"We say to the defenders of the cross, the U.S., that future attacks are going to be harsher and worse. The Islamic State soldiers will inflict harm on you with the grace of God. The future is just around the corner."Given that the score on this one was 0-2, they could be literally infinitely harsher and worse and still not be too bad, mathematically speaking. Attrition: You're doing it wrong.
CNN, meanwhile, is wringing their hands, wondering whether the Sudden Jihad Syndrome sufferers were (and I quote)
ISIS sympathizers or operatives?
Turns out one of the guys modeling for chalk outlines was on some .gov terrorist watchlist or another, too.
I haven't checked the gun boards, but no doubt this "massive failure of the system" is being lamented by people who are busily debating how many extra AR magazines to add to the bugout bag in the trunk. What makes it odd is that these are the same people who will tell you that, when it comes to regular old street crime and/or whackadoodle mass shooters, you're on your own and the cops are there to write reports and string yellow tape afterwards.
Granted, it's more than just a little disappointing to be paying jillions of dollars for a giant surveillance state with a microscope up everybody's butt and double-secret probation lists that you can't even find out if you're on, only to have one of those listees turn up in Garland with guns blazing. Still, we pay jillions of dollars for a gigantic war on crime with an incarceration rate that boggles the mind and you still can't leave your car unlocked most places, so the inefficiency of the terrorism watch list thing shouldn't come as a surprise. If government is competent at one thing, it's incompetence.
.
