Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
the cartoon at the top of the page at this link provides you an answer.....
WMICentral - News - Editorial Cartoons
Sorry, guys, but this is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacking by the media. First of all, in order to make a valid argument, you have to substitute certain words to make sure that the logic stands up to scrutiny. For example: "In the months before the deadly shootings at Fort Hood, Army Maj. William A. Schmedlapp intensified his communications with a radical Baptist minister and began to discuss surreptitious financial transfers and other steps that could translate his thoughts into action, according to two sources briefed on a collection of secret e-mails between the two." If it doesn't stand up to scrutiny under this change, then it's probably not a valid argument. My point is that while the military is a highly-disciplined society, to suggest that these emails served as valid grounds for the FBI to make a case is completely dumb and dangerously un-American. I am not saying that the FBI didn't have the grounds to initiate an inquiry. I am just saying that these emails alone were not enough to trigger the tripwire for an imminent terrorist attack. Otherwise, Soldiers and members of the other uniformed services have certain constitutionally-protected rights, and if we allow the flawed logic of this news article to influence future restrictions imposed upon the military, we will have opened a can of worms...hell, a can of maggots is more like it.
Sorry, guys, but this is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacking by the media. First of all, in order to make a valid argument, you have to substitute certain words to make sure that the logic stands up to scrutiny. For example: "In the months before the deadly shootings at Fort Hood, Army Maj. William A. Schmedlapp intensified his communications with a radical Baptist minister and began to discuss surreptitious financial transfers and other steps that could translate his thoughts into action, according to two sources briefed on a collection of secret e-mails between the two." If it doesn't stand up to scrutiny under this change, then it's probably not a valid argument. My point is that while the military is a highly-disciplined society, to suggest that these emails served as valid grounds for the FBI to make a case is completely dumb and dangerously un-American. I am not saying that the FBI didn't have the grounds to initiate an inquiry. I am just saying that these emails alone were not enough to trigger the tripwire for an imminent terrorist attack. Otherwise, Soldiers and members of the other uniformed services have certain constitutionally-protected rights, and if we allow the flawed logic of this news article to influence future restrictions imposed upon the military, we will have opened a can of worms...hell, a can of maggots is more like it.
Bullshit, As an Army Officer he had a Security clearance, His emails alone should have been enough to pull that clearance and start a military investigation. If the FBI had only notified the Pentagon. Face the facts , the world changed on 9-11-01 and we have to make a few hard changes with it. One of those is to investigate when one of our own contacts the enemies contact.
Sorry, guys, but this is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacking by the media. First of all, in order to make a valid argument, you have to substitute certain words to make sure that the logic stands up to scrutiny. For example: "In the months before the deadly shootings at Fort Hood, Army Maj. William A. Schmedlapp intensified his communications with a radical Baptist minister and began to discuss surreptitious financial transfers and other steps that could translate his thoughts into action, according to two sources briefed on a collection of secret e-mails between the two." If it doesn't stand up to scrutiny under this change, then it's probably not a valid argument. My point is that while the military is a highly-disciplined society, to suggest that these emails served as valid grounds for the FBI to make a case is completely dumb and dangerously un-American. I am not saying that the FBI didn't have the grounds to initiate an inquiry. I am just saying that these emails alone were not enough to trigger the tripwire for an imminent terrorist attack. Otherwise, Soldiers and members of the other uniformed services have certain constitutionally-protected rights, and if we allow the flawed logic of this news article to influence future restrictions imposed upon the military, we will have opened a can of worms...hell, a can of maggots is more like it.
Bullshit, As an Army Officer he had a Security clearance, His emails alone should have been enough to pull that clearance and start a military investigation. If the FBI had only notified the Pentagon. Face the facts , the world changed on 9-11-01 and we have to make a few hard changes with it. One of those is to investigate when one of our own contacts the enemies contact.
Sorry, guys, but this is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacking by the media. First of all, in order to make a valid argument, you have to substitute certain words to make sure that the logic stands up to scrutiny. For example: "In the months before the deadly shootings at Fort Hood, Army Maj. William A. Schmedlapp intensified his communications with a radical Baptist minister and began to discuss surreptitious financial transfers and other steps that could translate his thoughts into action, according to two sources briefed on a collection of secret e-mails between the two." If it doesn't stand up to scrutiny under this change, then it's probably not a valid argument. My point is that while the military is a highly-disciplined society, to suggest that these emails served as valid grounds for the FBI to make a case is completely dumb and dangerously un-American. I am not saying that the FBI didn't have the grounds to initiate an inquiry. I am just saying that these emails alone were not enough to trigger the tripwire for an imminent terrorist attack. Otherwise, Soldiers and members of the other uniformed services have certain constitutionally-protected rights, and if we allow the flawed logic of this news article to influence future restrictions imposed upon the military, we will have opened a can of worms...hell, a can of maggots is more like it.
Bullshit, As an Army Officer he had a Security clearance, His emails alone should have been enough to pull that clearance and start a military investigation. If the FBI had only notified the Pentagon. Face the facts , the world changed on 9-11-01 and we have to make a few hard changes with it. One of those is to investigate when one of our own contacts the enemies contact.
Then we agree to disagree. What you need to take into account is how any potential law, policy or other procedure regarding thoughts and ideas exchanged between people is written. The same criminal procedures that apply to any crime haven't changed, and what Hasan did, like it or not, was short of any stated intent to commit a crime. You basically have an officer who was discussing only ideas. The only reason we can connect the dots today is because of what we know happened. Very difficult to make that same judgment BEFORE the act.
You also have to take into account current security policies. Back in the Cold War, if he had any association with the Soviet Union, a country whose interests were known to be inimical to the United States, his clearance would have been yanked as you described. However, in this case, we don't have a country involved. It's a group of individuals scattered throughout the world. There's no smoking gun like there was in the old days. A US military member walks into any Soviet embassy anywhere in the world and you'd have the FBI, CIA and host of other alphabet agencies jumping all over that. The same cannot be said when it involves a mosque.
One last point, the FBI, not the Pentagon, has jurisdiction in these cases. Even when it involves espionage, the FBI has jurisdiction. It is by written agreement between the Department of Justice and Department of Defense that the Pentagon's counterintelligence and other agencies have any authority to pursue certain matters within the United States. The FBI did not report Hasan's activities because it did not have to.
I agree 9/11 changed things. I disagree with your implication about the "few hard changes" that are required. We always need to make sure we don't empower the government to cross that line between a republic and tyranny.
Hasan had intensified contact with radical Yemeni American cleric - washingtonpost.com
Washington Post reports e-mails reveal terrorist leader inspired Ft. Hood killings. Why didn't the FBI send out alert?
fbi has let OK bombing, both WTC attacks, pearl harbor etc all happen. they had knowledge of the attacks and were intimate with many of the attackers in WTC 93 and 9/11. if you think they care about you then you are an idiot. they let the mob become what it was and still is b/c they didn't want to look bad in the media. they let the WTC happen in order to foster hatred against america's enemies in order to expand their power and slowly chip away at our liberties
