Here's Why The Media Denies it Was Terrorism

[CurveLight]

Oh bullshit. You were attempting to imply it with yer little Cheney strawman.

Lying must come as naturally as breathing to you. Too bad you can't get away with it because of your mental deficiencies.

Here ya go (dis)honest abe. I pointed out I never said you supported the invasion or cheney and your response clearly says I implied that. Can't believe you tried to spin it as a "literary tool." rotfl.

So, to summarize, you get caught lying and accuse others of the same when busted.

Got it.

Go back to spinning and projecting. Even though you're not very good at that either.

I'm supposed to care what you think? Rotfl! You can't even be honest and admit I never said you supported the invasion or cheney. Holy shit I gotta work harder at ignoring completely absolutely positively useless bullshit.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Holy shit I gotta work harder at ignoring completely absolutely positively useless bullshit.

How are you planning on ignoring yourself?

 

[Intense]

America tortures POWs....I thought only Nazis, VC, and Commies tortured people?

We build Character Yukon.

 

[Intense]

Good ******* grief man. I used "op-ed" because I thought it was short for "opinion editorial." you posted the link showing that is not what it really means so I stood corrected on my misuse of the abbreviation.

For some strange reason you keep overlooking where the author of that paper states:

"The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by

the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy."

"The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by

the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy."

"The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by

the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy."


"The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by

the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy."



"The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by

the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy."

He is an Army Major Dip Shit and the Statement is a Disclaimer. How many more times are you going to wet yourself?

Intense.......

....look at this link.....the link you give was written by Major Reid as a STUDENT PAPER while attending the Naval War College.

BLACK HUMOR: 'The right to kill them by virtue'

Don't like that link? How about a bibliography that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
Law of Armed Conflict

Don't like that link? How about an actual court case that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
http://www.pegc.us/archive/In_re_Gitmo_II/boumediene_supp_20081031.pdf

Doesn't Google just make it easy!!!!



BLACK HUMOR: 'The right to kill them by virtue'
Seems pretty Drug induced. Non coherent. Not Your best Reference.



Don't like that link? How about a bibliography that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
Law of Armed Conflict

Nice Link. A bit more informed I'm guessing because of Freedom of Information. It does appear to probably be a Final Paper. Pretty amazing Analysis though. He appears to be one hell of a Lawyer.
I will point out here that I discovered this through FAS, not Google. Again it stated in the first sentence of my post that it was an Analysis. I did not Post any comment at the time, it was cut and paste, plain and simple. There was no hidden motive on my part, either You believe that or you don't.

Don't like that link? How about an actual court case that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
http://www.pegc.us/archive/In_re_Gitmo_II/boumediene_supp_20081031.pdf[/QUOTE]

Yeah... Cool, Good enough to use in Court.

 

[CurveLight]

Hey Annie....when did I ignore scotus? Or will you keep the majority of your communications to me through childish rep comments? (and you're a ******* teacher?)

 

[CurveLight]

He is an Army Major Dip Shit and the Statement is a Disclaimer. How many more times are you going to wet yourself?

Intense.......

....look at this link.....the link you give was written by Major Reid as a STUDENT PAPER while attending the Naval War College.

BLACK HUMOR: 'The right to kill them by virtue'

Don't like that link? How about a bibliography that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
Law of Armed Conflict

Don't like that link? How about an actual court case that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
http://www.pegc.us/archive/In_re_Gitmo_II/boumediene_supp_20081031.pdf

Doesn't Google just make it easy!!!!



BLACK HUMOR: 'The right to kill them by virtue'
Seems pretty Drug induced. Non coherent. Not Your best Reference.



Don't like that link? How about a bibliography that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
Law of Armed Conflict

Nice Link. A bit more informed I'm guessing because of Freedom of Information. It does appear to probably be a Final Paper. Pretty amazing Analysis though. He appears to be one hell of a Lawyer.
I will point out here that I discovered this through FAS, not Google. Again it stated in the first sentence of my post that it was an Analysis. I did not Post any comment at the time, it was cut and paste, plain and simple. There was no hidden motive on my part, either You believe that or you don't.

Don't like that link? How about an actual court case that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
http://www.pegc.us/archive/In_re_Gitmo_II/boumediene_supp_20081031.pdf

Yeah... Cool, Good enough to use in Court.

Ummmmmm.....you tried to claim this was Policy. Now you ever so briefly admit you fucked up by saying "It does appear to be a final paper." I pointed several times it was an opinion piece and you kept screaming about the word "Analysis" while ignoring that I pointed out the "analysis" is his opinion! Then you kept skipping over the real clincher that said:

"A paper submitted to the Faculty of the Naval War College..."

Don't students usually submit papers to Faculty? Now you're trying to ******* backpedal and say you "made no commentary." Bullshit!! You kept saying it was not an opinion and that "The Army submitted it to the Navy" and it "appeared to be Official" military documents. Well....since it was a paper written by a soldier in a military school submitted to the military faculty then it would appear to be an "offical" military document.

I don't care if you found it on fas or google. Just keep this in mind the next time you try to present evidence because you clearly jumped the gun and tried to sell this as Policy when really it was just a student's paper in a military college.

 

[Intense]

Intense.......

....look at this link.....the link you give was written by Major Reid as a STUDENT PAPER while attending the Naval War College.

BLACK HUMOR: 'The right to kill them by virtue'

Don't like that link? How about a bibliography that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
Law of Armed Conflict

Don't like that link? How about an actual court case that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
http://www.pegc.us/archive/In_re_Gitmo_II/boumediene_supp_20081031.pdf

Doesn't Google just make it easy!!!!



BLACK HUMOR: 'The right to kill them by virtue'
Seems pretty Drug induced. Non coherent. Not Your best Reference.



Don't like that link? How about a bibliography that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
Law of Armed Conflict

Nice Link. A bit more informed I'm guessing because of Freedom of Information. It does appear to probably be a Final Paper. Pretty amazing Analysis though. He appears to be one hell of a Lawyer.
I will point out here that I discovered this through FAS, not Google. Again it stated in the first sentence of my post that it was an Analysis. I did not Post any comment at the time, it was cut and paste, plain and simple. There was no hidden motive on my part, either You believe that or you don't.

Don't like that link? How about an actual court case that points out it was a paper submitted to the War College?
http://www.pegc.us/archive/In_re_Gitmo_II/boumediene_supp_20081031.pdf

Yeah... Cool, Good enough to use in Court.

Ummmmmm.....you tried to claim this was Policy. Now you ever so briefly admit you fucked up by saying "It does appear to be a final paper." I pointed several times it was an opinion piece and you kept screaming about the word "Analysis" while ignoring that I pointed out the "analysis" is his opinion! Then you kept skipping over the real clincher that said:

"A paper submitted to the Faculty of the Naval War College..."

Don't students usually submit papers to Faculty? Now you're trying to ******* backpedal and say you "made no commentary." Bullshit!! You kept saying it was not an opinion and that "The Army submitted it to the Navy" and it "appeared to be Official" military documents. Well....since it was a paper written by a soldier in a military school submitted to the military faculty then it would appear to be an "offical" military document.

I don't care if you found it on fas or google. Just keep this in mind the next time you try to present evidence because you clearly jumped the gun and tried to sell this as Policy when really it was just a student's paper in a military college.

It was presented without comment Asshole. You Accused me of Posting it and misrepresenting it, when I had made no comment at all. It Plainly States that It is An Analysis of Policy **** Head. You called it an op-ed Opinion Piece, which it is not. You treated it like an editorial, from the start, which it is not. It appears to be a Final Paper/Report, Highly regarded., Which we both recently found out. It is an Analysis of the breakdown of The Bush Administration Policy,An Analysis of How the United States Applies the Law of Armed Conflict
in the Global War on Terrorism Asshole. Show where it differs from Bush Policy Asshole. Show what is contrary to Policy. Your Student Was A Major in the US Army at the time, not a shit for brains like You, Dick Head. It was good enough to be used in Court. That makes it more credible than You. Low Life Scum. I do contest also that it is a Government Document Property of The Dept. of Defense.

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense,
Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any
other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE
ABOVE ADDRESS.
1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)
09-02-2004
2. REPORT TYPE
FINAL
3. DATES COVERED (From - To)
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
TERRORISTS AS ENEMY COMBATANTS
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
An Analysis of How the United States Applies the Law of Armed Conflict
5b. GRANT NUMBER
in the Global War on Terrorism
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S)
MAJ Scott Reid, USA
5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
Paper Advisor (if Any): CDR Burton Waltman
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT
NUMBER
Joint Military Operations Department
Naval War College
686 Cushing Road
Newport, RI 02841-1207
9.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I had to finally just ignore this child.

 

[saveliberty]

I had to finally just ignore this child.

Reminds me of this: "Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig." - Robert Heinlein

 

[Annie]

I find it appropriate that CL hasn't responded and is now offline or hiding. He's a loser of the epic range. Though odds to evens he'll come back posting as if none of this existed. Why? Because he is a tool!

 

[SFC Ollie]

I had to finally just ignore this child.

Reminds me of this: "Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig." - Robert Heinlein

So very true.

 

[Intense]

I had to finally just ignore this child.

Reminds me of this: "Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig." - Robert Heinlein

So very true.

Whats really bizarre, is if you study the link, you come out of it with a really clear understanding of Bush Strategy pre 2005.

 

[Yukon]

German torture is bad, Chinese torture is bad, Viet Cong torture is bad, communist torture is bad, but American torture is good !

 

[Intense]

German torture is bad, Chinese torture is bad, Viet Cong torture is bad, communist torture is bad, but American torture is good !

Are You comparing Survival Rates? Ability to Repatriate?

Is that why Grown Women don't do it for you any more?

Honestly There is much, We would not approve of, yet the inhumanity on Your side is off the charts Yukon.

 

[drsmith1072]

You state facts? You claim I cover for Bush and Blame Obama. I have plainly stated that Both contributed and are to blame. Was this preventable? Possibly, though given the climate, the odds were against it, being stopped. Did PC contribute to this? Probably. Will it again? Probably. Does Obama take the hit Yes. It's His Job. The Crime happened on His Watch.

DrSmith: Here I will ask a few simple questions and you can answer them with the factual responses.

DrSmith: When did obama become president?
1/20/2009.

DrSmith: How far back were hasan's "red flags" popping up?

Here is some of what I could track down.

Questions Abound as Warning Signs Stifled About Major Nidal Malik Hasan
Posted by Staff on Nov 19th, 2009 // No Comment



In the wake of the tragedy at Fort Hood, in which Major Nidal Malik Hasan has been accused in the deaths of 13 fellow unarmed soldiers during a shooting rampage on November 5, questions have risen as to whether warning signs were stifled for the sake of political correctness.

Supposed inaction by the military, as well as in the civilian sphere, have drawn ire after some have denounced the lack of investigation into whether Hasan suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or whether his attack was fueled by Islamic extremism, or a combination of both. They claim that even in the post-attack media and military investigation, valid questions are not being asked for the sake of political correctness.

Yet, others point out that the value of political correctness cannot be deciphered from such a tragedy, but in the general good that it provides. They cite examples such as the desegregation of the military and the presence of women in the military as examples where politically correct motives has lead to real advancement in the military sphere and society at large.

The military, the media, and ultimately the people, are weighing the value of political correctness and their commitment to it in the post-attack discussion and reaction.

Questions Abound as Warning Signs Stifled About Major Nidal Malik Hasan | eCanadaNow






The FBI knew for nearly a year before his murderous Fort Hood rampage that psycho Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had repeatedly contacted al Qaeda -- but the blundering agency last night admitted it dismissed the lead.

The clueless G-men said that at the time, they simply chalked up the chilling e-mails between Hasan and a radical imam and other terror-tied Islamic figures to his "research" as an Army shrink.

Outraged congressional leaders immediately called for a probe into the debacle -- and the red-faced agency vowed to get to the bottom of things itself.

Read more: FBI blew off killer e-mail to al Qaeda







United States Army Major Nidal Hasan proclaimed himself a "soldier of Allah" on private business cards he obtained over the Internet and kept in a box at his apartment near Fort Hood, Texas.

Major Nidal Hasan's private business card, which he obtained over the Internet and kept in a box at his apartment near Fort Hood, Texas.
(ABC News)Hasan, the alleged perpetrator of last week's fatal shootings in Fort Hood, TX, was charged Thursday with 13 counts of premeditated murder under Article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which can carry a sentence up to death or life imprisonment.

The cards make no mention of his military affiliation, but underneath his name he listed himself as SoA (SWT). SoA is commonly used on jihadist Web sites as the acronym for Soldier of Allah, according to investigators and experts who have studied such sites. SWT is commonly used by Muslims as an acronym for Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala, Glory to God.

"He was making no secret of allegiances," said former FBI agent Brad Garrett, an ABC News consultant.

Related
FBI Agents Search Trash At Mosque Attended by HasanWATCH: Inside the Home of Nidal HasanMore from Brian Ross and the Investigative Team"It's one more piece of evidence that might have come out if investigators had taken a hard look at Hasan," said Garrett. "It doesn't say he's about to go out and shoot a bunch of people, but there's something not quite right for an Army major to self-identify that way."

The green and white business cards include the title Behavior Heatlh (sic) Mental Health and Life Skills.

Hasan listed a Maryland area mobile phone number and an aol.com e-mail address.

U.S. officials and analysts told ABCNews.com today that Hasan used multiple e-mail addresses and screen names as he contacted several jihadist web sites around the world.

CLICK HERE TO SEE INSIDE THE HOME OF NIDAL HASAN

In addition to his contacts with suspected al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al Awlaki in Yemen, authorities said there is evidence he contacted other radical sites and individuals, including some in Europe.

On Hasan's official Army personnel record, obtained by ABCNews.com., Hasan lists his e-mail address using the first name of Abduwall, instead of Nidal. Abduwalli, in Arabic, means "slave of" the great protector, or God.

Hasan Had Multiple E-mail Accounts, Officials Said - ABC News





A Walter Reed staff member familiar with his medical training told The Washington Post that Hasan was ordered to attend university lectures on terrorism, Islam and the Middle East in the hopes of redirecting his increasing preoccupation with the conflicts felt by Muslim American soldiers on the front lines.

U.S. military doctors overseeing Hasan's medical training reportedly had been worried he was "psychotic" and possibly capable of killing other American soldiers.

Medical officials at Walter Reed Army Medical Center held a series of meetings beginning in the Spring of 2008 to discuss serious concerns about Hasan's work and behavior, National Public Radio reported.

"Put it this way," one official told NPR. "Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole."

An official who participated in the discussions reportedly told others he was worried that if Hasan was deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak covert military information to Islamic extremists, NPR reported.

Another official "wondered aloud" to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of killing fellow soldiers in the same way a Muslim sergeant in 2003 had set off grenades at a base in Kuwait, killing two and wounding 14, the radio network reported.

The officials who discussed Hasan's status were unaware - as some top Walter Reed hospital officials were - that intelligence agencies had been tracking Hasan's e-mails to a radical imam since December 2008, NPR said.

Officials considered kicking Hasan out of the program but chose not to partly because firing a doctor is a "cumbersome and lengthy" process that involves hearings and potential legal conflict, sources told NPR.

Officials also believed they lacked solid evidence that Hasan was unstable and were concerned they could be accused of discriminating against him because of his Islamic identity or views.

FOX News - Top Stories - Top Stories - Hasan's Business Cards Refer to 'Soldier of Allah'



This Report was presented to Top Army Doctors in June 2007
"The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in The U.S. Military" by Major Nidal Malik Hasan

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/MAJHasanSlides.pdf

Hey intense can you count?? I asked FOUR questions and you could only respond to TWO. lol Why is that?

Why is it so hard for you to HONESTLY answer these FOUR questions?

When did obama become president?

How far back were hasan's "red flags" popping up?

If political correctness was the reason for not reporting these "red flags" then based on when they occured who was president and who should be blamed since the "red flags" were ignored on their watch?

If obama wasn't yet president then how could his "new attitude" as president have affected something that occured BEFORE his "new attitude" was in effect?

So why avoid these questions?? Is it because you wouldn't like the answer that you would have to give IF you answered them HONESTLY?
BTW the argument presented in this thread, that you echoed, was to blame obama for the PC attitude that allowed this to happen. However, since I completely shredded that argument I can see why you would try to change it to blame obama for the incident as you run away form the original argument. How typical.

Oh and furthermore you didn't start half assedly blaming W while laying the whole thing at obama's feet UNTIL AFTER you realized how absurd you were being for ONLY blaming obama for the PC attitude that existed BEFORE he was even president. You clearly stated the following

Does Obama take the hit Yes. It's His Job. The Crime happened on His Watch.

which is basically a repeat of your previouos spin.

So I have to ask, do you hold W accountable for 9/11 since it happened on his watch?? Or are you one of the many hypocritical righties who blamed clinton and gave W a pass??

 

[Yukon]

Not terrorism, Just plain incompetence on the part of US Army security and you people think you're safe. What a joke..

 

[Intense]

You state facts? You claim I cover for Bush and Blame Obama. I have plainly stated that Both contributed and are to blame. Was this preventable? Possibly, though given the climate, the odds were against it, being stopped. Did PC contribute to this? Probably. Will it again? Probably. Does Obama take the hit Yes. It's His Job. The Crime happened on His Watch.

DrSmith: Here I will ask a few simple questions and you can answer them with the factual responses.

DrSmith: When did obama become president?
1/20/2009.

DrSmith: How far back were hasan's "red flags" popping up?

Here is some of what I could track down.

Questions Abound as Warning Signs Stifled About Major Nidal Malik Hasan
Posted by Staff on Nov 19th, 2009 // No Comment



In the wake of the tragedy at Fort Hood, in which Major Nidal Malik Hasan has been accused in the deaths of 13 fellow unarmed soldiers during a shooting rampage on November 5, questions have risen as to whether warning signs were stifled for the sake of political correctness.

Supposed inaction by the military, as well as in the civilian sphere, have drawn ire after some have denounced the lack of investigation into whether Hasan suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or whether his attack was fueled by Islamic extremism, or a combination of both. They claim that even in the post-attack media and military investigation, valid questions are not being asked for the sake of political correctness.

Yet, others point out that the value of political correctness cannot be deciphered from such a tragedy, but in the general good that it provides. They cite examples such as the desegregation of the military and the presence of women in the military as examples where politically correct motives has lead to real advancement in the military sphere and society at large.

The military, the media, and ultimately the people, are weighing the value of political correctness and their commitment to it in the post-attack discussion and reaction.

Questions Abound as Warning Signs Stifled About Major Nidal Malik Hasan | eCanadaNow






The FBI knew for nearly a year before his murderous Fort Hood rampage that psycho Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had repeatedly contacted al Qaeda -- but the blundering agency last night admitted it dismissed the lead.

The clueless G-men said that at the time, they simply chalked up the chilling e-mails between Hasan and a radical imam and other terror-tied Islamic figures to his "research" as an Army shrink.

Outraged congressional leaders immediately called for a probe into the debacle -- and the red-faced agency vowed to get to the bottom of things itself.

Read more: FBI blew off killer e-mail to al Qaeda







United States Army Major Nidal Hasan proclaimed himself a "soldier of Allah" on private business cards he obtained over the Internet and kept in a box at his apartment near Fort Hood, Texas.

Major Nidal Hasan's private business card, which he obtained over the Internet and kept in a box at his apartment near Fort Hood, Texas.
(ABC News)Hasan, the alleged perpetrator of last week's fatal shootings in Fort Hood, TX, was charged Thursday with 13 counts of premeditated murder under Article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which can carry a sentence up to death or life imprisonment.

The cards make no mention of his military affiliation, but underneath his name he listed himself as SoA (SWT). SoA is commonly used on jihadist Web sites as the acronym for Soldier of Allah, according to investigators and experts who have studied such sites. SWT is commonly used by Muslims as an acronym for Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala, Glory to God.

"He was making no secret of allegiances," said former FBI agent Brad Garrett, an ABC News consultant.

Related
FBI Agents Search Trash At Mosque Attended by HasanWATCH: Inside the Home of Nidal HasanMore from Brian Ross and the Investigative Team"It's one more piece of evidence that might have come out if investigators had taken a hard look at Hasan," said Garrett. "It doesn't say he's about to go out and shoot a bunch of people, but there's something not quite right for an Army major to self-identify that way."

The green and white business cards include the title Behavior Heatlh (sic) Mental Health and Life Skills.

Hasan listed a Maryland area mobile phone number and an aol.com e-mail address.

U.S. officials and analysts told ABCNews.com today that Hasan used multiple e-mail addresses and screen names as he contacted several jihadist web sites around the world.

CLICK HERE TO SEE INSIDE THE HOME OF NIDAL HASAN

In addition to his contacts with suspected al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al Awlaki in Yemen, authorities said there is evidence he contacted other radical sites and individuals, including some in Europe.

On Hasan's official Army personnel record, obtained by ABCNews.com., Hasan lists his e-mail address using the first name of Abduwall, instead of Nidal. Abduwalli, in Arabic, means "slave of" the great protector, or God.

Hasan Had Multiple E-mail Accounts, Officials Said - ABC News





A Walter Reed staff member familiar with his medical training told The Washington Post that Hasan was ordered to attend university lectures on terrorism, Islam and the Middle East in the hopes of redirecting his increasing preoccupation with the conflicts felt by Muslim American soldiers on the front lines.

U.S. military doctors overseeing Hasan's medical training reportedly had been worried he was "psychotic" and possibly capable of killing other American soldiers.

Medical officials at Walter Reed Army Medical Center held a series of meetings beginning in the Spring of 2008 to discuss serious concerns about Hasan's work and behavior, National Public Radio reported.

"Put it this way," one official told NPR. "Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole."

An official who participated in the discussions reportedly told others he was worried that if Hasan was deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak covert military information to Islamic extremists, NPR reported.

Another official "wondered aloud" to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of killing fellow soldiers in the same way a Muslim sergeant in 2003 had set off grenades at a base in Kuwait, killing two and wounding 14, the radio network reported.

The officials who discussed Hasan's status were unaware - as some top Walter Reed hospital officials were - that intelligence agencies had been tracking Hasan's e-mails to a radical imam since December 2008, NPR said.

Officials considered kicking Hasan out of the program but chose not to partly because firing a doctor is a "cumbersome and lengthy" process that involves hearings and potential legal conflict, sources told NPR.

Officials also believed they lacked solid evidence that Hasan was unstable and were concerned they could be accused of discriminating against him because of his Islamic identity or views.

FOX News - Top Stories - Top Stories - Hasan's Business Cards Refer to 'Soldier of Allah'



This Report was presented to Top Army Doctors in June 2007
"The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in The U.S. Military" by Major Nidal Malik Hasan

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/MAJHasanSlides.pdf

Hey intense can you count?? I asked FOUR questions and you could only respond to TWO. lol Why is that?

Why is it so hard for you to HONESTLY answer these FOUR questions?

When did obama become president?

How far back were hasan's "red flags" popping up?

If political correctness was the reason for not reporting these "red flags" then based on when they occured who was president and who should be blamed since the "red flags" were ignored on their watch?

If obama wasn't yet president then how could his "new attitude" as president have affected something that occured BEFORE his "new attitude" was in effect?

So why avoid these questions?? Is it because you wouldn't like the answer that you would have to give IF you answered them HONESTLY?
BTW the argument presented in this thread, that you echoed, was to blame obama for the PC attitude that allowed this to happen. However, since I completely shredded that argument I can see why you would try to change it to blame obama for the incident as you run away form the original argument. How typical.

Oh and furthermore you didn't start half assedly blaming W while laying the whole thing at obama's feet UNTIL AFTER you realized how absurd you were being for ONLY blaming obama for the PC attitude that existed BEFORE he was even president. You clearly stated the following

Does Obama take the hit Yes. It's His Job. The Crime happened on His Watch.

which is basically a repeat of your previouos spin.

So I have to ask, do you hold W accountable for 9/11 since it happened on his watch?? Or are you one of the many hypocritical righties who blamed clinton and gave W a pass??

Dr. Smith, You are reading too much into My Remarks, and assuming too much of what You You think My motives are. You are way off base. Your Posts are too long. I thought I did a fairly good job covering the basic flow, considering that there seems to be little information available, such as interviews with Coworkers of the Shooter. Maybe the reasons for so little information available is to protect the Investigation. What ever the reason is, there isn't much to go on in relation to Obama at this time. That said He still takes the hit being CIC. Bush also takes the hit, for what He missed.

I have said this many times over. You seem to miss it. I give You My perspective, which You term Spin. That Only holds True if Your definition of Spin is Anytime Anybody gives a Personal Perspective including You. You also presume, and are poor at it.

The way I perceive things, is the Right is more apt to follow the Rule of Law, Safeguard, Conserve, where as the Left is usually concerned about the exception and the What If Factor, which can also be helpful, yet factoring in incompetence, dangerous to the Society as a whole.
Moral Absolutism V.S. Moral Relativism. The Struggle is old, not new. Each camp has pluses and minuses. Abandon Reason and It turns into a Shit Storm.



If political correctness was the reason for not reporting these "red flags" then based on when they occured who was president and who should be blamed since the "red flags" were ignored on their watch?

If there were red flags that were ignored under both administrations, both have a share in the blame. Is this clear enough for You yet? I hold to My claim on Obama, I hold to My Claim on Bush. Your charge is absurd. The Shooting was on Obama's watch, The details that led up to it do not seem to be available to the Public. That is not a free pass, but a stay, on what level, current PC contributed. You can accept it at face value or not.

So I have to ask, do you hold W accountable for 9/11 since it happened on his watch?? Or are you one of the many hypocritical righties who blamed clinton and gave W a pass??


In Part Yes, He takes a Hit, for Not seeing any of it coming. I believe there were some that knew something was up, yet did not adequately prepare. Did Anyone suspect that it would be Hijacked Planes? I don't know. Bush did respond Admirably, and helped establish much of the security Advancements of today. The Coast Guard Response during Katrina, would not have been what it was, had not Homeland Security built It up. Part of Leadership is how You take the Hit. Part of Leadership is What You learn and improve on because of the experience of the Hit. Clinton bears responsibility for what Passed on His Watch, Good and Bad. You throw stones Wildly.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are people STILL in this thread claiming the media ever denied it was terrorism?

lol

 

[Intense]

Are people STILL in this thread claiming the media ever denied it was terrorism?

lol

I don't know?
Do You?
Where do the Networks stand on it?
What is the DNC Position?
Do the ranks of Democrats that Post in this Community think so?

 

[drsmith1072]

Dr. Smith, You are reading too much into My Remarks, and assuming too much of what You You think My motives are. You are way off base.

not really but I can see why you would wish to spin it that way. the topic of this thread was to blame obama for the PC attitude that allowed this to happen that argument was PROVEN to be less than honest. Then you tried to change the subject to the incident happened on his watch so it's his fault which has NOTHING to do with the actual topic.

Your Posts are too long.

LOL and yet YOU are the one that cut an pasted entire articles into your posts. LOL have you read some of your posts which appear to be A LOT longer than mine? my responses have to be longwinded to respond to and counter all of your long winded spin.

I thought I did a fairly good job covering the basic flow, considering that there seems to be little information available, such as interviews with Coworkers of the Shooter. Maybe the reasons for so little information available is to protect the Investigation.

and yet you failed miserably to answer the FOUR simple questions that I asked. Imagine that.

What ever the reason is, there isn't much to go on in relation to Obama at this time. That said He still takes the hit being CIC. Bush also takes the hit, for what He missed.

it's funny how the right refused to see it this way when W was actually president LOL

I have said this many times over. You seem to miss it. I give You My perspective, which You term Spin. That Only holds True if Your definition of Spin is Anytime Anybody gives a Personal Perspective including You. You also presume, and are poor at it.

so now you are trying to read into my statements?? I thought you said that was wrong?? Your perspective is one of avoidance and dishonesty. That makes it spin. when you tried to blame obama for the PC attitude that existed BEFORE he was president was as dishonest as one could get.

The way I perceive things, is the Right is more apt to follow the Rule of Law, Safeguard, Conserve, where as the Left is usually concerned about the exception and the What If Factor, which can also be helpful, yet factoring in incompetence, dangerous to the Society as a whole.
Moral Absolutism V.S. Moral Relativism. The Struggle is old, not new. Each camp has pluses and minuses. Abandon Reason and It turns into a Shit Storm.

and that is where you problem begins. your perception is based on partisan spin and is hardly based on fact. prime example look at what the right said about perjury back when they wrongly accused clinton of it and then compare it to the comments the right made about perjury when scooter libby was actually convicted of it. So how is that again about how "the right is more apt to follow the rule of law?" LOL

If political correctness was the reason for not reporting these "red flags" then based on when they occured who was president and who should be blamed since the "red flags" were ignored on their watch?

If there were red flags that were ignored under both administrations, both have a share in the blame. Is this clear enough for You yet? I hold to My claim on Obama, I hold to My Claim on Bush. Your charge is absurd. The Shooting was on Obama's watch, The details that led up to it do not seem to be available to the Public. That is not a free pass, but a stay, on what level, current PC contributed. You can accept it at face value or not.

So you agree that obama is NOT to blame for the PC attitude that allowed this to happen since it began BEFORE he was even president?? After all that was the false claim made in this thread and since red flags were ignored before obama took office, his "new attitude" could not have contributed to instances that accorded BEFORE he was even president. that is a FACT that you can't spin.

So I have to ask, do you hold W accountable for 9/11 since it happened on his watch?? Or are you one of the many hypocritical righties who blamed clinton and gave W a pass??


In Part Yes, He takes a Hit, for Not seeing any of it coming. I believe there were some that knew something was up, yet did not adequately prepare. Did Anyone suspect that it would be Hijacked Planes? I don't know. Bush did respond Admirably, and helped establish much of the security Advancements of today. The Coast Guard Response during Katrina, would not have been what it was, had not Homeland Security built It up. Part of Leadership is how You take the Hit. Part of Leadership is What You learn and improve on because of the experience of the Hit. Clinton bears responsibility for what Passed on His Watch, Good and Bad. You throw stones Wildly.

Way to half ass it. According to your past remarks before you shifted to partially blaming W, obama takes the hit because he is CIC but for bush you give a litany of excuses and spin. LOL oh you mean the security advancements that still impede communications between departments and organizations?? Like the ones that have been mentioned in hasan's case?? LOL yeah that is something to brag about.

I think it's hilarious how you revise history and try to claim that how W responded to katrina was good. LOL let's see on 9/11 after being told the nation is under attack he sits in his chair, frozen in place and then when katrina hit and the aftermath how long was it BEFORE the W responded and actually started trying to help?? So what did he learn again??