previous post next post  

Rowr?

confused-dog.jpg
 
"ARLINGTON, Va. – Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday there is no question that the person or persons behind the failed bombing attempt in Times Square intended to spread terror across New York.

Investigators have some good leads in addition to the videotape of a middle-aged man who could be seen shedding his shirt near the SUV where the bomb was found, the attorney general said in remarks to reporters.

Holder said it is too early in the probe to say whether the incident was of foreign or domestic origin and that it was too early to designate it as a terrorist incident."

No, really, he said that.  Well, at least the AP says he said that.
 

11 Comments

I'm beginning to believe that this administration's definition of terror is tied directly to how bad it makes the opposition party look.  If it doesn't splatter feces on the Republicans, then it's probably just some dis-enfranchised protester looking for an expression of his clearly bad lot in life.  When terror jumps out and bites you in the A$$, will you recognize it then, Mr. Holder?
 
This one, and the Detriot airport bombing... all these near misses are making me nervous. I think we're fast using up whatever guardian angel points we have.
 
Despite the Pakistani Taliban's claims of responsibility, I expect Obama / Holder / Napolitano to eventually blame it on a domestic militia group comprised of Tea Party members.
 
(Caption) "Just think, they call us *dumb animals*. If  the humans want to find *dumb animals*, they should just go look into the mirror. Grumpy, that includes you, too."
 
Lessee -- the object of terror is to create terror, and one who uses terror, or attempts to uses terror, in order to create terror is, by definition, a terrorist.

Except in Eric Holder's world, where someone who attempts to create terror is -- ummmmm -- aaaahhhh -- errrr -- ehhhhhh -- oh, darn the imprecision of the English language. We'll just have to wait to see what his motivation was before we can decide what he is, huh?

On the *other* hand, we already know what Holder is -- a political hack who's way out of his depth.
 
You know. In some ways this reminds me of Ireland. Initially the British tried to say "Oh no it's just a few ragtag rebels. Nothing orchestrated." By the time they were at all but all out war they were maintaining their stiff upper lip.

The current administration isnt much different. Militarily speaking a public that is not anxious or fearful is more easily quelled because they aren't asking "Why, How, What" etc. A Public thats on high alert tends to ask more questions.

Speaking conspiratorially and not trying to insinuate anything I do find it interesting this happened on the eb of 2 huge natural disasters that the current Administration has been rather lacksadaisial in their approach with.
 
Bloodspite!  Here - you left your colander!  Dude - they work better without the tinfoil wrapping...

;^ )
 
Thanks! I needed that :)
I was feeling rather tin hatish this morning, I  can plead no other excuse I fear
 
Bill, I think the phrase you're looking for is "radical activist expressing their justifiable resentment of the United States oppresive world hegemony."

There. Fixed that for you.

The sad part is that Holder probably really thinks that way.


 
Casey -- You forgot "...misunderstood, and the victim of an unhappy childhood..."
 
Why, yes I did. Not to mention "sexually frustrated by a system with alleged 'morals' which would outrage a reactionary Puritan."

It's no wonder that a theoretical place in Heaven with 72 virgins (or raisins; whatever) is preferable to yet one more night with Rosie Palm and her five sisters... But playing with yourself is probably a mortal sin under Islam, just like the Catholics.

Is it such a shock that the 9/11 murderers spent their last night on earth in a strip joint, instead of prayer? These were literally no holy warriors.