TexasCHLforum.com

Superman wrote:

‘To think she had a gun pulled on her and was effectively defenceless raises massive questions about her personal safety. Thankfully she came to no harm but the potential terrorism threat is obvious.’

I'm more concerned about the part I bolded...what do they mean by the potential terrorism threat is obvious? Are they saying that anyone with a gun is a potential terrorist? Shouldn't it really be a "potential criminal threat"? The terrorist and terrorism terms are quickly being applied to more and more. This ain't good...

I think what they're saying is that since she's Blair's daughter, and therefore a symbol and more important than the rest of us, she's a potential target for terrorists, versus ordinary criminals. To me, it shows the opposite of what they're attempting to say....the fact that she walks around "defenceless" just shows how much the terrorist threat is overblown and overhyped.