<BREAKING> Active Shooter in San Bernardino, California

"It is possible that this is terrorist-related, but we don't know. It's also possible this was workplace-related," he said. "There may be mixed motives in all this, which makes the investigation more complicated. But rest assured, we will get to the bottom of this."
3 Dec

"The San Bernardino, California, mass shooting is now being investigated as "an act of terrorism," FBI official David Bowdich said Friday."
4 Dec

Obama made a general remarks (unknown motive yet), BEFORE the FBI made their statement (known motive now). That is what ATW and Bandwagoner can't figure out.

 

That is actually exactly what I am criticizing. But that went right over your head.

 

Actually, as you may recall, I stated when we knew it was two Muslims, but did not yet have a motive or the tie to Islamic State that people were "prematurely ejaculating" on this.

In order for it to be "terrorism," there has to be a political motive. Whether a government body "formally" classifies it as such doesn't matter. Just the political motive and the terror. This was without a doubt an act of terror.

Once again, here is the Merriam Websters definition of terrorism (yes, a dictionary definition can be wrong, but this one looks very good):

Terrorism : the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal.

The problem with Obama is he refuses to utter the words radical Islamic Terrorism - ever. It was not about him refusing to identify our enemy the day before, it is about his refusal to identify them at all.

Military 101: "Know your enemy" (Sun Tsu). Barack Obama and his crew refuse to identify them correctly, much less know them for who they are. We cannot win against such a deadly opponent with this kind of obtuse, borderline delusional mindset. If we continue to approach this problem in this way, it is going to rapidly get worse from this point. How can it not?

 

I'm somewhat laughing at FranchiseBlade - "I call it terrorism even if there is no political motive". That's like saying "I call them the Houston Ballhogs even though I know they are called the Houston Rockets. I don't care about the official name. That's just how I roll."

 

FranchiseBlade is a dedicated troll. He tries to pass off as fact what he wishes the narrative to be. Then he tries to justify it by absurd hypotheticals and even supporting evidence from left wing news sources. Remember, the way the news media works, at least in the US, is that you can find whatever news support you want. ie - want to see the San Bernardino massacre called "workplace violence" or blamed on GOPers? No problem, you can find that at DailyKos or MotherJones easily. This is one of the reasons why some liberals truly believe the idiocy they spew, is because they read these sites. Delusional.

 

This is on Obama and the liberals for the atmosphere they've created.

 

You jumped on this as terrorism "from the beginning" because the mass media - wrong yet again - initially reported that this was "three white guys." Which you and nearly all of your leftist brethren took to mean your political enemies on the right. Just like you did in the case of Robert Dear in Colorado Springs - which we still do not have a political motive for, meaning we still do not have adequate cause to conclude it was an act of terrorism - you folks all prematurely ejaculated, as leftists everywhere routinely and very predictably do on these matters.

And almost without exception, when the facts come in and the true story comes to light - not to be confused with the false story being perpetrated by the leftist media - the basis for your premature imputations is found to be flat out wrong. Here we see that happening, yet again. I have lost count of how many times we have witnessed this phenomenon, even during Barack Obama's time in office alone.

By the time we knew that this was a conspiracy (an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons) and also the perpetrator's names, a bit of their background and that they were manufacturing pipe bombs in their house - all of which Obama knew when he made his PC driven "workplace violence" statement - at that point it was clear to any brain-activated, independent thinking person that this was very probably an act of terrorism. But we still did not have an identifiable motive at that point.

To give credit to Obama, he did in these same comments note that terrorism was a "possibility". However, based on what he knew and what we all knew at the time of those remarks (and now) the "workplace violence" suggestion was just more blatantly dishonest, PC crap from this pathologically liar that currently occupies the oval office president.

You embarrass yourself whether you realize it or not by continuing to parrot this nonsense at this late post-mortum stage of this incident.

 

To me it's still very odd and yet to be a terrorist act - I like how the right is creating this narrative and politicizing this. If one liberal called it terrorism when they thought it was a bunch of white honkies then all of a sudden the entire left did. Many people like you and myself held back and waited for more information.

There still isn't a political agenda associated with this attack that's clearly stated but maybe the FBI knows more than we do. It is very odd that they erased all evidence of associating this with any group or motive.

 

Please see my response to Franchise Blade above, as that applies to you, too.

 

"However, based on what he knew and what we all knew at the time of those remarks (and now) the "workplace violence" suggestion was just more blatantly dishonest, PC crap from this pathologically liar that currently occupies the oval office president.

You embarrass yourself whether you realize it or not by continuing to parrot this nonsense at this late post-mortum stage of this incident."

There is still a question over why he was present at that place, where he formerly worked, and why he was angry when leaving it. It appears that he had some personal anger against his former workplace, and what role this played is still unclear.

In the interest of understanding the whole story of what happened, I can't assume at this point that his personal relation to this workplace has no role in any of this. That's not me trying to be "politically correct", because I am not claiming that to be the only or principle factor here. It is very clear now that these people were terrorists, as the wife made a statement of allegience to ISIS.

 

I'm not sure about the chronology of how everything played out. I suppose it does make sense that they erased online evidence to prevent the attack from being foiled by authorities before it could be carried out? The wife did publicly post that she supported ISIS during the police chase, if I'm not mistaken.

I think what happened is these two were wanting to attack something (clear-cut terrorists), and they figured to target this place because the husband also had some personal beef with some people there. Killing two birds with one stone.

 

That makes sense. What's scary is that this kind of act is almost impossible to stop as they are legal citizens who did not have any communication with ISIS or part of a larger cell from what they are saying.

Gun control might be the only way to make it more difficult to carry out these kinds of mass killings that are politically motivated. Any kind of extremist - whether it's Timothy McVeigh or Islamic extremists here or as in Boston - so tough to stop.

 

From the Los Angeles Times:

'And her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, had contact with people from at least two terrorist organizations overseas, including the Al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front in Syria, a federal law enforcement official said.' ​

Of course Syria is where the Obama regime is defiantly bringing in thousands of young fighting age Muslim men from, essentially unvetted into our country. Unvetted just like Farook's new wife Tashfeen Malik was.

But it would not be "Politically Correct" to exclude these people, even though they almost certainly include substantial numbers of additional terrorists that President Obama is proactively importing into our country, against the will of the people and the US Congress.

Obama and the Democrats are once again are putting their PC agenda ahead of our national security.

 

Have they found the three honkies yet?

 

Give it some time MSNBC will find them soon.

 

Lol doesn't matter that it was actually Isis terrorists.

Obama is still busy trying to push his gun control agenda even if it was terrorist driven. So hypocritical that the liberals weren't crying for this in Paris but they are here.

 

I guess you don't know that two Republican gun control amendments were put to vote on Thursday, as well. One by the Majority Whip Cornyn (from Texas). Further, after Sandy Hook, gun control legislation was proposed by two Republicans, which Feinstein's Thursday amendment mirrored.

So, you were saying...

 

None of what you wrote discredits what I wrote.