McCain/Palin: right-wing terrorism is not really terrorism

Under that definition Ayers wouldn't be considered a terrorist since the group he belong to didn't kill anyone...other than a couple of their own when a bomb they were building accidentally went off.

I think protesting an abortion clinic is closer to terrorism than bombing one when they are closed. Since it is an abortion clinic it isn't terrorism if you blow it when there is no danger of anyone getting hurt.

"I'm sure that she "didn't hear the question correctly" or "she didn't understand the question because it was a gotcha question" or pretty much whatever other lame excuse they can come up with." See answer #6 for said lame excuse.

If there weren't lame excuses, we wouldn't have anything to start discussions over

I'm often baffled by not only how big a moron you are, but how often you lie. Did you listen to the interview? You took one snippet and used it to attack her. When pressed on whether she would stretch the definition to include abortion clinic bombings and people who used Molotov cocktails during protests she said it would apply to anyone who "Anyone else who would seek to campaign to destroy our united states capital and pentagon and would seek to destroy innocent Americans." So right there, you took a single line and attacked her while omitting the other statements she made regarding anyone who would seek to destroy innocent Americans. "It's not rocket science. The point of attacking abortion clinics is to scare doctors out of performing abortions. Ergo, terrorism." That's your narrow minded and ignorant assumption. Here's a scenario for you if you can wrap your small mind around it: A man's girlfriend gets pregnant. He's excited to have a son. She finds out he cheated and has an abortion to punish him. He, out of rage, bombs the clinic to kill her and the doctor. That is murder. It's not terrorism. He's not trying to invoke fear in anyone. He's trying to kill people plain and simple. THAT is why we have trials to determine what offense was committed. THAT is why we have so many levels of each crime such as murder, manslaughter, conspiracy, etc.

"I'm often baffled by not only how big a moron you are, but how often you lie. Did you listen to the interview? You took one snippet and used it to attack her." Which of us just linked the other to the full interview? I'M the one that provided the full context! Get real.

"Clarus, she's not a lawyer or a legal expert and frankly, the interviewer did not provide sufficient information to give a complete answer." Are you for real? CHILDREN could correctly identify abortion clinic bombings as terrorism. Terrorism = influence through manipulation of fear It's not rocket science. The point of attacking abortion clinics is to scare doctors out of performing abortions. Ergo, terrorism. The interviewer was not asking for a "from the books" diagnosis. It's very obvious what he was asking, and I found the video of the interview here, since I feel an "out of context" complaint coming: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27347418#27347418 The straw-grasping is getting more and more outrageous with each passing day.

Yes I do agree. If a judge calls it terrorism then that makes it terrorism under the law as far as I am concerned.

"Unlike Ayers who did not endorse terrorist activities during his meetings with Obama, this woman, Shannon, said of the shooter -- as McCain sat there -- quote 'she's a fine lady,'" Olbermann said. "A judge who later sentenced his fine lady for a campaign of yes, bombing women's clinics, said quote, 'Though I am loathe to call anyone a terrorist, you are a terrorist.'" -- http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Olbermann_McCain_guilty_by_association_1009.html If it's 'good' enough for a judge, it's good enough for me. Don't you agree?