Sounds like a great idea. Maybe they ought to suggest it to border cities where the shooters are portrayed as illegal immigrants, or inner cities where they are portrayed as blacks or San Francisco where they are portrayed as angry homosexuals. Sounds fair doesn't it?
First of all, I've yet to see an organized attack by "angry homosexuals" unless there is a 50 pct off sale as Macy's. So I don't think the concern is quite the same there.
Second, inner city violence is quite a bit difference.
And isolated, not uncommon, simply isolated attacks by immigrants or illegals in border states is something cops do prepare for. It's called being a cop. How would you go about defending against such a thing?
There are groups in this country that are more likely to act in concert with each other. I see no issue with addressing that and preparing for it. We've obviously done it with foreign terrorist attacks, we've done it with domestic terrorist attacks from rural militia type groups.
I don't think this is a very big deal.
When was the last terrorist attack by a white militia? I think preparing for an attack by angry union members is probably more realistic right now. Unless I just don't hear about these attacks by skinheads. And I'm not defending the militias, I'm just saying that they are needlessly creating a bias against a group of people. Just like if they used immigrants, blacks, muslims or homosexuals. I think even Ban would agree with me on this one.
You're just saying the same exact thing you said prior to this last post.
As I SAID, they do prepare for attacks against Muslims, homosexuals haven't really shown themselves to be an organized and violent group, and blacks, not sure what sect of blacks would deviate from normal criminal patterns to organized a synchronized attack. And there already is a "bias" against crazy militia groups.
The number of these types of groups are up big time since Obama became President. The director of the FBI said they were at an all time high in terms of death threat and hate speech since Obama's inauguration.
And if we're using the argument that it hasn't happened in a while, I don't think you plan for what happens often, you plan for what you believe could happen next.
Here is one from just last year.
Anyway... did you ever think using white dudes as the training focus is the easiest way to practice this stuff? If they had said they were training for race riots or foreign terrorists itd probably cause quite a bigger stir.
In order to qualify for Federal funding, the drill had to involve terrorism. Therefore, there had to be terrorists. Who to cast in the role of terrorists? Had they picked any minority group, there would have been an immediate outcry of profiling. So they looked for a group who can generally be "discriminated" against without repercussion - white, male gun-owners.
Next time they will know better. Pick on a really safe group - the obese.
And I seriously don't know the answer to this, but what qualifies as a terrorist act? Does it have to happen to someone in government? Because if not, I would say that inner city gangs have been terrorizing people for quite some time. Mexican drug cartels seem like a terrorist organization, too. But, like I said, I'm not sure what qualifies.