Terrorist or Not?

[Steven Vaccaro]

Since everyone is mudding up Darins thread, I thought I would start the pot stirring myself in a new thread.

So do you think Nadal(the Fort Hood Killer) is an Islamic terrorist or just an insane us citizen?

It seems to me that if he didn't want to fight Muslims overseas, but decided in his eyes it was ok to kill unarmed US citizens, he's a Islamic Terrorists.

[RCprince]

Insane in the membrane, insane in the brain.

I think we've found a new buzz word since 911 and now everyone and everything is a terrorist. Was the Charles Manson a terrorist? was the Son of Sam a terrorist? was Ted Bundy a Terrorist? Is that guy in Cleveland who allegedly killed those 11 women a terrorist? I think that word is use to invoke a certain emotion in people.

[RCprince]

Why we don't call Wall Street Bankers Terrorist? They've been terrorizing our economy for decades.

[Fluid]

Based on comments I've read - that he had stated he's a Muslim first, an American second; that he attended the same mosque that several of the 9/11 terrorists did; that he followed the same pre-attack regimine that the 9/11 terrorists did (strip clubs, gambling, etc); that he hollered "Allah akbar!" during the shooting - and the fact he attacked departing soldiers, I say he's an Islamic terrorist. You don't have to be part of a cell to be a terrorist.

For those with short or defective memories, Timmothy McVey was called a terrorist long before 9/11. So were the Black September hijackers of the 1970s. This is hardly a new buzz word - except among those who think the world began only when they became aware of it......


And I hate to read and hear this comment: "alleged shooter".



.

[RCprince]

I was watching CNN, yesterday an a private who was in the vicinity when the shooting occurred, While being coached by the anchor, said he hear him say that, then when the anchor asked him again, the private said he didn't hear him say it.

[Steven Vaccaro]

Insane in the membrane, insane in the brain.

I think we've found a new buzz word since 911 and now everyone and everything is a terrorist. Was the Charles Manson a terrorist? was the Son of Sam a terrorist? was Ted Bundy a Terrorist? Is that guy in Cleveland who allegedly killed those 11 women a terrorist? I think that word is use to invoke a certain emotion in people.

I think a person that kills innocent people for religious or governmental differences is a terrorist. For example Nadal, McVey are both terrorists.

[RCprince]

So using that logic, Jim Jones was a terrorist! But wait, then the Catholic Church is a terrorist organization, they've Killed millions, via, burnings hanging and crucifixions.

Terrorist is a word used to conjure a provocative subjective reaction. The connotation of Terrorist is: Being Muslim. Are the KKK terrorist? How about the anti-abortionist?

[carsonschaos]

A guess you can argue that the people flying the planes on 9 11 were not terrorist using the same defense. So I guess you win. No such thing as a terrorist. It's odd that the same people I see on the tube, not wanting to use the term terrorist are the same people that can't wait to cry "Hate Crime".

And an abortion clinic bomber should probably be considered a terrorist also, I my view.

[RCprince]

My point is not to question if they are terrorist or not! But why not use the term to describe all people or organizations who commit those acts.

[AndyKunz]

If there goal is to achieve superiority by threat of force (inflicting terror), usually by acts intended to achieve a particular emotional response from or toward the victims, they are terrorists. Does anybody remember Munich? THOSE were terrorists. Does anybody remember the hostage crisis? THOSE were terrorists (are - one is now their President and he seems to keep using the same tactics). People hijacking airliners flying out of Cuba aren't terrorists, they're repressed citizens who have turned to acts of desperation.

If they are only seeking to achieve victory over a local enemy, they are combatants.

Was this guy a terrorists or a combatant? I guess the law will have to figure it out. Either way, his days should be numbered.

Andy

[carsonschaos]

I'll agree that the term is thrown around far too often. It's kinda hard to make black or white. (racism not intended) Snicker.
But this political correctness that we seem to be bogged down in, is going weaken us tremendously. We have to see things as they are and not how we wish they were.

[Bill-SOCAL]

I think a person that kills innocent people for religious or governmental differences is a terrorist. For example Nadal, McVey are both terrorists.

What about this guy?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...re_violen.html

And what if he was a white guy who yelled "Praise Jesus" before killing people? Terrorist or not?

I understand the desire to paint Hasan as a terrorist. It is the easy thing to do and allows us an avenue to explain what happened and to demonize an entire religious group based on the actions of a single individual. Plus it serves the political purposes of the right to do so. Keeps the "Be very afraid" idea going and allows them a way to politicize this tragedy, something they are very good at doing.

It is far more disquieting to view these murders for what they are, the actions of an insane person. David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) got his orders from God, but he was a pre 9/11 killer, so never got called a terrorist (he killed because God told him to).

When we are confronted with the actions of insane people it places rational people at the disadvantage because we try to place the actions within a sane context, which is doomed from the start.

Crazy people do crazy things.

[NitroVal]

I wouldnt go so far as to call him a terrorist before this happened.. A radical maybe... But it seems to me like a few other issues besides religion and allah lit hit fuse for him to snap and do what he did...

[Bill-SOCAL]

And I hate to read and hear this comment: "alleged shooter".

One of those distasteful side effects of that thing we call the "Constitution". The whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing.

[Bill-SOCAL]

An interesting tidbit in the news today:

Officials said Hasan will be tried in a military court, not a civilian one, a choice that suggests his alleged actions are not thought to have emanated from a terrorist organization.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/...xuYnNwc3Rvcg--

[Doby]

Terrorists or not, they are all people we wish could have been aborted prior to birth.

A$$holes, all of them.

[domwilson]

I think "terrorist" applies to a person or group who insights fear or commits acts of violence to promote a political or religious ideology. However, these days it is used too often as a buzz word to initiate an emotional reaction. Sometimes it is easier to rationalize or group people to appease our own comfort levels. From what I'm gathering from Bill is that just because he is a Muslim, we should not categorize him or other Muslims based on their faith. We should focus and judge the individual first and foremost, then determine if his motivations come from an external influence such as a political or religious organization.

[Bill-SOCAL]

Essentially my point. If this guy was not a Muslim nobody would be saying he's a terrorist. Even McVeigh was rarely called a terrorist, although his actions meet all the criteria.

Consider this:

Pennsylvania’s Homeland Security Director James Powers said:

“Tim McVey [sic] is not a terrorist, just very angry with the U.S. government,” Powers said. “Whether a person is a terrorist or a criminal is irrelevant to me.”

Enter "McVeigh" & "Terrorist" into Google and you get about 2 million hits. That is after 14 years.

Do the same with "Hasan" and in less than a week there are 1.45 million hits.

And before somebody says something really stupid like I am defending Hassan, please do not try to go down that path. I am not doing any such thing. Hasan in an insane killer who deserves death. Can I say that any more clearly?

[Steven Vaccaro]

It seems to me if people spent less time worrying about being politically correct and more time looking at the obvious, we wouldn't be taking about this in the first place.

[domwilson]

It seems to me if people spent less time worrying about being politically correct and more time looking at the obvious, we wouldn't be taking about this in the first place.

I'm not understanding the statement. Please elaborate.

[Ub Hauled]

....
And what if he was a white guy who yelled "Praise Jesus" before killing people? Terrorist or not?
.....

Crazy people do crazy things.

I agree, had he been part of a different religion things would have been different...no questioning about if it was terrorist or not, etc.

One of those distasteful side effects of that thing we call the "Constitution". The whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing.

Not sure if you are being sarcastic here or not but my take on it is, people saw him doing it, tried to stop him (succesfully), HE DID IT! No questions about that, so all this "alleged shooting" crap is bogus... innocent until proven guilty? BS! Just figure out his sentence and move on, the more press this thing gets the prouder terrorists get, whether he's one or not.
BTW, I think he was mentally weak and broke down under negative pressure, doesn't mater if he is a Muslim first... he could have said I am a Christian first and American second and yelling "God is righteous, God is righteous!"... what would have people thought about that?!

It seems to me if people spent less time worrying about being politically correct and more time looking at the obvious, we wouldn't be taking about this in the first place.

Correct Steven, he IS a murderer, he deserves what's coming to him.

[Bill-SOCAL]

Jan - my comment about innocent until proven guilty means that legally when people refer to the guy and his actions even if there is video tape, he is still alleged until proven guilty in court. Then they refer to him as "convicted" mass murderer, etc. It is a by product of how our system works.

Steven - PC has nothing to do with this. The jump to label him a terrorist is motivated by nothing beyond his religion. It is a biased label unsupported by the current facts.

I still maintain that unless some very concrete evidence comes out to the contrary that this is simply a man pushed to his limits and who committed (allegedly) an act of sheer insanity.

[Hydromaniac]

Essentially my point. If this guy was not a Muslim nobody would be saying he's a terrorist. Even McVeigh was rarely called a terrorist, although his actions meet all the criteria.

Consider this:



Enter "McVeigh" & "Terrorist" into Google and you get about 2 million hits. That is after 14 years.

Do the same with "Hasan" and in less than a week there are 1.45 million hits.

And before somebody says something really stupid like I am defending Hassan, please do not try to go down that path. I am not doing any such thing. Hasan in an insane killer who deserves death. Can I say that any more clearly?

If he is found insane I don't think he would be allowed the DEATH PENALTY!

[Steven Vaccaro]

Bill what would it take for you to call this a terrorist act?

And what limits was he pushed to? The man would not go to war to fight the enemy but found the courage to kill his own brothers!

And lastly, the guy should be processed right to the front of the court line. Once convicted, hung immediately and broad-casted to the rest of the world. If he wants to die for Allah, lets help him fill that need.

[Ub Hauled]

Bill what would it take for you to call this a terrorist act?

And what limits was he pushed to? The man would not go to war to fight the enemy but found the courage to kill his own brothers!

And lastly, the guy should be processed right to the front of the court line. Once convicted, hung immediately and broad-casted to the rest of the world. If he wants to die for Allah, lets help him fill that need.

Steven, I'd like to hang a terrorist just like the next guy, but looking at what happened, the killings where nothing from a terrorist's point of view. It was not like blowing up a bomb in public, it has only an isolated impact. I understand that ONE life taken is bad enough but one has to look at this from a far vantage point in order to understand and label this a terrorist attack or not. People these days are very sensitive to any kinda killing spree, but there are people out there that may just snap, "go postal" like they say, and it may be a Muslim, Christian, Baptist or even Atheist (spelling?), everyone's limit is different.
Unfortunately there will be a lawyer out there that will defend this guy and plea insanity... the worst is, he may get it, the media is already spreading the word that he was teased, verbally abused, etc... life in jail is what I foresee for him.

[ozzie-crawl]

looking at this people are either saying he was insane or a terrorist
i would like to know the diffrence between the two
as far as i see it a person cannot be a terrorist with out being insane
so if people so no he wasnt a terrorist he was insane,how to you ever convict a terrorist,they could plead insanity,wich would be rite as none of them are sane

[Doby]

They have all commited mass murder, call them what you like, there is NO difference.

Don't care if you are white, black, asian, christian, jewish, muslum......whatever....

You are an Earthling,,,, Human, no better than anyone else until you commit such an act.

They all should be removed from my planet

[Eodman]

I don't give a rats a@$ what you call him - just don't call him nutz!

I want to see him get a bullet in his freakin head!

If he's nutz some do gooder will lock him up for a while!

[Bill-SOCAL]

If he is found insane I don't think he would be allowed the DEATH PENALTY!

I am not speaking of legal insanity. I use the term insane in the commonly accepted societal norm. The act of mass murder is the action of an insane person.

Fortunately he is being tried in the military system. That is one that is much less lenient than the normal civilian court system.

Steven - as far as what it would take for me to view his actions as an act of terrorism, I use this definition:

The United States Department of Defense defines terrorism as “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” Within this definition, there are three key elements—violence, fear, and intimidation—and each element produces terror in its victims.

The FBI uses this: "Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and 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."

The U.S. Department of State defines "terrorism" to be "premeditated politically-motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

http://www.terrorism-research.com/

I do not think his actions meet any of these definitions as well as they do the acts of a deranged person. Like I keep saying, if his name was Joe Smith and he yelled "Praise Jesus" before pulling the trigger not one of you would be raising the question about this being a terrorist act.

[Steven Vaccaro]

I do not think his actions meet any of these definitions as well as they do the acts of a deranged person. Like I keep saying, if his name was Joe Smith and he yelled "Praise Jesus" before pulling the trigger not one of you would be raising the question about this being a terrorist act.

How do you know that? I haven't seen too many mass killings of this sort, happening in the name of "Jesus" lately. Until then.......