“Releaseth thou our unjustly incarecerated bretheren, or we shall ignite the black powder”?

When you get blown up by a Christian car-bomb, you come back to life 3 days later. Also, there’s a substantially higher chance of the last sounds you hear being a Carman song bumping through a minivan stereo. One where he raps.

(Sheesh, too early in the a.m….)

Our American terrorist sare motivated by their own egos, their personal rages (Name a Postal Office murder), their internal violence (Columbine), self-hatred (Santee High School), bigotry (The guy who shot Jews and a Filipino mail carrier in the SFV), gender hatred (Richard Speck, and countless domestic murderers, including yesterday’s murder in Atlanta), right wing hatred (Eric Rudolph) delusions of grandeur (David Koresh), paranoia (Jim Jones) and other sicknesses generated by our very own American culture.

We don’t need terrorists to run drills in schools. We have enough hideous horrible scenarios to drill with that have already happened here. The Muslamofascists are pikers compared to the average asshole living in a trailer down the end of the two-lane highway out west of town.

So, we should hit them before they hit us? Now that’s proactive thinking, Jrod! Kill the students before they can kill students! A plan any right-thinking person of upstanding character can get behind.

We must bring democracy to the public school system! For too long innocent children have lived under the twisted regime of student councils and presidencies who rule via fear and terror!

And golf carts.

Now, if only we could find some force to invade these schools. Armed and state-sponsored of course. Students will welcome them with flowers and open arms!

One might add: And no, it’s not “censorship” to denounce the Limbaughs, Coulters, and Malkins, nor is it “an attempt to silence them,” much as Malkin et al would love to complain and feel thus victimized. (No one is happier than a wingnut feeling victimized.)

It’s an attempt to persuade them to silence themselves, by the use of moral force.

What? Don’t bother? Yeah, I know. Still, one has to say SOMETHING.

See Mike Davis’ Buda’s Wagon: A Brief History of the Car Bomb

I’d say the Christians terrorists are more likely in this context; a US school is of no value as a target for Muslim extremists. They have limited access to equipment, and if their motivations align with those of the 9/11 hijackers, they’ll want to expend their energy on a highly visible target with symbolic value. They would pose a danger to famous buildings and bridges – active landmarks where the estimated death toll could be in the thousands. They might also attack stress points in the power grid, as well as subway tunnels and busy roadways.

Their main object is to terrorize. They’re not after any really specific goals, regardless of their televised protestations; they want to make general political or ideological statements.

They don’t usually target individuals. They target ideas.

Terrorists who’d raid and hold a school are more likely to be driven by the desire for specific changes. By holding vulnerable people hostage, they’re more likely to score some airtime for their POV.

Their goal would be to persuade, either recruiting people friendly to the cause or repelling enemies, and their method of collecting an audience would be to threaten violence against a captive population. Terrorists motivated by the latter desire are far less likely to leave home for their mayhem. They don’t just terrorize for the sake of instilling fear; they want to change things close to where they operate.

Political terrorists – the ‘beheaders’ in Iraq, for example – will take hostages close to home because that’s where they want the greatest changes to occur. They will target and kill individuals. Palestinian suicide bombers don’t go all that far from home, either, because they want something specific to change near where they live.

So the terrorists most likely to attack a school in the US would be people who live fairly close by, perhaps in the same state. They would most likely take hostages for no other reason than to gain the attention of media outlets. Their demands – in this case, the beginnings of a theonomy – would be fairly specific in nature and local in scope.

Working close to home has an additional benefit: it is more likely the terrorists will find sympathizers in a populace with the same basic background and beliefs.

Muslims aren’t going to travel to the US and hold a bunch of kids hostage merely to protest the war in Afghanistan or whatever. They’d find no allies among the people or in the press. They’d have expended a monstrous amount of money and effort to attack a target that has absolutely nothing to do with the source of their anger. US Muslims who sympathize with terrorism aren’t likely to waste their resources on such a futile quest, either.

Yes, but a terrorism drill can only be taken seriously when you dress up like a Mooslim, not when you dress like Tony the Tiger.

http://michellemalkinisanidiot.com

And I think YOU meant to type “homicide bombing.” Appeaser.