Enough public info now for early analysis of the attempted bombings. THREAD--Will update as more info becomes public. First, this fits the definition of terrorism: Non-combatant targets, violent (at least one device confirmed active), almost certainly political. 1/x
-
-
Rhetoric can motivate violence. And not just direct incitement. That being said, I think it's irresponsible to assume terrorist(s) who haven't been identified or released any statement were motivated by any specific rhetoric based on chosen targets. 12/x https://twitter.com/Duncans_Eggs/status/1055213492771450880 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
Good example of incorrect speculation connecting rhetoric and violence: Giffords shooting in AZ. Sarah Palin released map of districts to "target," which some blamed for motivating shooter. Turns out shooter wasn't motivated by political rhetoric at all (see tweet 3 above). 13/x
Show this thread -
We don't know who sent the bombs yet. There's nothing lost--absolutely nothing--in waiting a few days for law enforcement to investigate. (END)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Looks like there is also a picture of a person next to the flag. John Brennan?
-
No idea. I can't make it out.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.