- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,105
- Reaction score
- 33,447
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
He didn't kill civilians?Come again?
He didn't kill civilians?Come again?
I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Columbine happened on National "Get High" Day...Klebold and Harris must have been pro-pot activists.
I just don't think that this incident meets the litmus test.
According to liberlism, terrorism doesn't exist. So, thus the arguing over whether Hasan was a terrorist. We say he is, they say he isn't.
He didn't kill civilians?
Yep ties to radical Iman jihadist recruiters, his own claims to be a Soldier of Allah, screaming the jihadist battle cry before opening fire, justification and glorification of suicide bombers, saying that Muslims should kill Americans etc etc, nothing to see here folks, clearly this was not a radical Islamist jihad attack but rather some guy who just snapped. :roll:
I was born at night but not last night.
Really, the list of facts that I presented doesn't pass the litmus test? What does he need a business card that says "I'm a Jihadist" on it. Oh wait he had one of those. :roll:
No, he did not. And according to military planner (USN) boyfriend, attacks on military populations AT ANY TIME, whether in a state of readiness or not, are considered fair game during wartime. NOT terror attacks.
Again, killing people for religious reasons does not equal terrorism.
According to what definition of terrorism?
So if a person that a fundamentalist christian kills an abortion doctor that's terrorism, not murder?
The FBI defines terrorism as:
"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."
Can we try and at least keep to some semblance of facts, and not just making stuff up? Me personally, what we label him does not matter to me.
I agree that the simple association of Islam is not sufficient to classify Hassan as a terrorist. I do believe, however, that his association with the Jihadist network in conjunction with his avowed radicalism is enough to label him as such.
Just because he didn’t receive explicit marching orders from AQ doesn’t mean he can’t be a terrorist cell. Perhaps the Jihadists wants to further decentralize their network by encouraging lone-wolf types to act independently of their command structure; this would increase the randomness and frequency of attacks on our soil. I’m not sure why some people find this idea so objectionable or far-fetched.
I agree that the simple association of Islam is not sufficient to classify Hassan as a terrorist. I do believe, however, that his association with the Jihadist network in conjunction with his avowed radicalism is enough to label him as such.
Just because he didn’t receive explicit marching orders from AQ doesn’t mean he can’t be a terrorist cell. Perhaps the Jihadists wants to further decentralize their network by encouraging lone-wolf types to act independently of their command structure; this would increase the randomness and frequency of attacks on our soil. I’m not sure why some people find this idea so objectionable or far-fetched.
well, to be fair, he is more than a bit extreme.You know, while I don't necessarily agree with your conclussion, I don't think your definition is so far out of stretch as others. Many seem to be equating simply islam with it, but you're at least going the step further and saying it has to have ties...even if not direct...to jihadist terrorist networks for it to be consider as such.
I generally disagree, I don't think simply being inspired by those type of networks or ideology to act makes someone a terrorist. However I think that's a far more reasonable way to come to the conclussion rather than simply he's a muslim and a bit extreme and therefore must be a terrorist.
Why not, doesn't it matter when trying to prevent this from happening again?
Well, well. It's nice to hear Barack Hussein Obama making excuses for Nidal Malik Hasan.
So if a person that a fundamentalist christian kills an abortion doctor that's terrorism, not murder?
So are street gangs in New York charged with terrorism? Because they do the same thing. Again, you are grasping at straws here.
You know, while I don't necessarily agree with your conclussion, I don't think your definition is so far out of stretch as others. Many seem to be equating simply islam with it, but you're at least going the step further and saying it has to have ties...even if not direct...to jihadist terrorist networks for it to be consider as such.
I generally disagree, I don't think simply being inspired by those type of networks or ideology to act makes someone a terrorist. However I think that's a far more reasonable way to come to the conclussion rather than simply he's a muslim and a bit extreme and therefore must be a terrorist.