14 Killed in Shooting in San Bernardino (2 Viewers)

[TobiasFunke]

Apparently another FBI spokesman says they're done with the place, so maybe DD is right.

'maybe' should never be uttered in the same sentence with regards to a DD statement. He is about as black & white as they get.

And I learned a new term today, self-radicalization. Funny what lengths the media will go to to not call it an act of terrorism.

Big fan of self-radicalization. Aren't we all in some way or another?

I'm kinda "meh" on the terrorism label here. Just because you're associated with an organization that supports terrorism doesn't mean you've committed an act a terrorism. To be terrorism you have to have some larger political goal in mind. We don't know why these people did this. If these people did what they did because they just wanted to kill a bunch of non-Muslims for some reason other than provoking a holy war or drawing attention to perceived US atrocities or something, they're not terrorists. They're just ###holes.

And I kind of like the idea of not calling them terrorists. That's exactly what ISIS wants us to do, because they want us to get mad at Muslims and provoke the holy war that is their end game, forcing non-radical Muslims to join up with them. #### them. I'm in no rush to give them what they want.

 

[sho nuff]

Apparently another FBI spokesman says they're done with the place, so maybe DD is right.

'maybe' should never be uttered in the same sentence with regards to a DD statement. He is about as black & white as they get.

And I learned a new term today, self-radicalization. Funny what lengths the media will go to to not call it an act of terrorism.

He is SWC and he is black "and" white?

 

[netnalp]

Re: open house

I spoke to a lead federal investigator in a major U.S city and he said there was no reason for the FBI to secure the scene any further. Both suspects were dead, they already took all the evidence they needed, and they most certainly looked in the walls, under the house, etc.

Talking heads may disagree, but this isn't the FBIs first rodeo. If they bring a case against you, believe that it is thorough.

Now I've been to crime scenes (mostly homicide and fire) and some are more involved than others. Arson scenes can take weeks to clear, homicide scenes several days depending on the variables. But 15-20 federal agents in an 1100 square foot house can clear a scene like this in a few hours. So I'm gonna guess they went over that scene 5+ times.

I just hope the FBI is more thorough than police are when it comes to collecting evidence. Granted my experience of poor police work is limited to one investigation. But they missed a bunch of evidence my brother had placed into an XBox gaming console box. They had the box in their custody but never bothered to open it.

How did they eventually discover it?I can't imagine the volume of evidence when it comes to a serial killer.

True. But you'd have to think "look inside the box" would be Evidence 101.

 

[shader]

Apparently another FBI spokesman says they're done with the place, so maybe DD is right.

'maybe' should never be uttered in the same sentence with regards to a DD statement. He is about as black & white as they get.

And I learned a new term today, self-radicalization. Funny what lengths the media will go to to not call it an act of terrorism.

Big fan of self-radicalization. Aren't we all in some way or another?

I'm kinda "meh" on the terrorism label here. Just because you're associated with an organization that supports terrorism doesn't mean you've committed an act a terrorism. To be terrorism you have to have some larger political goal in mind. We don't know why these people did this. If these people did what they did because they just wanted to kill a bunch of non-Muslims for some reason other than provoking a holy war or drawing attention to perceived US atrocities or something, they're not terrorists. They're just ###holes.

And I kind of like the idea of not calling them terrorists. That's exactly what ISIS wants us to do, because they want us to get mad at Muslims and provoke the holy war that is their end game, forcing non-radical Muslims to join up with them. #### them. I'm in no rush to give them what they want.

So we are going to start playing word games just to keep from making ISIS happy?

These are terrorists. I don't see how you could argue otherwise. They built 12 pipe bombs, swore allegiance to the biggest terrorist group in the world, had thousands of rounds of ammo, and went and shot up a bunch of non-muslims. If that's not terrorism, I just don't know what is.

 

[The Commish]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

 

[tom22406]

What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

#######s seems to work for me

 

[George Jefferson Airplane]

Why arent they releasing the picture of the foreign national terrorist?

Yeah who knows, was wondering that myself. Maybe no photos with her without a mask on?

 

[Clifford]

It doesn't matter. The idea that the government can throw your name on a list with no due process and strip you of your rights is awful. I'm pretty surprised at how many liberals are supporting that idea.

So you are opposed to the Terrorist Watch List, or ok with it as long it only hampers your ability to travel, buy a home, etc.? Asking because none of these are rights.

It's a constitutional right. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it less so.

A drastically misinterpreted right that is causing way more damage than good. One that needs to be either repealed or changed.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Apparently another FBI spokesman says they're done with the place, so maybe DD is right.

'maybe' should never be uttered in the same sentence with regards to a DD statement. He is about as black & white as they get.

And I learned a new term today, self-radicalization. Funny what lengths the media will go to to not call it an act of terrorism.

Big fan of self-radicalization. Aren't we all in some way or another?

I'm kinda "meh" on the terrorism label here. Just because you're associated with an organization that supports terrorism doesn't mean you've committed an act a terrorism. To be terrorism you have to have some larger political goal in mind. We don't know why these people did this. If these people did what they did because they just wanted to kill a bunch of non-Muslims for some reason other than provoking a holy war or drawing attention to perceived US atrocities or something, they're not terrorists. They're just ###holes.

And I kind of like the idea of not calling them terrorists. That's exactly what ISIS wants us to do, because they want us to get mad at Muslims and provoke the holy war that is their end game, forcing non-radical Muslims to join up with them. #### them. I'm in no rush to give them what they want.

So we are going to start playing word games just to keep from making ISIS happy?

These are terrorists. I don't see how you could argue otherwise. They built 12 pipe bombs, swore allegiance to the biggest terrorist group in the world, had thousands of rounds of ammo, and went and shot up a bunch of non-muslims. If that's not terrorism, I just don't know what is.

Well then apparently you don't know what terrorism is. It has to be done with some sort of policy goal in mind. You can look it up in any dictionary or statute or international agreement you like, they'll all tell you the same thing. Doesn't matter who did it or who they liked on social media or what weaponry they used or who they killed. If it's not done with the intent of terrorizing survivors to accomplish some larger goal, it's not terrorism. Sorry.

Honestly if I had my druthers we wouldn't ever call it terrorism anyway. I think we should translate some awful thing that they'd hate into Arabic and use that word instead. "Today the White House warned of the increasing threat of [Arabic phrase meaning pig semen guzzling] during the holidays." "A chilling declaration today from leaders of the [pig semen guzzlers] Middle Eastern organization ISIS." Let's belittle them instead of giving them what they want.

 

[Spin]

Let's belittle them instead of giving them what they want.

Isn't that pretty much what caused the Charlie Hebdo attacks?

 

[CBusAlex]

Seems like kind of a leap to assume that ISIS is opposed to pig semen guzzling.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Ok however we would like this world to be, the FBI has opened an investigation into terrorism by two people who were communications and allying themselves with ISIS the formost brutal and bloodiest international Islamic terrorism organization in the world.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Let's belittle them instead of giving them what they want.

Isn't that pretty much what caused the Charlie Hebdo attacks?

Yup. And if we stop doing it we let them win.

It's not like they're not already motivated to attack us. Do you think ISIS and their sympathizers have the capability to strike at the US right now but they're holding off because we haven't cracked enough jokes? "OK, we can live with the financial and political support of Israel, the tens of thousands of deaths from the Iraq War, and the drone strikes. But name-calling, that's over the line."

 

[jonessed]

If we don't call it workplace violence it means the terrorists have won.

 

[Loan Sharks]

If we don't call it workplace violence it means the terrorists have won.

Didn't we used to just call this murder?

 

[Clifford]

Apparently another FBI spokesman says they're done with the place, so maybe DD is right.

'maybe' should never be uttered in the same sentence with regards to a DD statement. He is about as black & white as they get.

And I learned a new term today, self-radicalization. Funny what lengths the media will go to to not call it an act of terrorism.

Big fan of self-radicalization. Aren't we all in some way or another?

I'm kinda "meh" on the terrorism label here. Just because you're associated with an organization that supports terrorism doesn't mean you've committed an act a terrorism. To be terrorism you have to have some larger political goal in mind. We don't know why these people did this. If these people did what they did because they just wanted to kill a bunch of non-Muslims for some reason other than provoking a holy war or drawing attention to perceived US atrocities or something, they're not terrorists. They're just ###holes.

And I kind of like the idea of not calling them terrorists. That's exactly what ISIS wants us to do, because they want us to get mad at Muslims and provoke the holy war that is their end game, forcing non-radical Muslims to join up with them. #### them. I'm in no rush to give them what they want.

So we are going to start playing word games just to keep from making ISIS happy?

These are terrorists. I don't see how you could argue otherwise. They built 12 pipe bombs, swore allegiance to the biggest terrorist group in the world, had thousands of rounds of ammo, and went and shot up a bunch of non-muslims. If that's not terrorism, I just don't know what is.

Well then apparently you don't know what terrorism is. It has to be done with some sort of policy goal in mind. You can look it up in any dictionary or statute or international agreement you like, they'll all tell you the same thing. Doesn't matter who did it or who they liked on social media or what weaponry they used or who they killed. If it's not done with the intent of terrorizing survivors to accomplish some larger goal, it's not terrorism. Sorry.

Honestly if I had my druthers we wouldn't ever call it terrorism anyway. I think we should translate some awful thing that they'd hate into Arabic and use that word instead. "Today the White House warned of the increasing threat of [Arabic phrase meaning pig semen guzzling] during the holidays." "A chilling declaration today from leaders of the [pig semen guzzlers] Middle Eastern organization ISIS." Let's belittle them instead of giving them what they want.

It is and was. ISIS's stated goal is to goad the west into a biblical, apocalyptic battle in the Mideast, basically west v Islam, then when they are down to about 5k fighters Jesus will appear, to battle on their behalf, and smite the West and establish their Caliphate as the ruler of the world, and they will be burning, raping and pillaging to their hearts content.

So THAT is the policy goal in mind, every single attack conducted in their name whether in Mideast or abroad directly serves that goal, so this, Paris, Hebdo, every single destruction of antiquity, beheading, video, all serve that goal, and are all terrorism.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Apparently another FBI spokesman says they're done with the place, so maybe DD is right.

'maybe' should never be uttered in the same sentence with regards to a DD statement. He is about as black & white as they get.

And I learned a new term today, self-radicalization. Funny what lengths the media will go to to not call it an act of terrorism.

Big fan of self-radicalization. Aren't we all in some way or another?

I'm kinda "meh" on the terrorism label here. Just because you're associated with an organization that supports terrorism doesn't mean you've committed an act a terrorism. To be terrorism you have to have some larger political goal in mind. We don't know why these people did this. If these people did what they did because they just wanted to kill a bunch of non-Muslims for some reason other than provoking a holy war or drawing attention to perceived US atrocities or something, they're not terrorists. They're just ###holes.

And I kind of like the idea of not calling them terrorists. That's exactly what ISIS wants us to do, because they want us to get mad at Muslims and provoke the holy war that is their end game, forcing non-radical Muslims to join up with them. #### them. I'm in no rush to give them what they want.

So we are going to start playing word games just to keep from making ISIS happy?

These are terrorists. I don't see how you could argue otherwise. They built 12 pipe bombs, swore allegiance to the biggest terrorist group in the world, had thousands of rounds of ammo, and went and shot up a bunch of non-muslims. If that's not terrorism, I just don't know what is.

Well then apparently you don't know what terrorism is. It has to be done with some sort of policy goal in mind. You can look it up in any dictionary or statute or international agreement you like, they'll all tell you the same thing. Doesn't matter who did it or who they liked on social media or what weaponry they used or who they killed. If it's not done with the intent of terrorizing survivors to accomplish some larger goal, it's not terrorism. Sorry.

Honestly if I had my druthers we wouldn't ever call it terrorism anyway. I think we should translate some awful thing that they'd hate into Arabic and use that word instead. "Today the White House warned of the increasing threat of [Arabic phrase meaning pig semen guzzling] during the holidays." "A chilling declaration today from leaders of the [pig semen guzzlers] Middle Eastern organization ISIS." Let's belittle them instead of giving them what they want.

It is and was. ISIS's stated goal is to goad the west into a biblical, apocalyptic battle in the Mideast, basically west v Islam, then when they are down to about 5k fighters Jesus will appear, to battle on their behalf, and smite the West and establish their Caliphate as the ruler of the world, and they will be burning, raping and pillaging to their hearts content.

So THAT is the policy goal in mind, every single attack conducted in their name whether in Mideast or abroad directly serves that goal, so this, Paris, Hebdo, every single destruction of antiquity, beheading, video, all serve that goal, and are all terrorism.

Agreed. If this attack was indeed conducted in their name it's probably terrorism. Do we know that it was, and that this wasn't just some couple who gradually developed anti-American/Christian/white people sentiments (resulting in their apparent ISIS sympathy) and then lashed out in anger after some final perceived insult rather than in a calculated strike in the name of ISIS?

And FWIW I was arguing against the people who seemed totally outraged that the media are hesitant to call it terrorism for the time being, because I think they have good reason to be hesitant on that. I'm not arguing that this wasn't terrorism even under the strictest dictionary definition. I think it likely was terrorism, based on what I know, but I don't know that much and neither does the media most likely. My point was that the media was most likely just trying to be careful and accurate, which is a good thing. They're not following some weird agenda.

 

[Clifford]

I thought we knew wife pledged allegiance to ISIS? That alone constitutes domestic terrorism as it is providing material support to a terrorist organization.

If your point is we should verify that before lambasting media for NOT jumping to a conclusion, I agree.

My point was that given their wacked out goal of bringing about the apocalypse, I'd say any violent provocative act would work towards that goal.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I thought we knew wife pledged allegiance to ISIS? That alone constitutes domestic terrorism as it is providing material support to a terrorist organization.

If your point is we should verify that before lambasting media for NOT jumping to a conclusion, I agree.

My point was that given their wacked out goal of bringing about the apocalypse, I'd say any violent provocative act would work towards that goal.

Yup, that was my point.

Disagree about merely pledging allegiance to ISIS constituting domestic terrorism, I'd say you need to act in the name/service of the organization, but that's just more hair-splitting. For example I pledge allegiance to the Washington football team but that doesn't make me a racist ... just a sympathizer with them

 

[Harry Manback]

Why arent they releasing the picture of the foreign national terrorist?

Who?

 

[Clifford]

BTW, in terms of societal acceptance of Muslims, this video is pretty awesome

http://yellowhammernews.com/faithandculture/blindfolded-muslim-asks-fellow-auburn-students-for-hugs-heres-what-happened-next-video/

 

[SIDA!]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

 

[Ladsud]

The FBI leaves, drivers licences, SS cards, school IDs, family pictures, papers all over the house. The media walks in and films all of this. How is this stuff not evidence, 2 days after a terror attack and the FBI just walks away from the house. This is so bizarre.

 

[Ladsud]

Can the FBI clear a house of all finger prints, hair samples, possible DNA from a house in 2 days? I know they have sophisticated equipment these days but you would figure after a terrorist attack they wouldnt just leave.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

I think the difference is that if the radicalized person is coordinating with a known terror group we probably have a better chance to catch and stop them. If they are basically working on their own I don't think there is much difference at all.

 

[tdoss]

I find it so odd how there's debate over how to label this...

When the white kid shot up the church...it seemed pretty quickly deemed as a racist hate filled motive...regardless if some larger white power group claimed that idiot or told him to do it.

When the black dude shot the reporters and left a racist manifesto stating he hoped to trigger a race war...people jumped all over themselves to call it "workplace violence" or a disgruntled employee.

Now we're actually going to split hairs over what this is...and whether or not ISIS gave them the go ahead or set the plan in motion...

Self radicalized...interesting term really.

Did Timothy McVeigh get that same label?

 

[Christo]

ISIS news agency reporting that the attack was carried out by ISIS followers.

I think this is an example of them claiming credit after the fact. I doubt they knew who these two were or that they even existed. Which, I guess, is actually what they want.

I'm sure it doesn't upset them.

 

[Ladsud]

Good job FBI and the media for destroying an active crime scene, terrorist staging ground. FBI is a damn joke right now.

 

[ericttspikes]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

I personally just think they are simply murderers, nothing more. Why elevate it to something else? Murder is bad enough. They are psychopaths who have no empathy or value for human life. There is no "solving" that other than letting law enforcement and other agencies do their job in rolling up others like them. Elevating a particular murder to something more grand, and calling it "terrorism", is kind of the entire purpose of why they do it. They feed on the sensationalism. They feed on the media frenzy and the fear it causes. It's almost a multi-pronged attack; first the murders, the fear and panic cause by the media's obsession with it, the damage politicians and law makers do reacting to it, and then they use all that combined damage as PR for recruiting.

 

[Willie Neslon]

ISIS news agency reporting that the attack was carried out by ISIS followers.

Wolfallah Blitzakbar reporting?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Can the FBI clear a house of all finger prints, hair samples, possible DNA from a house in 2 days?

Yes

 

[Christo]

Good job FBI and the media for destroying an active crime scene, terrorist staging ground. FBI is a damn joke right now.

 

[CBusAlex]

When the white kid shot up the church...it seemed pretty quickly deemed as a racist hate filled motive...

I guess you didn't get the memo, but that guy was just mentally ill. As was the white guy that shot up planned parenthood. Nope, no need to label either of them terrorists either.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I find it so odd how there's debate over how to label this...

When the white kid shot up the church...it seemed pretty quickly deemed as a racist hate filled motive...regardless if some larger white power group claimed that idiot or told him to do it.

When the black dude shot the reporters and left a racist manifesto stating he hoped to trigger a race war...people jumped all over themselves to call it "workplace violence" or a disgruntled employee.

Now we're actually going to split hairs over what this is...and whether or not ISIS gave them the go ahead or set the plan in motion...

Self radicalized...interesting term really.

Did Timothy McVeigh get that same label?

Not sure what you were doing at the time, but there was pretty significant debate after the Roof shootings here and elsewhere over whether to call it terrorism.

 

[Ladsud]

Good job FBI and the media for destroying an active crime scene, terrorist staging ground. FBI is a damn joke right now.

Can the FBI clear a house of all finger prints, hair samples, possible DNA from a house in 2 days?

Yes

How often do they walk away from the a crime scene and leave identification, family pictures, SS cards strewn over a bed and just leave it to the media?

 

[The Commish]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

I'm not sure. There seems to be a lot of hesitance to label things "terrorist". Personally? I think anyone terrorizing someone else is a terrorist, but the actual definition has this political element and it has me wondering how it got there because terror and terrorize don't have that political element. Seems like there's a disconnect

 

[beer 30]

I find it so odd how there's debate over how to label this...

When the white kid shot up the church...it seemed pretty quickly deemed as a racist hate filled motive...regardless if some larger white power group claimed that idiot or told him to do it.

When the black dude shot the reporters and left a racist manifesto stating he hoped to trigger a race war...people jumped all over themselves to call it "workplace violence" or a disgruntled employee.

Now we're actually going to split hairs over what this is...and whether or not ISIS gave them the go ahead or set the plan in motion...

Self radicalized...interesting term really.

Did Timothy McVeigh get that same label?

I'd say him, the unabomber and a few select others would be ont eh Mt. Rushmore of self-radicalization.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

How often do they walk away from the a crime scene and leave identification, family pictures, SS cards strewn over a bed and just leave it to the media?

They scan all that info, and they take any appropriate documents that are critical to the investigation. Chain of evidence, like most things in 2015, is trending to the electronic version. As far as the media, I'm sure they didn't think the landlord would let them trample in there. Regardless, once they clear the scene they have everything they need.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

I'm not sure. There seems to be a lot of hesitance to label things "terrorist". Personally? I think anyone terrorizing someone else is a terrorist, but the actual definition has this political element and it has me wondering how it got there because terror and terrorize don't have that political element. Seems like there's a disconnect

It's pretty much the same deal as sexist/sexism not meaning the same thing as sex or sexy.

 

[The Commish]

And to play devil's advocate.....doesn't labeling everything "terrorism" strip the word of it's true meaning delegitimizing the "stature"?

 

[Clifford]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

I'm not sure. There seems to be a lot of hesitance to label things "terrorist". Personally? I think anyone terrorizing someone else is a terrorist, but the actual definition has this political element and it has me wondering how it got there because terror and terrorize don't have that political element. Seems like there's a disconnect

It's pretty much the same deal as sexist/sexism not meaning the same thing as sex or sexy.

http://static.wix.com/media/c0cd1c_4c6fd5f4c54eac4f8473b13b0004dac6.jpg

 

[Clifford]

And to play devil's advocate.....doesn't labeling everything "terrorism" strip the word of it's true meaning delegitimizing the "stature"?

http://41.media.tumblr.com/2da97c1053a9ca3cd2836d8685b693e6/tumblr_mv6sqlF4yM1r3yxp8o1_500.jpg

 

[snogger]

If we don't call it workplace violence it means the terrorists have won.

Didn't we used to just call this murder?

I remember it being called "going postal"

 

[Nick Vermeil]

How often do they walk away from the a crime scene and leave identification, family pictures, SS cards strewn over a bed and just leave it to the media?

They scan all that info, and they take any appropriate documents that are critical to the investigation. Chain of evidence, like most things in 2015, is trending to the electronic version.As far as the media, I'm sure they didn't think the landlord would let them trample in there. Regardless, once they clear the scene they have everything they need.

I'm fairly certain I've seen more than one movie where a cop/journalist/suspect comes back to a crime scene, days later, sneaks past the police tape and finds the smoking gun. Why was there no police tape? Why?

 

[GoBirds]

Family attorney holding a press conference....why do you need 2 attorneys on TV already if your innocent?

 

[El Floppo]

I personally, like to stick to original term definitions, but I am wondering why terrorism specifies an underlying political motive? What are we to call the people who terrorize others just because they are warped, mean, demented etc?

Because there is a fundamental difference between a gangbanger or a mentally ill person engaging in deadly acts versus a radicalized Muslim. Or am I in the minority on this and most everybody thinks that there isn't a bit of difference?

I'm not sure. There seems to be a lot of hesitance to label things "terrorist". Personally? I think anyone terrorizing someone else is a terrorist, but the actual definition has this political element and it has me wondering how it got there because terror and terrorize don't have that political element. Seems like there's a disconnect

It's pretty much the same deal as sexist/sexism not meaning the same thing as sex or sexy.

what's wrong with being sexy?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

You know what, I don't think I'm buying the crime scene was all cleaned up explanation. This is an international terrorism investigation with 2 score people injured, 15 dead. No. The investigators might find new evidence that requires them to go back. It could happen. At a minimum they should have kept the press out. This is a major screw up.

And the family has hired a true screwball, conspiracy nut full on attorney.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Two interesting things that came out in the last two hours:

--at least one of the assault rifles used in the shooting was converted to fully automatic with s tool that apparently isn't that hard to acquire.

-all those documents that were in the house that everyone Is sooooo worried about, belonged to the mother of the shooter. She lived with the shooters and is not a suspect.

 

[lod01]

Did they check under that subhuman's skirt because that so called woman looks like a dude.

 

[tommyboy]

It doesn't matter. The idea that the government can throw your name on a list with no due process and strip you of your rights is awful. I'm pretty surprised at how many liberals are supporting that idea.

So you are opposed to the Terrorist Watch List, or ok with it as long it only hampers your ability to travel, buy a home, etc.? Asking because none of these are rights.

It's a constitutional right. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it less so.

A drastically misinterpreted right that is causing way more damage than good. One that needs to be either repealed or changed.

Whoa