Originally <a href='http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/showthread.php?p=24914661'>posted</a> on 12/03/2015:
Agreed. My post pretty much refers to what it takes to get an act labeled terrorism by the mass media. They seem to reserve the term for more coordinated, pre planned attacks by organized well known groups as opposed to lone sympathizers. On a national level they likely won't acknowledge "standing orders" as a credible threat using the excuse that it is not specific.
In court and with law enforcement it's a whole different ballgame but there seems to be special care as to what gets labeled what when it comes to the news script.
I don't see how Fort Hood is anything but an act of war. It was an attack on a military installation...troops were being deployed to a war zone from there.
Agreed. My post pretty much refers to what it takes to get an act labeled terrorism by the mass media. They seem to reserve the term for more coordinated, pre planned attacks by organized well known groups as opposed to lone sympathizers. On a national level they likely won't acknowledge "standing orders" as a credible threat using the excuse that it is not specific.
In court and with law enforcement it's a whole different ballgame but there seems to be special care as to what gets labeled what when it comes to the news script.
I don't see how Fort Hood is anything but an act of war. It was an attack on a military installation...troops were being deployed to a war zone from there.
