I agree.... John Walsh is biased on the lone psycho killer side.
The problem is that John Walsh has dismissed a terrorist connection out of hand, because of the style and scope of 'normal' ME terrorism.
How can you dismiss the possibility that they are doing something new? Or, for that matter, how does he know that there haven't been other terrorist strikes in the past that didn't fit his definition? Perhaps they have never claimed credit for some terrorist strikes..........anthrax comes to mind.
I seem to remember John Walsh defending Gary Condit a while back......saying he couldn't possibly be involved with Chandra's disappearance!
