to change, although if an important vote is coming up, the vacancies may make a difference.
So H isn’t a terrorist. But, as has been pointed out, whatever is known of his political beliefs, he’s a white-bread dem/prog.

By: Ed Bonderenka

Ed Bonderenka — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 11:24:27 +0000

AesopFan: Glad you pointed that out. I assumed it had been dropped.
So many squirrels, so few eyeballs.

By: Manju

Manju — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 06:23:56 +0000

This piece offers some possible explanations: Why The FBI Usually Doesn’t Label Attacks By Non-Muslims Terrorism Long/short: It boils down to having links to a "designated foreign terrorist organization". While this isn't essential for a terrorist charge...the FBI generally doesn't bother unless this is in play. So, for example, Dylan Roof got a pass. But the Muslim guy who shot a cop at the airport recently is a terrorist suspect. Even if he acted alone, "elements like retweets can be considered material support for a designated foreign terrorist organization."