From the article:
"A suburban Rochester, New York, man described as potentially "the next Oklahoma City bomber" has been arrested and charged with planning to kill former President George W. Bush, according to federal authorities.
"The suspect, 23-year-old Ian Rotunno of Greece, New York, repeatedly told Secret Service agents he was intent on killing the former president, and had planned to go to Washington or Texas to carry out that mission. However, Rotunno, after loading his truck with assorted weapons, turned himself in to Owego, New York, police on October 7.
...
"At one point Rotunno told agents he was simply going to fire his shotgun into the reflecting pool on the Washington mall to gain the attention of authorities, expecting he would then be arrested or killed by law enforcement officials. But he added he would kill the former president with his bare hands if he could.
"I know where to find President Bush at his ranch in Texas, and I'm not going to stop," Rotunno told Secret Service agents, according to the affidavit."
Sounds like a deranged potential murderer to me, not a terrorist.
But it's easier to LINK him to terrorism, so that is what is being done.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-10-26/justice/new.york.bush.plot_1_federal-custody-secret-service-agents-federal-court?_s=PM:CRIME
I think that the war on terror has caused a moral panic throughout society. Terrorists are definitely a threat, but there hasn't been a successful terrorist attack since 9/11. With this said, terrorism may not be the greatest threat to America. I think that this man is more of a potential crazy murderer than a terrorist, and therefore should not be called a terrorist. In our society today, I feel as though we feel comfortable calling potential threats terrorism, whenever something regarding our government or economy is potentially attacked. Granted, terrorism is the attack of a country's government; however a citizen who threatened to kill the former President is just a lunatic, and by no means a terrorist.
ReplyDelete