Just over a year ago;
FORT HOOD, Tex. — Wearing a camouflage Army uniform and sitting upright in a wheelchair, the military psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people in a shooting rampage… – NYT
A gunman opened fire on a security guard at the Washington D.C., headquarters of a conservative Christian organization only to be tackled and subdued by the guard whom he had just shot in the arm… – ABC News
The former shooter declared his actions were in defense of Islam and in protest of the American involvement in the Middle East. It was declared by authorities to be “workplace violence”.
The latter shooter declared his actions were in protest of the Family Research Council’s stance on marriage. The authorities declared this act “domestic terrorism”.
Please read the above last two lines again.
Anyone? I have plenty of room in the comments section for explanations.
Is it because the Family Research Council shooter did not work for the organization? If he had, would that have changed the act by means of motivation? No? Then how does this work exactly?
This is not about Islam any more than it is about marriage. What it is about is intellectual consistency. We seem to have a very poor relationship with that here in the U.S.
Leave a Reply