|
|
Everyone in the MSM is speculating as to why this happened today. That is why on this day. The only thing I can think of is Guy Fawkes day. I'm a big fan of graphic novels so it was already on my mind today. Any other ideas?
|
Posts:
710
Registered:
9/1/08
|
|
(1202 of 1202)
Nov 20, 2009 2:55 PM
|
> Federal investigators have found that Hasan donated
> $20,000 to $30,000 a year to overseas Islamic
> "charities." As an Army major, his yearly salary,
> including housing and food allowances, was
> approximately $92,000. A number of Islamic charities
> have been identified by U.S. authorities as conduits
> to terror groups.
1/3 of his salary, is that it? What kind of fanatic is he? Musta needed to keep a little around for the scrippas.
Edit: Army FAIL
--
Edited by Jetblakc at 11/20/2009 11:55 AM PST
|
|
|
Posts:
482
Registered:
9/15/07
|
|
(1201 of 1202)
Nov 20, 2009 4:11 AM
|
"BTW, when I was in high school we had a calculator
> that had tubes in it.
Really? This coming from the guy that called me an old fogey because I could remember the lyrics to a Foghat song?"
Never said I wasn't.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,137
Registered:
11/5/02
|
|
(1200 of 1202)
Nov 19, 2009 11:27 PM
|
So much for the emails not throwing up red flags........
Major Hasan's E-Mail: 'I Can't Wait to Join You' in Afterlife
ABC news
By BRIAN ROSS and RHONDA SCHWARTZ
Nov. 19, 2009
United States Army Major Nidal Hasan told a radical cleric considered by authorities to be an al-Qaeda recruiter, "I can't wait to join you" in the afterlife, according to an American official with top secret access to 18 e-mails exchanged between Hasan and the cleric, Anwar al Awlaki, over a six month period between Dec. 2008 and June 2009.
"It sounds like code words," said Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, a military analyst at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies. "That he's actually either offering himself up or that he's already crossed that line in his own mind."
Other messages include questions, the official with access to the e-mails said, that include when is jihad appropriate, and whether it is permissible if there are innocents killed in a suicide attack.
"Hasan told Awlaki he couldn't wait to join him in the discussions they would having over non-alcoholic wine in the afterlife," the official said.
Major Hasan also wrote, "My strength is my financial capabilities."
Federal investigators have found that Hasan donated $20,000 to $30,000 a year to overseas Islamic "charities." As an Army major, his yearly salary, including housing and food allowances, was approximately $92,000. A number of Islamic charities have been identified by U.S. authorities as conduits to terror groups.
Two FBI task forces, in Washington and San Diego, received the intercepted messages, but deemed them innocent.
On Capitol Hill today, Senators questioned how that could be.
"The choice of this recipient of emails says a lot about what Hasan was looking for," said Senator Joseph Lieberman, chair of the Senate's Homeland Security committee. Lieberman's committee held a hearing on the Fort Hood shootings, and announced that it was launching an investigation.
"What I'm getting at," said Lieberman, "Is he may have been looking for spiritual sanctions for what he's accused of ultimately doing."
The American-born Awlaki is considered a recruiter for al-Qaeda. He has been in hiding since the shooting, but a Yemeni journalist told ABC News today that the e-mails show Hasan was "almost a member of al-Qaeda."
link
|
|
|
Posts:
8,296
Registered:
8/24/06
|
|
(1199 of 1202)
Nov 19, 2009 9:57 AM
|
Double
Regarding your statement about Constitutional requirements, consider the first sentence of Amendment 6, then get back to me.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,166
Registered:
6/29/09
|
|
(1198 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 11:07 PM
|
> I wasn't responding to your post (3058), with mine (3135).
So what?
|
|
|
Posts:
3,166
Registered:
6/29/09
|
|
(1197 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 11:03 PM
|
Little known fact: Who has the biggest counter-terrorism project, with more Arabic translators than the CIA or FBI, agents the world over, the world's largest trained anti-terrorism task force and literally thousands of trained troops as backup to the main task force, who all literally train daily for years and with an exceptional record of stopping terrorists at home and abroad since 9/11?
NYPD. They're out for blood and aren't about to let it happen again. There probably isn't a better place to hold the trial in the world. Certainly not a kangaroo court at Gitmo, further challenging constitutionality and providing fodder for terrorist recruiters.
JaredP
Posts: 3,059
Registered: 6/29/09
(1144 of 1195)
Re: Fort Hood
Nov 17, 2009 10:50 AM
Edit Reply Report Abuse
So people are irrational cowards who don't want to hold it in NYC where the big secure and experienced facilities are, but can't give a good reason why. Boo hoo.
Unless you've got something better than that I'm dismissing your objection as baseless.
...
Seems to your point.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,137
Registered:
11/5/02
|
|
(1196 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 10:59 PM
|
> JaredP
>
> Posts: 3,058
> Registered: 6/29/09
> (1109 of 1194)
> Re: Fort Hood
> Nov 16, 2009 11:36 PM Rating:
>
> Reply Report Abuse
> Controversy? Tough shit. Meet the Constitution.
>
> The question is not whether there will be
> controversy. The question is who is causing it and
> why?
> doubletake
> Posts: 3,135
> Registered: 11/5/02
> Subscribe
> Ignore
> (1108 of 1194)
> Re: Fort Hood
> Nov 16, 2009 11:08 PM Rate this post:
> Reply Report Abuse
> Having this trial in NY is a terrible idea. This
> mistake will create a tremendous amount of
> controversy- something the O team doesn't need right
> about now. An avoidable distraction.
>
> ...
>
> bold added
I wasn't responding to your post (3058), with mine (3135).
|
|
|
Posts:
3,166
Registered:
6/29/09
|
|
(1195 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 10:52 PM
|
JaredP
Posts: 3,058
Registered: 6/29/09
(1109 of 1194)
Re: Fort Hood
Nov 16, 2009 11:36 PM Rating:
Reply Report Abuse
Controversy? Tough shit. Meet the Constitution.
The question is not whether there will be controversy. The question is who is causing it and why?
doubletake
Posts: 3,135
Registered: 11/5/02
Subscribe
Ignore
(1108 of 1194)
Re: Fort Hood
Nov 16, 2009 11:08 PM Rate this post:
Reply Report Abuse
Having this trial in NY is a terrible idea. This mistake will create a tremendous amount of controversy- something the O team doesn't need right about now. An avoidable distraction.
...
bold added
|
|
|
Posts:
3,137
Registered:
11/5/02
|
|
(1194 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 10:35 PM
|
> So what?
Just pointing out that your response had nothing to do with the statement you were answering, and avoided the question entirely. Just that.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,137
Registered:
11/5/02
|
|
(1193 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 10:33 PM
|
> Doubletake 1108
>
> You are worried about having the trial in the US
> because there is a slim chance that the truth might
> be outed, thus upsetting the Government Lie that you
> have defended for all these years.
>
> It's a very slim chance, so don't worry. With enough
> people repeating the Lie enough times and frequently
> enough, it will stand (for the gullible)
Yes, that must be it Jet. It's a vast right wing conspiracy.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,166
Registered:
6/29/09
|
|
(1192 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 10:26 PM
|
|
So what?
|
|
|
Posts:
3,137
Registered:
11/5/02
|
|
(1191 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 10:21 PM
|
> > > Controversy? Tough shit. Meet the
> Constitution.
> >
> >
> > The Constitution specifies it has to be held in
> NY
> > City?
>
> The Southern District of New York has tried many
> terrorists. This means that many issues unique to
> such cases have already been hammered out. It also
> means the NY US Marshal's service, jails and prisons
> have successfully held the most dangerous of
> criminals and actually continue to do so. Since they
> do have this experience of handling these type of
> cases, ie. handling sensitive evidence, it is the
> most logical court for speedy trials.
In other words, no- the constitution does not specify that the trial needs to be held in NY.
|
|
|
Posts:
8,296
Registered:
8/24/06
|
|
(1190 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 9:10 PM
|
|
Ah, the beauty of victimhood! Kinda brings a tear to my eye.....
|
|
|
Posts:
9,563
Registered:
3/25/08
|
|
(1189 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 12:39 PM
|
> Ok, so show of hands, or responses, who amongst you
> all think Maj Nidal Hasan is a victim?
No one. At least no one here ever suggested he was.
> I ask, because I think a lot of the media are hyping
> it that way, and i really would like to know if the
> marketing is working.
I haven't seen the media calling him a victim either.
>
> Salon is running a story on their web site:
>
> Camp
> LeJeune
>
> In it, they assert:
> >They weren't talking about Marines suffering from a
> tangle of mental and religious angst, like news
> reports suggest haunted the alleged Fort Hood
> shooter, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan
>
> And that's not the only reference, if just happens to
> be handy.
>
> They go on by suggesting:
>
> >While military officials and the media examine
> whether the Army missed warning signs that might have
> indicated an unhinged Nidal Hasan was capable of
> killing 13 people at Fort Hood, Manion's Camp Lejeune
> story is a cautionary tale of what happens to those
> who blow the whistle on conditions for military
> personnel with mental problems.
>
> Gosh, where to start. First, how is it possible that
> Maj Nidal was a sufferer of PTSD? Cause he talked to
> those that actually had it?
Nowhere in that article does it say Nidal suffered from PTSD, so I don't know what you're asking.
> Second, why is it
> necessary for especially the liberal outlets to
> conclude that the major was mentally unbalanced? Is
> there a record that someone is aware of the major's
> long alleged mental illness? Third, why should this
> incident be used to serve as some asinine advocacy
> for additional mental health services in the
> military?
I think the fact that Nidal slipped through the cracks and is a psychiatrist himself just drew attention to how the system is working...woefully, apparently. Are you saying that should be ignored because...I dunno what exactly...because Nidal didn't have PTSD?
The article was not about Nidal. At all.
> How is it that it's more important to change the
> subject than deal with the fact that the army
> commissioned someone who had a religious allegiance
> strong enough to overwhelm his allegiance to the
> United States, and result in the massacre of soldiers
> at a soldier processing center?
Does there have to be a choice, a matter of degree? Seems to me that they have to deal with it all.
> Is it as simple as political correctness? When
> asked, Gen George Casey makes the case that
> "diversity" is more important.
More important than what?
Perhaps we should look at what Casey actually said, and the context in which he said it, and the question he was answering:
GREGORY: What about your concerns about backlash against our Muslim soldiers who are in the Army, as a result of this incident?
GEN. CASEY: Yeah. I think those concerns are real and I, and I will tell you, David, that they're, they're fueled partially, at least, by the speculation about--based on anecdotal evidence that people are presenting. I think we have to be very careful with that. Our diversity not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse.
|
|
|
Posts:
4,444
Registered:
1/15/06
|
|
(1188 of 1202)
Nov 18, 2009 12:18 PM
|
|
Define "victim"?
|
|
|
|
|
