Assuming he’s guilty, Christopher Monfort is a cop killer. From what limited biographical information we’ve learned about him thus far, I wouldn’t be surprised if he is seriously mentally ill. At the very worst, he’s an awful, sadistic, cold-hearted, anti-social murderer.
But calling him a “terrorist” just trivializes the word, and in some ways, trivializes the crime.
Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation for political purposes. It is a crime against government. A crime against society. A crime against humanity.
But while killing a police officer in the line of duty wounds our entire community, Monfort is alleged to have killed a man… a husband, a son, a father of two small children. Whatever Monfort’s crazy beef with police officers in general may have been, the murder of Officer Timothy Brenton was also a personal crime, that will forever have a very personal and tragic impact on Officer Brenton’s family and friends. Two young children will grow up without a father, not because of terrorism, but because some asshole murdered him in cold blood, as he sat in his patrol car.
So don’t waste the word by labeling Monfort a “terrorist” even if in his own deluded mind, that’s what he fancied himself to be. Assuming he’s guilty as charged, he is a cop killer. And in our society, labels don’t get much worse than that.
Amen.
Hey Goldy, they also said he’s their suspect in the firebombing of four Seattle police cruisers.
SEATTLE — Police described a suspect in the shooting death of a Seattle policeman as a “lone domestic terrorist” and said he was also suspected of firebombing four police vehicles.
Whoops it was in the Seattle Times… my bad :)
Actually the police are potentially giving him grounds to appeal any conviction by flinging the “t” word around in the media. His lawyers are sure to argue that inflaming the community with “terrorist” talk made it impossible for him to get an impartial jury or a fair trial. It’s not a real smart thing to do.
If* Montfort is guilty, this looks like a case of Black Rage. We’re told Mr. Monfort was interested in “jury nullification” and he seemed obsessed with police injustices against minorities as he moved through the academic system. It appears he wanted to make a “statement” by murdering a white cop.
* I like this terminology better than “assuming” because all defendants are presumed innocent until proved guilty, and “if” leaves the question of guilt up in the air, where it should be at this stage of proceedings.
Puddy checked the “washed” PI version against the Seattle Times version. No wonder Goldy was led “astray”.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Puddy @5,
I read both versions, and I don’t get your point. The fact that Monfort is a suspect in both the arsons and the shootings doesn’t make him a terrorist, whatever so-called IED equipment they found in his apartment.
Goldy,
Why did you only place the PI version for all to read? There was no mention of the police cruiser firebombings in the PI version. That’s where the Seattle PoPo used the word. So the PI using the word in their headline without explaining how the Seattle PoPo used the term is out of context and it made no sense.
You chose the PI as you created the thread. Why?
One sick puppy that guy.
If he’s guilty, lock him up and throw away the key.
No chance of parole.
7 – ‘Cuz Goldy can do whatever he pleases on his own website fool.
He take no orders from right wing whackjobs like you.
Never has, never will. That must really BURN YOUR SILLY ASS!
Puddy @7,
Because when given the opportunity, I prefer to drive traffic to the PI rather than the Times.
pi: At Highline Community College, Monfort ran for student government saying he wanted to make students more aware of civil liberties lost under the Patriot Act, according to the college newspaper.
only a terrorist or other enemy combatant would question the patriot act in the post 9-11 world. war forever.
Do I need you to wield weapons?
otoh, the nytimes reports:
Little Evidence of Terror Plot in Base Killings
screw the life in prison sentence…but this POS to death if found guilty.
Goldy is right, if inconsistent.
Newpeak has demeaned all language …
Confusing.
If the stories are true, Monfort, like a Palestinian bomber, like Mr. Taq, like the IRA, used murder to make a political point.
When Puddy’s buddies killed Dr. Teller, they were nto acting against him .. they were exercising his death as a form of free speech.
If we need to categorize murder, maybe we need to make a the crime of abuse of free speech?
If I murder someone because I want tio mkake a point, like Taq or the shrink in Texas, am I oprotected from the death penalty be3ause I KNOW what is right?
have we figured out yet if he was a christian, catholic, atheist?? guaranteed if he was a muslim that’s all you would have heard about in the news. “MUSLIM MAN KILLS COP” but you never see “CHRISTIAN MAN KILLS COP”
Goldy@10,
Exactly. Thank you for showing your bias and why your the use of the PI and it’s headline only confuses the issue.
ylb arschloch – ignored due to continual comical idiotic ignorance. C2I2
WTF SJ? Scott Roeder?
He was an anti-tax, explosives fiend like Jeff Jones and Bill Ayers, buds of Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm. Sorry dude that whackjob had more in common with your peeps than Puddy’s peeps.
SJ, your leftist pinheads forget about the IEDs and if they match the residue found at the police garage then Monfort is just like your peeps in the ELF. He used explosives to make his point.
Sounds like 90+% of the HA Libtardos on this board.
Sorry about #17 – remove the “the”.
Exactly. Thank you for showing your bias and why your use of the PI and it’s headline only confuses the issue regarding what the Seattle PoPo said.
Goldy, What do you think of the term assassin? I think there is a reasonable desire to give this act a special title because the murder was of a person because of their position in society.
Poor Stupes. This last year he’s gone totally off the deep end. Called Hank Paulson, Greenspan and “Go Galt” Ayn Rand “lefties”. Now this Roeder guy.
Anyone who embarrasses the sick, degenerate right wing cause – to him is a “lefty”.
What a totally insane, reality denying fool.
Anti tax????? LMAO!!!
Explosives fiend??? As was any white supremacist aryan nations type. Those guys are “lefties”?
Who else is “lefty” to this fiend? I bet that guy who shot up the Holocaust museum is one for sure!
LMAO!! The insanity of this idiot is primo entertainment.
Goldy – just as you tell us NOT to rush into calling this POS a terrorist, maybe you should take your own advice and NOT rush to pronounce that he is not. As evidence mounts, his actions and motives are starting to look more and more premeditated and coordinated. (And terrorist-like). You say he was seriously mentally ill – does that mean that terrorists arent??
@3 – leave it to a lefty bunny to make excuses for a terrorist.
@11 Well, then in your estimation that makes me and a lot of other people “terrorists”.
More likely it makes you an idiot.
Goldy, the reason you don’t see Puddy’s point is that it’s under his hat.
Whatever the color of Mr. Monfort’s skin, he was pretty evidently over the edge. Likewise with the guy at Fort Hood.
Unfortunately, as times get worse and events become more surreal, it’s all too likely that more and more people whose inner demons have them close to the breaking point are going to snap. Some of them are going to awful things.
All that being said, one crazy, murderous shithead acting on his own does not a “terrorist conspiracy” make. For responsible citizens or officials to attempt to attach such claims just serves to make us all a little crazier.
It’s absolutely true that the “T” thing is overused and overhyped. That was the mother’s milk of the Busheviks.
Having spewed that though, there’s a lot more evidence that Monfort’s a T-ist than any of the pawns held at Guantanamo.
goldy you are a clueless liberal.
Did he have to pull an “Oklahoma City” to qualify?
Manifesto, firebombing, killing a random public servant. Hmmm, that might not be terrorism but is a tiny bit further than concerned citizen.
Would it held get him into the T-zone if he were not “domestic”?
Actually, Goldy, he’s a terrorist. He had a political agenda which he intended to accomplish via bombings and killings of police. He instilled fear in the police and the residents of East Precinct. He used sophisticated tactics. Pretty much every single aspect of his behavior is terrorist. Sometimes you are just a little too far to the left, Goldy.
ArtFart…
So dense, just like spent uranium… Goldy uses a link because he hates the Seattle Times. This “link” doesn’t come close to describing what the Seattle PoPo was discussing yesterday. Then Goldy highlights the T word. Reading the PI story you have no clue. Reading the Times article clarifies and clears up why the T word was used.
It’s a shame you are as dense as spent uranium ArtFart. Need some Gingko?
Heath,
For once Puddy agrees with you. Great post dude!
Terrorist – An individual who uses violence, terror, and intimidation to achieve a result. The police were intimidated. They admitted it. They called for backup a lot more than normal.
slingshot@29 direct from your peeps on HA
Michael called Gordon Kahl, Tim McVeigh & Terry Nichols – white Christian terrorists.
Well that Ft Hood muslim dude was Army too.
danw –
Need to see more from your peeps calling people terrorists?
Hey ylb arschloch… remember this…
“liberals must be tolerant otherwise they’re not liberals.”
What happened? Oh yeah you lost your yob jlb arschloch.
The modern usage of the word is a derivition of the word “franc terreur”, a lable given during WWI by German troops to describe french civilians who would shoot at German troops during the early days of that war. The Germans were greatly offended by this breach of the rules of war, and would shoot anyone suspected of such conduct on sight.
During WWII, the Belgium and French governments called the Germans “terrorists” for their threats to bomb undefended cities unless the governments capitulated.
So the upshot is that it’s a label which can be applied pretty loosely by anyone who wants to do so, and frequently is used for political purposes.
But I also don’t think it’s fair to NOT label whoever did these crimes as a terrorist, or at least a terrorist-wanna-be. Just because he was caught before more people died doesn’t change the nature of the crime. The real issue is the motivation behind the crime, which we may never really know.
This guy sounds like a police and military wanna-be who switched from one extreme to the other. That’s sometimes a sign of some pretty unbalanced psychology- like when Mussollini switched from being a Communist to being a Fascist.
@19 ff Puddy ….
How Christian, how typically Christian to not accept responsibility for the evil deeds dlone by your people.
Have your coreligionists accepted the guilt for slavery? for kidnapping of Jewish kids (as recently as WW II), for Northern Ireland, for spreading small pox?, for McVeigh?, for Sarah’s witch hunting bud in Kenya??
As for the EFF, Peta, and a lot of the other nbuts you list … howsit you want me to take responsibility for them?
I thought it was “christian” to first look at one’s own guilt?
When did any Christian ever fess up to the evils his Church has done?
As for spreadinbg and inciting terror ….
ojnmy side we have Dr. King, Cesar Chavez, Gandhi, Gompers, Alinski and .. yes ACORN.
And on Puddy’s side …errr ahhh who are the disciples of peace? what righties or christianizers flie the SANE flag or preqach non violence?
Odd criterion …
terror is OK is it is unorganized? Hamas is bad but individual suicide bombers are good?
Use of violence to make political points IS terror. ask Lenin.
Use of violence in thename of God IS terror. ask Hamas or Begin.
ctuallt, SJ, it is rather difficult to conspire with oneself. And Hamas and Begin did have other co-conspirators
What I believe to be the underlying point of the original post, the proper use of language, is an interesting one. I made a challenge to ESO on the same basis for an accusation of “date rape”. Use language indiscrimately and it looses its power and meaning.
And first word @41 is “actually”
Oh? and who says the tolerant should tolerate the intolerant?
I lean liberal yes. I don’t lean idiot like you.
Moron.
What your yob? Being a fiend apparently.
@6 Now that vandals have been upgraded to “terrorists” it’s only fitting to upgrade “pipe bombs” to “improvised explosive devices.” Hell, you could say that about the NASA rockets that blew up on the launch pad.
@21 “Sounds like 90+% of the HA Libtardos on this board.”
Sounds like none of the wingnuts on this board, because you fascist Hitler lovers don’t give a rap about civil liberties.
@32 Since when is arguing that someone should be called a “criminal” instead of a “terrorist” a matter of “right” or “left”?
Methinks you’re too far to the idiotic.
Terrorists are organized groups with political agendas such as al Qaeda, the IRA, Red Army Brigades, etc.
To apply the term to a nut with a grudge simply cheapens the word.
Bottom line: If he’s convicted of arson, assault, murder, etc., he’s merely a criminal. If he’s convicted of “terrorism” under terrorism statutes, he’s a terrorist.
SJ,
Where does Puddy have to take responsibility for another persons actions? Does Judaism teach that? Ask Proud Leftist what his pastor father says about personal responsibility.
That’s why we laugh at your ignorance, unemployed and lazy status, and general stupidity.
Dismissed with prejudice!
LMAO!!! Who’s we? A bunch a of sad losers.
Of course you laugh. You’re not in touch with reality. You’re insane. A sane person would cry when the Titanic of their failed ideology is sinking into the muck.
So what’s your “yob” fool? Prasing the “socialism” of Group Health in Seattle over the average private health plan that costs over 13 large for the typical family?
Such a freaking failure you are!
Dismissed with prejudice!
Uhhh fool? That’s what Bridges said to the sloppy case brought before him by the Republicans.
The winning case you disparaged and named called its supporters like Goldy.
You cheerleaded for the moron from Greenlake who predicted Bridges would decide for the Republicans.
One of the first of your many defeats here.
Man it sucks to be your losing ass!
#20: ELF are not terrortists
Terrorists use TERROR to make a political point. What ELF is doing is destroying property to thwart an activity of which they don’t approve. This is called “sabotage.” It’s a crime…but to conflate it with terrorism (especially to do so in the law) strongly discourages ELF types from making a distinction between property and human life. If the ELF is going to be punished the same, why not kill people…especially when killing people will get them more press?
ELF is also engaged in ‘monkeywrenching’.
[Deleted — see HA Comment Policy]