That, they would have us believe, will prevent future terrorist attacks from other radicals who want to pledge allegiance to the group-that-must-not-be-named.
FBI Special Agent Ronald Hopper explained the thinking behind this when asked by a reporter what good will come from redacting “ISIS.”
Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?
“Part of the process is meant to not give credence to individuals who have done terrorist acts in the past,” he said. Using that logic, we’d better never mention Hitler or the Nazis, otherwise that might give them credence.
He wasn’t finished, however.
“We’re not going to propagate their rhetoric, their violent rhetoric. And we’ve seen no value in putting those individual’s names back out there,” he added. “We’re trying to prevent future acts from happening again. For cowards like this one, people like that influence them so we’re not going to continue to put those names out front.”
So, not mentioning ISIS will keep terrorist attacks from ever happening again? Really? Why didn’t we adopt that tactic from the beginning?
Or did we?
Here’s video of the comment:
I get the feeling Scott Baio was onto something…
- Video: Scott Baio says Obama either dumb, Muslim or a Muslim sympathizer
- Obama regime’s transcript of call from Mateen: ‘I pledge allegiance to [omitted]’
- The Editing of Orlando Shooter’s Calls- What else does it mean?
- Drexel law professor declares: ‘Second Amendment must be repealed’
- Obama claims Orlando shooter had Glock with ‘a lot of clips in it’