Here's Why The Media Denies it Was Terrorism

[Coyote]

Honest question:

What's the difference between the Fort Hood Shooter, and the guy who shot the Abortion Doctor at a church?

It seems with the first shooter the Right is eager to label him as a terrorist. With the second shooter, the Right was quick to call the guy a nut. Seems to me that both cases are pretty similar.

That's a good question. Defining terrorism is difficult.

 

[Intense]

Does the man's act fit THIS definition?

(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

U.S. Law Definition of Terrorism


Just plugging up yours ears and shouting nanny-nanny-boo-boo doesn't change the definition. And honestly, some of you folks who I have previously held in high regard doing just that, is very disappointing.

I have to wonder why?

Why would anyone insist on ignoring the definition? Your posts seem to make your agenda clear - the fact that you'll toss aside fact so easily in an effort to promote your agenda doesn't enhance credibility.

Possibly. It may fit the definition. I would add Religious Motive, or include that under Political.

Did the Administration and It's Policies obstruct the realization that this man was a Threat?
We need more free flow of information.

 

[kwc57]

What's the difference between the Fort Hood Shooter, and the guy who shot the Abortion Doctor at a church?

One fits this definition
One does not

"(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents"

U.S. Law Definition of Terrorism

That definition is outdated.

You are certainly entitled to replace reality with your personal version, just don't expect the rest of society to validate it.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

My God,when are people gonna wake up to reality? There is no legitimate Media anymore. It is now an Obama-Run Media. Once you understand this,you begin to accept that you're being lied to every day. Today's MSM merely reports what their White House Talking Points order them to report. It really isn't too complicated. This White House controls the Media. They are now even openly boasting about this. Just take anything the MSM reports with a grain of salt. It is what it is.

 

[Zander]

You nincompoops can debate this until the cows come home, the man is terrorist. Here is the simple checklist that the normal people use:

1) Is he a radical Islamofacist piece of shit?_______check
2) Did he kill unarmed people in cold blood?_______check
3) Did he do it for ALLAH? _____________________check
4) Did he contact Al Qaeda?____________________check

All yes answers. He is a terrorist. Period. You can split fucking hairs all day, we already know what he is and we don't need the media to "validate" what we already know is true.

 

[G.T.]

He's saying the diff. is one was aimed at Civilians, the other at Military. Per his provided definition.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Did the Administration and It's Policies obstruct the realization that this man was a Threat?
We need more free flow of information.

From what I've heard, the bigger problem was administrators and supervisors hoped Hasan would just go away. He seems to have been repeatedly sent off to be someone else's problem unti he ended up at Fort Hood. I doubt that blame for this will rise any higher up than local administrators scared of a lawsuit.

 

[kwc57]

Does the man's act fit THIS definition?

(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

U.S. Law Definition of Terrorism


Just plugging up yours ears and shouting nanny-nanny-boo-boo doesn't change the definition. And honestly, some of you folks who I have previously held in high regard doing just that, is very disappointing.

I have to wonder why?

Why would anyone insist on ignoring the definition? Your posts seem to make your agenda clear - the fact that you'll toss aside fact so easily in an effort to promote your agenda doesn't enhance credibility.

Possibly. It may fit the definition. I would add Religious Motive, or include that under Political.

Did the Administration and It's Policies obstruct the realization that this man was a Threat?
We need more free flow of information.

You do realize that he was being watched under the previous admin and it's policies don't you? I'd be careful casting that stone as it appears there would be plenty of blame to go around.

 

[noose4]

my defining this act as being an act of terrorism would hinge upon whether it was a planned attack involving more than one person, I think it will wind up that this guy was a lone nut and one reason I think this is because he was due for deployment and he could have done much worse when deployed to a war zone feeding info to the enemy and committing acts of sabotage.

 

[kwc57]

My God,when are people gonna wake up to reality? There is no legitimate Media anymore. It is now an Obama-Run Media. Once you understand this,you begin to accept that you're being lied to every day. Today's MSM merely reports what their White House Talking Points order them to report. It really isn't too complicated. This White House controls the Media. They are now even openly boasting about this. Just take anything the MSM reports with a grain of salt. It is what it is.

Where did/does the alternate media get their talking points?

 

[Intense]

My God,when are people gonna wake up to reality? There is no legitimate Media anymore. It is now an Obama-Run Media. Once you understand this,you begin to accept that you're being lied to every day. Today's MSM merely reports what their White House Talking Points order them to report. It really isn't too complicated. This White House controls the Media. They are now even openly boasting about this. Just take anything the MSM reports with a grain of salt. It is what it is.

I really don't think Obama is pulling the strings, unless He's pulling back once in a while. It's much bigger than that.

 

[nodoginnafight]

What's the difference between the Fort Hood Shooter, and the guy who shot the Abortion Doctor at a church?

One fits this definition
One does not

"(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents"

U.S. Law Definition of Terrorism

That definition is outdated.

No the definition is not outdated - it is from a different section of law.

One of our definitions comes from the law that dictates how the U.S. State Department is to define terrorism and one comes from how terrorism is to be defined under U.S. criminal code.

Since this act took place on U.S. soil I believe the appropriate definition should come from the U.S. Criminal code and that is the one you provided PP.

So I take back everything I previously said about how this act should be defined.

 

[Maple]

Let me share with my fellow board members a theory that helps us explain all of the administration and MSM proclamations that...
1. Major Hasan was just a ‘nut,’ and his actions were not related to Islamofascist terrorism
2. We should wait until ‘all the evidence is in’…
3. Better we take a pass on identifying Major Hasan’s motivations than risk losing ‘diversity’
4. It's all those right-wingers...

Here is the real skinny’
1. Anyone who hasn’t lived in a distant cave for the last decade knows that this was an act of Islamo-fascist terrorism
2. We had to rely on the British press to find out Major Hasans outbursts and links to terrorists.
3. Red-flags as to the dangers posed by this individual were buried based on a fear of being painted with the red letter “R” for racist.

Here is Dick Morris’ analysis, one which ties together both sets of bullet-points:

A major criticism of both Candidate Obama and of President Obama was that his attitude and actions with respect to protecting this country form Moslem terrorism was both the laxity and use of the power of government to investigate and restrict, vis-à-vis the Bush Administration.
1. Close Gitmo
2. Make nice with captured terrorists
3. Pressure interrogators to restrict investigations
4. Create the atmosphere that makes citizens reluctant to question any 'strange' activities

Many said we would suffer the effects of this ‘new’ attitude, and that if there were to be acts of terrorism, they would be the responsibility of President Obama..

Now we see the big push by the administration and the media to shield the President by announcing that this was surely not terrorism: anything but.

It's your call.

It's terrorism by a muslim extremist. They just don't want to call it that because it happened on Obama's watch.

Can you imagine if Bush were still President, oh my God, what they would be saying about this incident would peal your skin off. It's the old double standard, one for libs and a totally different one for moderates and conservative Republicans.

 

[Intense]

He's saying the diff. is one was aimed at Civilians, the other at Military. Per his provided definition.

Military does not mean combatant.

 

[Intense]

Does the man's act fit THIS definition?

(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

U.S. Law Definition of Terrorism


Just plugging up yours ears and shouting nanny-nanny-boo-boo doesn't change the definition. And honestly, some of you folks who I have previously held in high regard doing just that, is very disappointing.

I have to wonder why?

Why would anyone insist on ignoring the definition? Your posts seem to make your agenda clear - the fact that you'll toss aside fact so easily in an effort to promote your agenda doesn't enhance credibility.

Possibly. It may fit the definition. I would add Religious Motive, or include that under Political.

Did the Administration and It's Policies obstruct the realization that this man was a Threat?
We need more free flow of information.

You do realize that he was being watched under the previous admin and it's policies don't you? I'd be careful casting that stone as it appears there would be plenty of blame to go around.

Blame is secondary to fixing the problem.

 

[Coyote]

You nincompoops can debate this until the cows come home, the man is terrorist. Here is the simple checklist that the normal people use:

1) Is he a radical Islamofacist piece of shit?_______check
2) Did he kill unarmed people in cold blood?_______check
3) Did he do it for ALLAH? _____________________check
4) Did he contact Al Qaeda?____________________check

All yes answers. He is a terrorist. Period. You can split fucking hairs all day, we already know what he is and we don't need the media to "validate" what we already know is true.

Phew, well that lets old Tim McVeigh off the terrorism charge. Too bad he's already dead.

 

[Intense]

I consider The D.C. Snipers Terrorist. How about You?

 

[nodoginnafight]

The law I cited previously

18 U.S.C. § 2331 : US Code - Section 2331: Definitions

is the law that instructs the U.S. State Department on how to define terrorism. Patek cited a law from the U.S. Criminal Code which I think should be the proper one applied in this case since the act took place on U.S. Soil.

I was wrong to try to apply the incorrect law. My bad. No excuse. I have been convinced that using the words terrorist and terrorism in describing this guy and his act is totally appropriate.

And I also apologize if I insulted anyone for disagreeing with me.

 

[G.T.]

I'm convinced he should be shot in his face, preferably in public.

 

[Coyote]

I consider The D.C. Snipers Terrorist. How about You?

Don't know....what is the difference between a terrorist and a serial killer or mass murderer?

What if the person is psychotic?