chino
Fort Hood; Is It Terrorism?
Nov/096
I mean, what more needs to be said?
In the same hour that Hassan was killing 13 people at the US Army base, it was being reported that there were THREE shooters, 12 dead and up to 60 wounded: at that time I knew it was a terrorist act; I did not know he was a Muslim, I did not know his name. No one knew. I did not assume he was Muslim, in fact I was surprised to find out that he was. Even without all that information, at 3:06PM when Sean Hannity came on the air he said that he thought this might be a terrorist act. I screamed at my radio, “Of course it is!!!!!” Not a Muslim attack, just a terrorist attack under the definition of terrorism!
Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist. William Ayers IS a terrorist. Richard Reed was a terrorist. These are terrorist acts.
Now some of you with a brain in your head are saying, “duh, no sh!t sherlock! What’s your point Chino.”
Why won’t Obama call it as such and why doesn’t he want us “jumping to conclusions.” Why won’t the media call it what it is?
WHY?
Thank you Obama. Or should I say, MaoBama or Oba Mao as he is known in China? Thank you for once again reminding us what it feels like to have Islamic Extremists killing our people here at home. Would this have happened under McCain? I really don’t know, I can’t say yes or no, that would be pure speculation and unfair. What I do know, is that after 9-11, George W. Bush did not allow it. He made it his mission to make sure that it did not happen.
What is Obama’s mission?
Leave a comment
No trackbacks yet.
8:04 pm on November 12th, 2009
I’ve been reading along for a while now. I just wanted to drop you a comment to say keep up the good work.
10:20 am on November 13th, 2009
thank you
3:00 pm on November 17th, 2009
Unfair speculation? That pretty much sums up this entire post. No one has called this a terrorist act, not even military officials. Why? Because they are not completely sure about Hasan’s motives yet and saying anything at this point would just be a knee jerk reaction. So far all of the evidence points to personal grievances.
‘Even without all that information, at 3:06PM when Sean Hannity came on the air he said that he thought this might be a terrorist act. I screamed at my radio, “Of course it is!!!!!”’
That is exactly the problem. Without any evidence or information at all you came to the conclusion that this was a terrorist act. Are you still confidant that it was in fact a terrorist act now, 5 days later?
“What I do know, is that after 9-11, George W. Bush did not allow it. He made it his mission to make sure that it did not happen.”
I’m assuming that by “did not allowed this” you mean that he did not allow thing like this to slip by with out calling it terrorism. The word “terrorism” became so loosely defined under the Bush administration that it could have applied to almost anyone who committed nearly any act of violence. It is good to call things like they are, but there is a middle ground. If you are too politically correct you will narrow definitions so much that they exclude nearly everything, and on the other end of the spectrum you have overly broad definition that tend to include nearly everything. Neither are useful.
7:02 pm on November 19th, 2009
From dictionary.com, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism
ter⋅ror⋅ism [ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
And a terrorist is defined as one who commits terrorist acts.
Doesn’t seem too precise a definition to me. Let me repeat it, “the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce” it goes on to say “especially for political purposes.” BUT NOT ALWAYS.
I knew it was only a matter of time before you would blame Bush for something that occurs “naturally in nature.”
At 3:06 PM I already knew what I needed to know to come to my “conclusion.” If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck. All you need is common sense.
Yes 10 days later I still know what I knew then. Especially when I found out he was a muslim, a SOA (soldier of Allah) as printed on his business cards.
My question is WHY? Why don’t you feel this is a terrorist act? McVeigh was a one man terrorist not backed by any nation or group. Just a dumb ass like this guy.
So convince me, please. I am not trying to be a smart ass or argumentative, I really want to know why the left is sweeping this under the rug.
8:24 pm on November 19th, 2009
In response to the post “No one has called this a terrorist act, not even military officials.” In fact, YES indeed they have people like Joe Lieberman, and McCain and other high profile figures have stated that this was a “terrorist act” that in and of itself should not confirm in someone’s mind that is what this was that should be something that one who posesses the basic knowledge of the definition of “terrorist act” would have recognized because that is exactly what happened at Fort Hood.
In America Murder is murder and different degrees of punishment are handed down based upon the motivation and execution of the crime by the perpetrator of said criminal act.
4:12 am on January 27th, 2010
Nick, where you at on this?