12 replies to this topic

[cantrell]

http://www.salon.com...a_terrorist/?=5

well it's going to depend on just how white and conservative he is so let's take a look and see...



nope, turns out he's just a true patriot lone wolf fighting for freedoms or something because he sure isn't facing domestic terrorism charges after attempting to burn down a planned parenthood

[mav1234]

he was uh, standing ground in the name of the fetuses or something.

[Floppin]

Only brown people are terrorists, duh.

[Stannis]

Sickening. I want to know why this piece of poo did it. What motivated him? Sure, he thinks fetuses are babies, but what would drive him to want to burn down a building and harm people? I wonder...

[NanuqoftheNorth]

If the Feds prosecuted this guy as a terrorist you know what would happen... the Tea Party would be calling it a War on Babies!

[SmootsDaddy89]

Toby Keith song inc

[cantrell]

If the Feds prosecuted this guy as a terrorist you know what would happen... the Tea Party would be calling it a War on Babies!

the tea party would have a fuging conniption fit because charging a white conservative terrorist as a terrorist is literally the closest thing to oppression that they'd ever fuging see

[NanuqoftheNorth]

the tea party would have a fuging conniption fit because charging a white conservative terrorist as a terrorist is literally the closest thing to oppression that they'd ever fuging see

Ha ha, so true!

[Mr. Belding]

Is this the same guy from 3 weeks ago?
http://www.carolinah..._1#entry1716936

Whatever your personal views are, it says in the article linked in the OP why he isn't being treated like a terrorist.

Assistant United States Attorney William Roach, whose office is prosecuting the case, says Grady’s alleged attack did not rise to the level of domestic terrorism, primarily because Grady torched an unoccupied room in an empty building

[cantrell]

so he isn't being charged with terrorism after trying to destroy a planned parenthood because no one was there? well that sure seems to contradict this article about "ecoterrorism"

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,343768,00.html

For nearly seven years, the nation has turned its terror focus on Al Qaeda and the hunt for Usama bin Laden. But there is a domestic terror threat that federal officials still consider priority No. 1 — eco-terrorism.

FBI estimates place damages from these attacks at well over $100 million. So far, no one has been killed.

it's almost as if there's a double standard that benefits white christians but that sure would be odd here in america given their history of being oppressed at every turn

[cookinwithgas]

I don't think that this bombing should be equated to eco-terrorism, as it's intent is usually not to intimidate, but to actually cause monetary damages.

This guy was trying to intimidate people without killing them, which surely meets the legal definition of terrorism, but because he did it in such a weak sauce way it's been downplayed so as to not incite copycats IMHO.

[g5jamz]

According to rodeo...Ayers and Dorne weren't terrorists because they targetted empty buildings. Which is it. Are all these people terrorists or not.

In my opinion...they are.

[Mr. Belding]

so he isn't being charged with terrorism after trying to destroy a planned parenthood because no one was there? well that sure seems to contradict this article about "ecoterrorism"
http://www.foxnews.c...,343768,00.html
it's almost as if there's a double standard that benefits white christians but that sure would be odd here in america given their history of being oppressed at every turn

Interesting points, but the link brings up examples that don't compare to burning an empty building...

The torching of luxury homes in the swank Seattle suburb of Woodinville....

"It remains what we would probably consider the No. 1 domestic terrorism threat, because they have successfully continued to conduct different types of attacks in and around the country," said FBI Special Agent Richard Kolko.

However, that article does contain a tidbit that backs up your views..

The FBI defines eco-terrorism "as the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature."

Maybe time to get the FBI and Justice Department on the same page? I see reason for it.