I skimmed the study. I'm familiar with the research into this topic although admittedly it's been a few years. But like I said, I skimmed it and it basically defines hate crimes as terrorism. I disagree with that notion and I don't think it helps the conversations about these particular topics (terrorism and hate crimes) for them to be just tossed together and used interchangeably. For example, I probably wouldn't even list the charleston church shooting as a terrorist attack even though it's on the Wikipedia list I mentioned. I strongly believe in order to be defined as terrorist the act of violence needs to have an explicit political component that most hate crimes lack. I have a very limited understanding of the Charleston case, so I could be completely wrong, but I don't think his goal was to change any laws or shed light on the plight of his people. Dylan Roof is a monster, that's not what I'm debating, I just am not convinced he is a "terrorist."

And I'm not against reading a 200 page military study that has a different POV I'm just not going to do it right this second. :)