So, mass shootings only happen in the USA?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

He just said today it could be. You're just looking for gripes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You said there are legal ramifications for his using the word "terrorism" loosely. Please explain, or kindly admit you made it up in a desperate attempt, once again, to make the guy look brilliant.

He says it "might be terrorism, it might be workplace violence". Atta boy, Columbo.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

He says it "might be terrorism, it might be workplace violence". Atta boy, Columbo.

That's what the investigators are saying. There's a line of thinking that they may not have intended to attack the party but some disagreement changed their actions. Don't know right now.

You know the Fort Hood shooting was never declared terrorism either as it didn't meet the legal standard?

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

Making a bomb doesn't make you a terrorist. Using one or intending to use one with a specific political intent certainly could. Currently they really don't know the intent and the couple didn't leave any obvious indication of what they were trying to achieve aside from carnage.

The situation does appear to show something bad was afoot but until they have a better understanding of motive the FBI isn't going to call it terrorism and neither should POTUS.

Making a bomb with the intent to use it makes you a terrorist.

Originally Posted by spence

That's what the investigators are saying. There's a line of thinking that they may not have intended to attack the party but some disagreement changed their actions. Don't know right now.

They were far too geared up, prepared to do maximum damage, and setup to attack someone. So if they were going to do this and had all the training, weapons, gear, plans, as well as the scrubbing all ready to go, the "some disagreement changed their actions" to attack the party changes it from terrorism to workplace violence? How convenient.

Originally Posted by spence

You know the Fort Hood shooting was never declared terrorism either as it didn't meet the legal standard?

Fort Hood had all the makings of Terrorism, the shooter claimed he was a soldier of Allah

[Fly Rod]

Spence come on UUUUU know what it was an hour after......terrorism.....say it slowly take a deep breath....ter-ror-ism.....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

That's what the investigators are saying. There's a line of thinking that they may not have intended to attack the party but some disagreement changed their actions. Don't know right now.

You know the Fort Hood shooting was never declared terrorism either as it didn't meet the legal standard?

"That's what the investigators are saying"

Who, exactly? Please tell me who said that there are legal ramifications for the President throwing that word around.

Spence, we can debate about when it's appropriate to concluder that it was terrorism., But I don't believe for a second, that there are laws that would prevent him from saying "this looks lik eIslamic terrorism". But, you have prroven me wrong a few times, mybe this is another example.

"You know the Fort Hood shooting was never declared terrorism either as it didn't meet the legal standard"

What 'legal standard'?

I notice that your hero Obama doesn't mind spouting off half-assed, when he says that the Cambridge acted stupidly, or that if he had a son, he'd look like whoever it was. Obama's caution about not putting his goot in his mouth, seems quite selective, does it not?

The Fort Hood shooter had a card in his wallet that identified him as a "Soldier Of Allah". He was screaming "Allahu Akhbar" as he killed Americans. He was a terrorist. Only someone with a real political axe to grind, would debate that.