Tammy was on ‘Happening Now’ this morning discussing the controversy in labeling Dylann Roof as a ‘terrorist’ with Alan Colmes and Jon Scott.
Background:
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Defund The Police Advocates Panic & Backtrack As Crime Surges
Tammy | December 17, 2020 
SWAT Team That Caught Boston Marathon Bomber Disbanded
Shifra | August 4, 2020 
Portland ‘Peaceful Protesters’ Burn Bibles
Shifra | August 2, 2020 
Report: Three Federal Officers in Portland May Have Been Permanently Blinded by Lasers
Shifra | July 22, 2020 You must be logged in to post a comment.
For exclusive media, daily podcasts, live TAM Chat & more
Join the Tammy ArmyDonations are always welcome from subscribers and non-subscribers.
Loved this segment! Tammy was fabulous!
I would never watch Alan Colmes until they paired him with Tammy. Then I was forced to.
I am delighted that our beloved “Voice of Reason” is getting through to him. If nothing else, she is mellowing him out so that at times he actually sounds human as opposed to a Progressive robot spewing talking points.
Perhaps he realizes that he should tone it down because Tammy’s facts and logic tend to make him look like an idiot.
Alan equates Dems pushing gun control in wake of Charleston with Conservatives pointing out that “concealed carry” may have prevented the massacre? Liberal “logic” is stunningly idiotic…
Tammy makes a very important point about adherence to the definition of terrorism so an event is properly characterized. In particular I appreciate the case in point regarding Ft Hood. Alan Colmes is incorrect when he claims President Obama called it a terrorist act. The Obama Administration never changed the official designation as work place violence. As a result the soldiers killed and wounded were denied the Purple Heart and associated benefits which include medical care. As a matter of fact the Obama Administration lobbied hard against Congressional action to correct this injustice. Fortunately, Congress prevailed and these soldiers finally were awarded the Purple Hearts they deserve just five months ago.
I am grief stricken over this shooting. The shooting murders of worshipers in a church by a white man because he hates blacks is crushing for all it says about our unfinished journey from a shameful past.
Inevitably the political vultures are picking over the flesh. For them this is a feast.
This isn’t about gun control or a flag or young men finding meaning in their lives. It is terrorism coming out of the malignancy of white racism. However, we all know we have come very far in a short time. The President is always making things clear so it would have been helpful if he definitively stated that white people overwhelmingly are not racists. I say this because he is so earnest in separating Islam from violence that he often does not choose to call terrorism. I think white Americans are far more deserving of this kind of distinction. Instead he talks about something in our DNA.
Much was made about his use of a racial slur, but what did he mean by DNA? The country doesn’t have DNA, institutions don’t have DNA. People have DNA. Whose DNA is passing on the legacy of Jim Crow?
The first black president did acknowledge that great progress has been made over the last few decades. He also characterized the American people as good and generous. But, what did he mean by DNA? I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant habits of society continuing a bad historical legacy and he did not mean bad DNA floating around in certain people.
As Obama said, racism isn’t defined merely by using or avoiding certain words, yet we all know we have to be careful about the words we choose. By suggesting there’s some bad “DNA” in America, either Obama innocently used a term normally used in the context of genetics or he was very subtly deliberate in placing blame. But then, sensitivity to words is not allowed for everyone.
I would like to underscore your point about Obama separating Islam from violence. I call this the “See No Islam” policy and it is dangerous because it denies the very existence of an Islamist supremacy ideology. The adherents of Islamist supremacy not only conduct violence but “cultural jihad” that seeks to incrementally change Western values and culture. After the foiled attack in Garland, TX I think CAIR (Council on American and Islamic Relations) was surprised by so many Americans finally standing up for the First Amendment and did not bow to their desire to limit free speech to be more compliant with Sharia law.