fort hood shooting

[sgreger1]

lOL, never did I think I would actually quote from Worldnet Daily, but did you actually read the article you posted???

As RRK mentioned I was just posting what I was reading on the internet. I never meant it to be like "The shooter and Obama are homeboys" or anything, just quoting an article.


I love how anything I post is automaticly seen as somehow fake, as though i've ever posted fake articles on here or something ? Yah we all know I have a bias just like you and everyone else does. it's human nature, everyone sees the world through the lens of their own bias/perception.

[sagedil]

sgreger1. You know I like you. Very much despite our many differences.

The problem is not necessarily with what you post, but the WAY you post. In flat out absolutes. And yes, those posts often turnout to be flat out wrong or plain misleading. Look at how you posted....

NEW YORK – Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the alleged shooter in yesterday's massacre at Fort Hood, played a homeland security advisory role in President Barack Obama's transition into the White House, according to a key university policy institute document.

There was no wiggle room. And no, he was in the audience as part of his role at the University at the time.

You did the same thing about the Insurance pay as you go issue. You sated it WOULD be mandatory, that it WOULD use GPS. Later in that thread you back peddled and said you were just saying that because California USUALLY goes in that direction. But that was not how you posted it.

Rule of thumb here, people will respond to exactly what you post.

My best advice, and hear me, I have come to kinda love your enthusiasm about this, even as I sometimes need to stifle a scream.

Be careful about the absolutes. Be careful to include qualifiers. I suspect, if you do, you will find folks reactions here much less oppositional.

EDIT. And to repeat something I posted earlier. You are welcome to your own opinions. You are never welcome to your own facts.

[sgreger1]

sgreger1. You know I like you. Very much despite our many differences.

The problem is not necessarily with what you post, but the WAY you post. In flat out absolutes. And yes, those posts often turnout to be flat out wrong or plain misleading. Look at how you posted....

While I am guilty of posting like that from time to time, I promise this time I was just posting the first paragraph of an article I found in another forum. Didn't mean to imply he was boys with Obama, otherwise said quote would have been accompanied by one of my infamous rants.

You did the same thing about the Insurance pay as you go issue. You sated it WOULD be mandatory, that it WOULD use GPS. Later in that thread you back peddled and said you were just saying that because California USUALLY goes in that direction. But that was not how you posted it.

No, from the beginning I was saying that it wouldnt surprise me if this ends up being mandatory since they have been talking about it forever here in CA and have always talked about the need for it to be mandatory. I posted a link to the article so not trying to be misleading at all, info was right there. The idea of using GPS has also had a seat at the conversation about how to track and tax and or purchase insurance by the mile in CA.

My best advice, and hear me, I have come to kinda love your enthusiasm about this, even as I sometimes need to stifle a scream.

lol, I swear my wife has used this phrase on me before.

[sagedil]

LOL, I am sure your wife and I could swap stories about you for hours. :wink:

[sgreger1]

LOL, I am sure your wife and I could swap stories about you for hours. :wink:

lol


Hey the shooter just woke up according to the news. I couldnt imagine going in with a death wish like that and then ending up living through it. He has got some seriouse explaining to do.

[sgreger1]

The personal Web site for a radical American imam living in Yemen who had contact with two 9/11 hijackers praised Hasan as a hero.

The posting Monday on the Web site for Anwar al Awlaki, who was a spiritual leader at two mosques where three 9/11 hijackers worshipped, said American Muslims who condemned the Fort Hood attack are hypocrites who have committed treason against their religion.

Awlaki said the only way a Muslim can justify serving in the U.S. military is if he intends to "follow in the footsteps of men like Nidal."

"Nidal Hassan (sic) is a hero," Awlaki said. "He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people."

Classmates who participated in a 2007-2008 master's program at a military college told The Associated Press that they complained to faculty during the program about what they considered to be Hasan's anti-American views, which included his giving a presentation that justified suicide bombing and telling classmates that Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution.

And people are wondering why they bring up religion so much when talking about terror. It plays a role, it is endorsed by the extremests which seem to have hijacked a lot of the muslim religion.

Also, they now say he fired 100 rounds before he ended up getting shot. He had 2 pistols. And still no one took him down during his (presumably) many reloads.



EDIT:

British spies help prevent al Qaeda-inspired attack on New York subway


[/img][/url]

[tom502]

As I think about this, it may not really be "terrorist", because it was an attack on service people at a military installation. To me, "terrorism" is when one gets on a public bus or a civilian coffee shop and blows up. But I do think if Muslims have a conflict with fighting Muslims, which would mean they see themselves as Muslims first, then they should not be in our military. But then if the US shoots civilians, and drops bombs on civilians, does that make them "terrorists" too?

[sgreger1]

As I think about this, it may not really be "terrorist", because it was an attack on service people at a military installation. To me, "terrorism" is when one gets on a public bus or a civilian coffee shop and blows up. But I do think if Muslims have a conflict with fighting Muslims, which would mean they see themselves as Muslims first, then they should not be in our military. But then if the US shoots civilians, and drops bombs on civilians, does that make them "terrorists" too?

I would say its terrorism because the goal for them is to make it so we feel that nowhere is safe, nto even our own military bases. They want us to think they are everywhere and could be activated at any moment.

We are engaged in a declared war so our operations are considered war. Civilians are a casualty of war. If the US were not at war, but radical christians were signing up to be officers in Iraq's army and then shooting up their guys, that would be terrorism.

[RRK]

I would say its terrorism because the goal for them is to make it so we feel that nowhere is safe, nto even our own military bases. They want us to think they are everywhere and could be activated at any moment.

We are engaged in a declared war so our operations are considered war. Civilians are a casualty of war. If the US were not at war, but radical christians were signing up to be officers in Iraq's army and then shooting up their guys, that would be terrorism.

I think the definition of terrorism has to do with trying to influence politics by attacking civilians.

[sgreger1]

I think the definition of terrorism has to do with trying to influence politics by attacking civilians.

Well this guy was vocally upset about our the war and us killing his muslim bretheren. infact during a presentation he gave at walter reid he broke out into a rage and started ranting about how nyone who does not convert to islam should have boiling oil poured down their throat and then set on fire, after being beheaded.


The definition of terrorism is kind of grey since by that standard all countries that even went to war were commiting an act of terrorism.


The point is, this guy killed bunch of soldiers, it seemed to be because of his religious beliefs and contacts with Jihadists in Yemen, so to me this sounds like terrorism. Even if it was some christian guy, this is terrorism. No other way to see it.



EDIT:

The Army psychiatrist suspected of killing 13 people at Fort Hood reportedly warned senior Army physicians in 2007 that the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars to avoid "adverse events."

[RRK]

The definition of terrorism is kind of grey since by that standard all countries that even went to war were commiting an act of terrorism.


The point is, this guy killed bunch of soldiers, it seemed to be because of his religious beliefs and contacts with Jihadists in Yemen, so to me this sounds like terrorism. Even if it was some christian guy, this is terrorism. No other way to see it.

I don't really understand how all countries that have went to war are committing terrorism by that definition.

My point was that he attacked soldiers which means its not terrorism. Related to terrorists maybe, Jihadist maybe, by not terrorism in itself. More like murder and treason.

[tom502]

Well, it's sorta like if during WW2, an American went to Germany, and joined the German army, and then one day, starting shooting the German military personell, because he was sympathetic to the Americans. Would he be a terrorist?

[sgreger1]

Well, it's sorta like if during WW2, an American went to Germany, and joined the German army, and then one day, starting shooting the German military personell, because he was sympathetic to the Americans. Would he be a terrorist?

If he want's paid by the gov to do it, as in it wasn't part of the war and some guy just did this because he believed all german's should die since they are not christian, then yes terrorism.

[tom502]

No, they were Germans at war with America, and he's an American but in the German army, that sympathises with the Americans. I know it's not identical, but it is similar.

[sgreger1]

I don't really understand how all countries that have went to war are committing terrorism by that definition.

My point was that he attacked soldiers which means its not terrorism. Related to terrorists maybe, Jihadist maybe, by not terrorism in itself. More like murder and treason.

(d) Definitions
As used in this section—
(1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;
(3) the term “terrorist group” means any group, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism;
(4) the terms “territory” and “territory of the country” mean the land, waters, and airspace of the country; and
(5) the terms “terrorist sanctuary” and “sanctuary” mean an area in the territory of the country—
(A) that is used by a terrorist or terrorist organization—
(i) to carry out terrorist activities, including training, fundraising, financing, and recruitment; or
(ii) as a transit point; and
(B) the government of which expressly consents to, or with knowledge, allows, tolerates, or disregards such use of its territory and is not subject to a determination under—
(i) section 2405(j)(1)(A) of the Appendix to title 50;
(ii) section 2371 (a) of this title; or
(iii) section 2780 (d) of this title.

FBI's definiation of terrorism:

"The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

So I mean what isn't covered by that? If I slap you because your a liberal and tell you i'm going to kill your family. That is terrorism. If a country goes to war and destroys cities/civilians/military in an attempt to "bring democracy" than is that terrorism? By this definition yes.


Since this guy was in contact with radical leaders and was vocal about how if the US army didn't discharge all muslims bad thigns would happen, then he goes and shoot up a base while screaming allahu akhbar, well it sounds like terroism to me.

Treason also, since he was a soldier.


The guy woke up yesterday but the lawyer is saying that they don't want investigators to question him yet. I hope this guy fries. There is no physical punishment that is so extreme for an individual like this.