is what it seems to me. And it goes back to GWB. Divorcing Islam from the extremists with the premise that these people aren't "Muslims". It's essentially the "No True Scotsmen".
To be honest, I didn't even realize that until recently when I began to really think about and research this issue. I just accepted that the appropriate American response was to not blame a group for the actions of an individual, especially a religion. I was being naive and failing to really grasp what is happening and the importance of correctly characterizing and addressing it.
As I was reading here I was listening to a replay of this mornings Meet the Press with AG Lynch. I don't have a verbatim but she essentially equated the acts here to workplace violence again, saying identifying terrorists is the same thing, looking for people whose behavior has changed, as though it had no relationship to Islam.
And then the idea that the problem is guns. I don't have strong feelings about gun issues. I don't own or use guns and I'm not sure what kind of meaningful gun control can be accomplished in compliance with the second amendment. I don't know enough about guns to even argue about this effectively because a lot hinges on definitions of weapons and weapons are things that can be subsequently altered. Anyway, I don't see it related to terrorism for a few reasons including they are just as happy using bombs which can be even more deadly and terrorists will always find guns as there's no way to outlaw them in the US and they can be altered just like bombs can be built. Seems like a red herring to attach to terrorism.
Anyway, a lot of deflection by the AG as it is completely unacceptable to ever discuss Islam, radical Islam, anything at all about Islam or Muslims other than it and they need to be protected. There are PC rules in place and no matter what happens, they stay in place. That is now creating a worse problem in that most people aren't stupid and they intuitively understand the common link of Islam in the bulk of existing terror related deaths around the world and the establishment of the Islamic State. And the refusal of the government that is supposed to protect them to acknowledge this just ups the fear ante and creates space for xenophobic voices to rise.
The other deflection is to say no evidence tied to a larger cell. That is not saying much if anything. It simply means their actions may have been planned and fulfilled without assistance. But they don't even know that yet. And it doesn't at all mean there aren't other similar individuals or couples or families out there planning similar attacks on their own. It really doesn't matter if they were or weren't personally part of a cell. Neither means anything in regard to whether there are more out there. It creates a false assurance.
It will be really interesting to see what Obama says tonight. I will be carefully listening to the words while understanding there is almost zero likelihood of any change in tone or rhetoric.
It is my honest opinion that the guns will be blamed more than the terrorists. The WH had released a statement that is being shown on several news channels stating that there is no evidence that this incident is tied to a cell or larger organization. I think both issues need to be addressed, but what comes first-the terrorists or the egg?
