Report of Motive in Recruiter Attack
By JAMES DAO and DAVID JOHNSTONA 23-year-old man charged with killing one soldier and seriously wounding another in a shooting outside an Army recruiting office in Little Rock, Ark., was once detained in Yemen for possessing a fake Somali passport and other counterfeit documents, law enforcement officials said Tuesday.
Yeah, it was a Black guy whose gun didn't kill the soldier. The question I got is
Mr. Muhammad has been charged with one count of capital murder and 15 counts of terroristic acts in Monday’s shooting, in a parking lot outside the recruiting office.
Why is this guy a terrorist and not Scott Roeder?
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
Why is this guy a terrorist
The old folks used to say when one asked a question like the above that they could give you ten answers but the first nine would be wrong.
So, it WAS a drive-by.
They're both terrorists, btw. And, as much as this guy was on the FBI watch list, the other guy should have been on a domestic terrorism watch list. Still asking where he got his gun from, and where does one go to learn Islam in ARKANSAS?
Now, see, there's a difference between this guy and those guys they supposedly caught in NYC. When you can throw around Yemen and fake Somali passport, and come up with the name if a foreign Imam with a suspect - HE was a serious person of interest and a danger.
A drive-by terrorist attack...still wrapping the brain around that.
Who is a terrorist and who isn't
We can agree around here that both are terrorists, so it's a matter of what the authorities will charge each person with, and why. It might be a matter of whether they believe each is a terrorist. The psychological and societal implications of a white pro-life guy being a terrorist might be too much for the justice system to handle. That wouldn't be true in a "color-blind" system, but we have a world in which Sotomayor can be called a racist for acknowledging her own heritage, so the jury's out. It might be a matter of what charges they think will stick. Would a Midwest jury (speaking of which) convict Roeder of terrorist acts? Would a Southern jury convict Muhammad?
It might be a matter of race (OK, obvious) or religion (not so obvious). I don't think either shooter is Christian so it gets interesting. Check the CNN video of the interview with Roeder's ex-wife. Get past the part about mental instability, which I would certainly grant, and note when she says they observe the Sabbath.
a 'drive-by' terrorist attack?
Negro, please.
Drapetomania
Just as the desire for freedom was assumed in a white man and a mental disorder in a slave, I suspect terrorist, by definition, excludes those who are "citizens from a distance".
Wait a minute...
Wait a minute... dude said he was mad at the military for their treatment of other Muslims. This wasn't a classical act of inciting terror in a population, this was a revenge-based killing. He wasn't trying to scare people from going to recruiters' offices, he was just getting some "getback" (or so he claimed). Whereas Roeder may have also had a revenge mindset, but he was also sending a clear message to other "abortion doctors" that they're not safe. That, to me, is a "terroristic act."