In a recent piece entitled, "Nice Terrorism?" I found it interesting that in Nice we immediately jumped to the conclusion of terrorism yet in Fort Hood and Orlando we did not.
I wrote:
In virtually every terrorist attack that we have in the United States, or the West, more generally, there has been a great reluctance to use the term "terrorism" much less "radical Islamic terrorism."Well, now we know.
Fort Hood, an obvious terror attack, was dubbed "work place violence" by Ostrich-in-Chief, Barack Obama. ...
And, yet, in the hours directly after the horrific Nice attack, yesterday, everybody was using the term "terrorism" to describe this attack. The great irony is that this may be the one that actually is NOT a terror attack.
It might very well be, but we do not know that yet.
Just as Orlando was a Jihadi attack, so was Nice.
The Times of Israel, via Agence France Presse, tells us:
Nice, France — The truck driver who killed 85 people in the French city of Nice showed a “clear, recent interest” in radical Islam, the Paris prosecutor said Monday, confirming the attack was “premeditated.”Except for the most ideologically blinkered, this should resolve the question of whether or not this was a Jihadi attack.
The investigation showed Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel had trawled the internet for information on a terror attack in the US city of Orlando and on the killing of a police couple in a Paris suburb last month, Francois Molins said.
A search of his computer also found violent images “linked to radical Islam,” he told a press conference in Paris.
It was.
There was, however, very little evidence up until this moment that Bouhlel was religious or political, but, as it happens, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls was apparently correct when he said that Bouhlel was only recently radicalized.
One question that we are all asking ourselves, naturally, is where all this chaos and nonsense throughout the West is leading us?