re: #160 SanFranciscoZionist

I don’t think that’s even vaguely what I’m saying. Why is it so important for you to pretend that public outrage can’t be used by political actors for their own purposes?

Well, this is the thing for me: The militia claimed they attacked because of the movie and that tends to be the sort of thing that they do, right? So doesn’t their purpose including attacking the US embassy over stuff like this movie? Do they have another raison d’etre that’s supported by the attack on the embassy, that the attack serves as plausible deniability for or something?

I’m really honestly asking, this is the bit I don’t get: If the point of this militia isn’t to try to enforce their idea of Islamic law, including attacking the US for ‘allowing’ a movie that attacks Islam, what is their purpose?