So, the Paris to Cairo flight that crashed has an unknown cause at this time, but Dangerous Donald went out last night screaming about how it was terrorism and basically calling anyone who thought otherwise stupid.
Now, I suspect from what we know that it was terrorism, but is it really the right thing to do to go off half cocked calling it terrorism before we have solid evidence of it?
The fact is that ISIS has always claimed responsibility for things they do within hours of the event, they have not done so with this jet. In fact nobody creditable has done so, and terrorists usually do, it furthers their cause to claim it. As the hours tick bye, the possibility grows that its not terrorism.
My question becomes, if its not terrorism, will that further HRC's argument that Dangerous Donald is a loose cannon?
Remember we invaded Iraq on such loose assumptions!
Now, I suspect from what we know that it was terrorism, but is it really the right thing to do to go off half cocked calling it terrorism before we have solid evidence of it?
The fact is that ISIS has always claimed responsibility for things they do within hours of the event, they have not done so with this jet. In fact nobody creditable has done so, and terrorists usually do, it furthers their cause to claim it. As the hours tick bye, the possibility grows that its not terrorism.
My question becomes, if its not terrorism, will that further HRC's argument that Dangerous Donald is a loose cannon?
Remember we invaded Iraq on such loose assumptions!