ter·ror·ism
noun \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm\
: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal
This is a comment from a Facebook page made by State Representative John Burt from Goffstown. He's calling State Rep. Ed Butler from Hart's Location a terrorist.
Eric Robert Rudolph is a convicted terrorist. He was responsible for the bombing at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. The bombing killed one person and injured 111 others. He also bombed several abortion clinics, and a gay bar. He killed a cop and critically injured a nurse in the clinic bombings.
Timothy McVeigh was a convicted terrorist. He was executed.
He bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1995. There were 168 people killed in the bombing, and over 600 injured.
Dzhokar Tsarnaev is an alleged terrorist. He has not yet been convicted. He and his brother are alleged to have perpetuated the Boston Marathon bombings in April 2013. Three people were killed and at least 264 were injured.
Ed Butler, on the other hand, hasn't blown anyone up.
Why the careless, violent rhetoric? Ed's the chair of the Commerce Committee. His committee was (mistakenly) assigned a gun bill, aimed at tightening loopholes for background checks in NH firearms sales. Ed did the best he could with it, and for that he was rewarded with constant harassment and threats. Ed's from NY, (not NJ) where he was a nursing home administrator. The Freedumb crowd put that through their Magic 8 Ball and decided that meant that Mayor Michael Bloomberg (gun nutz Public Enemy #1) was in league with Ed - had, in fact, planted Ed here by buying him an inn.
We can see that bit of "intelligence" displayed here in a tweet from an exchange about me that a bunch of intellectuals were having on Feb. 11:
They were all a bit cross about this blog post about the harassment of NH legislators.
The fact that David Dinkins was Mayor of NYC when Ed bought the Notchland Inn would only confuse this crowd.
8 comments:
Confusion is a polite word for ignorant. These people are ignorant.
As a Gun Owner, I have absolutely NO problem with Background checks.
I have Nothing to HIDE.
When people fight AGAINST background
checks, there is Probably a GOOD reason why.
They are Afraid that they WILL FAIL.
But it was OK for the loony left to call ordinary citizens upset with their government 'terrorists' and worse for wanting to stop the overreach.... What it is with you loons that you don't look in the mirror before you pass judgement on everyone else? Clean your own house first.
Dear Mr. Anonymous. How about being brave enough to stand behind what you write?
I believe it is the individual with many weapons who would be deemed a "terrorist". Running and B&B and assisting with legislation toward background checks for purchasing weapons deems one an elected Representative and Legislator.
Oh why bother. Jerks are beyond ignorant and stupid. They are merely dangerous. AND THIS IS WHY BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE NEEDED.
Legislators who call other legislators names are immature and unprofessional. Can you imagine if you and I did this in OUR work places? Why do these overgrown babies get away with this?
Weapon of Mass Destruction
noun
A weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel (nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Quotes from Secretary of State John Kerry (2/16/2104 – Indonesia):
"In a sense, climate change can now be considered the world's largest weapon of mass destruction, perhaps even, the world's most fearsome weapon of mass destruction."
"The science is unequivocal, and those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand," Kerry said. "We don't have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society"
SusantheBruce...Why the careless violent rhetoric and name calling by the Secretary of State? In your attack of John Burt, you managed to equate “terrorism” with blowing people up...”Ed Butler, on the other hand, hasn't blown anyone up.” Your own posted definition of terrorism says nothing about blowing people up, but in your three posted “examples of terrorism,” that is the definition you have elected to use. A violent criminal can break into your home with a machete and threaten to kill you, and then leave. Isn’t that terrorism by your Webster-Merriam definition? Perhaps John Burt may not have used terrorism in your “text-book” definition of the word. I certainly look forward to your criticism of John Kerry, his name calling, and his misuse of WMD.
The topic here is John Burt, anonymous.
Post a Comment