The Domestic Terror Threat [Archive] - In Session Message Boards

ninetoes

11-20-2009, 08:49 PM

"It is still too early to tell what exactly motivated Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan to open fire on fellow American soldiers earlier this month, but the massacre came on the heels of a series of foiled terrorist plots involving Americans. In light of revelations that Anwar al-Awlaki, an extremist American cleric based in Yemen, had e-mailed with Hasan, it is worth asking whether America faces a growing threat from domestic terrorism, and to what degree those involved in terrorism are becoming radicalized not in some far-flung locale, but right here in the United States."

http://www.newsweek.com/ID/223776

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 12:36 PM

Has Dana Perino lost her mind?

"We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term," she told Sean Hannity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/25/perino-no-terrorist-attac_n_370393.html

Did she forget Bush was President when America had it's worst terrorist attack Sept 11th?

LisaM22

11-25-2009, 12:48 PM

wow, and hannity did not even correct her, go figure

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 12:51 PM

wow, and hannity did not even correct her, go figure

Yeah sad I'm not even shocked he didn't correct her.

LauraRose

11-25-2009, 01:56 PM

Has Dana Perino lost her mind?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/25/perino-no-terrorist-attac_n_370393.html

Did she forget Bush was President when America had it's worst terrorist attack Sept 11th?

My opinion on this is Dana Perion talks faster than she thinks or thinks faster than she talks, I am willing to bet she meant after 911. There were not attacks after. Good grief we all know 911 happened on Mr. Bush was president. I think it was a grammer mistake. Time being limited per talk session, Sean missed the slip too.

LauraR

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 02:00 PM

My opinion on this is Dana Perion talks faster than she thinks or thinks faster than she talks, I am willing to bet she meant after 911. There were not attacks after. Good grief we all know 911 happened on Mr. Bush was president. I think it was a grammer mistake. Time being limited per talk session, Sean missed the slip too.

LauraR

So are you saying the Anthrax attacks were not terrorist attacks?

LauraRose

11-25-2009, 02:03 PM

So are you saying the Anthrax attacks were not terrorist attacks?

Gawd! This is not worth it. I'm done

Lyvia

11-25-2009, 02:05 PM

So are you saying the Anthrax attacks were not terrorist attacks?

President Bush said they were.

Figured I better add a source. Just for giggles, I'll use Fox.

Administration Says Anthrax Mailings Are Acts of Terrorism (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,36468,00.html)

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © 2009 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 02:14 PM

Gawd! This is not worth it. I'm done

ummm Did i ask a bad question? :confused:
I did not mean to upset you.
The Anthrax attack killed 5 people and infected 17.

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 02:15 PM

WOW Justice .... I thought it was an honest question .... :confused:

jmo

Same here. I wasn't trying to be mean or rude I just wanted to clarify this country was attacked after Sept 11th.

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 02:16 PM

So are you saying the Anthrax attacks were not terrorist attacks?

Those were domestic attacks, were they not?

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 02:18 PM

Those were domestic attacks, were they not?

And your point? Was not the Ft Hood attack domestic, also?

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 02:26 PM

And your point? Was not the Ft Hood attack domestic, also?

Were we discussing Fort Hood? Was V-Tech a terrorist attack as well?

Terrorist attacks from foreign powers which kill over 3000 and a declared Jihad or WAR against us from foreign suspects -- while a domestic attacks signals a mind that has been broken to those disgruntled with their own country. We will never know why Lvins did what he did or why he targeted who he did. Two separate things IMO. The Tylenol killings were terrorist attacks if one looks at it that way.

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 02:34 PM

Those were domestic attacks, were they not?
well yessss and so was Fort Hood and that's what DP was talking about in the video. She said "We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term," while talking about Sean Hannity about Ft Hood. Do you agree with her?

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 02:34 PM

Were we discussing Fort Hood? Was V-Tech a terrorist attack as well?

Terrorist attacks from foreign powers which kill over 3000 and a declared Jihad or WAR against us from foreign suspects -- while a domestic attacks signals a mind that has been broken to those disgruntled with their own country. We will never know why Lvins did what he did or why he targeted who he did. Two separate things IMO. The Tylenol killings were terrorist attacks if one looks at it that way.

So, what was Ft Hood? You asked about the Anthrax being domestic...Didn't you? YOU brought up domestic terrorism....Not me!!

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 02:35 PM

Those were domestic attacks, were they not?

Was this not you?

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 02:35 PM

Were we discussing Fort Hood? Was V-Tech a terrorist attack as well?

Terrorist attacks from foreign powers which kill over 3000 and a declared Jihad or WAR against us from foreign suspects -- while a domestic attacks signals a mind that has been broken to those disgruntled with their own country. We will never know why Lvins did what he did or why he targeted who he did. Two separate things IMO. The Tylenol killings were terrorist attacks if one looks at it that way.

So was DP wrong when she called Ft Hood a terrorist attack?

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 02:56 PM

well yessss and so was Fort Hood and that's what DP was talking about in the video. She said "We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term," while talking about Sean Hannity about Ft Hood. Do you agree with her?

Do we know enough about Fort Hood to label it as anything yet? If there is evidence linking his actions to foreign terrorists then it may be an act of both.

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 02:58 PM

So, what was Ft Hood? You asked about the Anthrax being domestic...Didn't you? YOU brought up domestic terrorism....Not me!!

We don't know enough about Fort Hood to "label" it yet, IMO. If he was acting with another group as has been suggested by the CIA then it would be both IMO.

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 02:59 PM

Was this not you?

And? Justice4all brought up domestic terrorism, your point? :confused:

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 03:00 PM

So was DP wrong when she called Ft Hood a terrorist attack?

If he was doing this on behalf of another sect then yes, it would be an act of both IMO.

PosterGuy

11-25-2009, 03:00 PM

So was DP wrong when she called Ft Hood a terrorist attack?

Is this administartion wrong for not admitting that it was?:confused:

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 03:02 PM

We don't know enough about Fort Hood to "label" it yet, IMO. If he was acting with another group as has been suggested by the CIA then it would be both IMO.

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?p=13641671#post13641671

Post # 5. Please try and keep your story straight...you would be more credible:rolleyes:

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 03:02 PM

Is this administartion wrong for not admitting that it was?:confused:

WOW how did all this get twisted up LOL

No i don't think the administration was wrong.

I think Dana was wrong in saying this country was not attacked by terrorist under George Bush.......:rolleyes: Oh way i don't THINK she was wrong...........she WAS wrong!!!!!!!!

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 03:04 PM

Those were domestic attacks, were they not?

No you did. Try and stay with us...

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 03:04 PM

And? Justice4all brought up domestic terrorism, your point? :confused:

See above. You've been exposed.

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 03:04 PM

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?p=13641671#post13641671

Post # 5. Please try and keep your story straight...you would be more credible:rolleyes:

LOL AND? Where have I EVER claimed he was not a terrorist? LMAO

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 03:07 PM

We don't know enough about Fort Hood to "label" it yet, IMO. If he was acting with another group as has been suggested by the CIA then it would be both IMO.

My Gosh......Wow.

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 03:08 PM

See above. You've been exposed.

LOL Try again? Don't have a clue as to what you THINK you have exposed. The fact that we can't label Hasan a definite domestic terrorist or acting on behalf of a foreign faction that has declared a war against the US?

You just can't grasp it can you?

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 03:10 PM

LOL Try again? Don't have a clue as to what you THINK you have exposed. The fact that we can't label Hasan a definite domestic terrorist or acting on behalf of a foreign faction that has declared a war against the US?

You just can't grasp it can you?

You can't stop posting in circles can you? My peke spins in circles before SHE takes a dump, too. You're a fraud.

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 03:14 PM

And? Justice4all brought up domestic terrorism, your point? :confused:

I didn't bring up domestic terrorism Dana Perino did. Watch the video and get back to us on what your thoughts are. Thanks.

Justice4all

11-25-2009, 03:15 PM

IaNsSyAlNuE

11-25-2009, 03:16 PM

My Gosh......Wow.

1. Let me make this easy for you. 9-11 foreign terrorists who have declared an ongoing war against the US- willing to kill any American they can get close to. And Hasan who may have worked with them

OR

2. Livins trying to make himself famous or kill people he had work problems with?

One is a domestic and the other is an act of foreign terrorists who have declared war against the USA

Do you see the difference yet? No, can’t help you there.

LisaM22

11-25-2009, 03:28 PM

My opinion on this is Dana Perion talks faster than she thinks or thinks faster than she talks, I am willing to bet she meant after 911. There were not attacks after. Good grief we all know 911 happened on Mr. Bush was president. I think it was a grammer mistake. Time being limited per talk session, Sean missed the slip too.

LauraR

shoe bomber? not to mention all the doctor killings by the christian fanatics

Mahalo

11-25-2009, 03:34 PM

shoe bomber?

No, you see that involved shoes. Some will go to ANY length, including losing their own credibility and lying, to try and turn the fiasco bush admin into something that was good.:thumbdown:

LisaM22

11-25-2009, 03:39 PM

Do we know enough about Fort Hood to label it as anything yet? If there is evidence linking his actions to foreign terrorists then it may be an act of both.

I agree, had this not been a US soldier I am sure he would already be labeled a terrorist, just most have a hard time accepting that a US soldier could become a terrorist, so we are doing an investigation first...

jammies

11-27-2009, 09:04 AM

shoe bomber? not to mention all the doctor killings by the christian fanatics

Or all the fanatical doctors who willingly kill our unborn babies.

Mahalo

11-27-2009, 12:34 PM

Or all the fanatical doctors who willingly kill our unborn babies.

Fanatical? 'Our'? How they our's???? Ridiculous.

Justice4all

11-27-2009, 02:29 PM

Or all the fanatical doctors who willingly kill our unborn babies.

ummmm OUR unborn babies? What are you talking about?

Marrigan

01-12-2010, 09:51 AM

from today's Boston Globe:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/01/12/concerns_about_fort_hood_suspect_ignored_by_superv isors/

A Defense Department review of the shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, has found that the doctors overseeing Major Nidal Hasan’s medical training repeatedly voiced concerns over his strident views on Islam and his inappropriate behavior, yet continued to give him positive performance evaluations that kept him moving through the ranks.

The picture emerging from the review ordered by Defense Secretary Robert Gates is one of supervisors who failed to heed their own warnings about an officer ill-suited to be an Army psychiatrist,

I'm reminded of that saying about promoting people "to their next level of incompetence". But it gets deadly serious when we're talking about our Armed Forces and a person who is entrusted with the mental and emotional care of our troops.

jammies

01-12-2010, 10:09 AM

from today's Boston Globe:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/01/12/concerns_about_fort_hood_suspect_ignored_by_superv isors/

I'm reminded of that saying about promoting people "to their next level of incompetence". But it gets deadly serious when we're talking about our Armed Forces and a person who is entrusted with the mental and emotional care of our troops.

"ill suited to be a Army psychiatrist"????????? That's all?

birdwatch

01-15-2010, 06:11 PM

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60E5TA20100115

Annie143

01-15-2010, 07:04 PM

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60E5TA20100115
thank you.

This is another instance of the system that is supposed to protect us, failing miserably. But, it will all be swept under the rug and soon, it will be, business as usual. Nothing will change. Bah !

ninetoes

01-15-2010, 08:36 PM

"Fort Hood aftermath: Some Army officers’ careers may be over"

"Washington
The Pentagon may end the careers of a handful of Army officers for failing to perform their jobs and potentially contributing to the shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, last fall."

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2010/0115/Fort-Hood-aftermath-Some-Army-officers-careers-may-be-over

Annie143

01-16-2010, 11:43 AM

good, that some officers may lose their jobs.

And, ninetoes, I like your "location" statement. :smile:

ninetoes

01-16-2010, 05:42 PM

good, that some officers may lose their jobs.

And, ninetoes, I like your "location" statement. :smile:

My hope is that Army officers arent going to be used as the "fall guy", since I believe the fault goes much higher up the chain than an officer in the military. CIA and FBI had information and chose not to pursue it. They should also be held accountable, IMO.

IaNsSyAlNuE

01-20-2010, 03:24 PM

The Fort Hood Report: Why No Mention of Islam?

The U.S. military's just-released report into the Fort Hood shootings spends 86 pages detailing various slipups by Army officers but not once mentions Major Nidal Hasan by name or even discusses whether the killings may have had anything to do with the suspect's view of his Muslim faith. And as Congress opens two days of hearings on Wednesday into the Pentagon probe of the Nov. 5 attack that left 13 dead, lawmakers want explanations for that omission.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1954960,00.html?cnn=yes&hpt=C2#ixzz0dBbOpKWQ

More PC which is going to hurt us IMO.

MiamiNice1

01-20-2010, 03:33 PM

Is this a rhetorical question? :sneaky:

Justice4all

01-20-2010, 03:36 PM

What does this have to do with current politics?

Mrs Robinson

01-20-2010, 03:37 PM

The Fort Hood Report: Why No Mention of Islam?

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1954960,00.html?cnn=yes&hpt=C2#ixzz0dBbOpKWQ

More PC which is going to hurt us IMO.Watch the people that neglected to report Hassan's radical behavior because of their fear of being disciplined for a lack of political correctness will now be disciplined even though officials making the report continue with this idiotic PC behavior.

IaNsSyAlNuE

01-20-2010, 03:46 PM

What does this have to do with current politics?

Congress (our politicians) is investigating why Islam is not mentioned and such is reported in the OP.

IaNsSyAlNuE

01-20-2010, 03:51 PM

Watch the people that neglected to report Hassan's radical behavior because of their fear of being disciplined for a lack of political correctness will now be disciplined even though officials making the report continue with this idiotic PC behavior.

I can only hope that this report will address such and open eyes everywhere.

From the OP link:

Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut said he was "disappointed" because the inquiry "does not adequately recognize the specific threat posed by violent Islamist extremism to our military,"...

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1954960,00.html?cnn=yes&hpt=C2#ixzz0dBi3JQBE

Details

01-20-2010, 04:20 PM

The Fort Hood Report: Why No Mention of Islam?

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1954960,00.html?cnn=yes&hpt=C2#ixzz0dBbOpKWQ

More PC which is going to hurt us IMO.Because it wasn't about Islam - it was about extremism. The reason the Fort Hood shooter should have been spotted, reported, disciplined, etc. was not for his Muslim faith, but for the signs that he was going extremist.

An extremist white supremacist should also be reported. A Buddhist, Christian, Pagan, Wiccan, anyone showing signs of extremism should be reported. The problem was not that they failed to report his faith, it's that they failed to report his extremism.

Hey Paula

01-20-2010, 04:42 PM

IaNsSyAlNuE

01-20-2010, 04:48 PM

Because it wasn't about Islam - it was about extremism. The reason the Fort Hood shooter should have been spotted, reported, disciplined, etc. was not for his Muslim faith, but for the signs that he was going extremist.

An extremist white supremacist should also be reported. A Buddhist, Christian, Pagan, Wiccan, anyone showing signs of extremism should be reported. The problem was not that they failed to report his faith, it's that they failed to report his extremism.

As the article points out that was his motive ( extreme Islamic faith) and without his motive then there would not have been murders.

beattherap

01-20-2010, 04:53 PM

Because it wasn't about Islam - it was about extremism. The reason the Fort Hood shooter should have been spotted, reported, disciplined, etc. was not for his Muslim faith, but for the signs that he was going extremist.

An extremist white supremacist should also be reported. A Buddhist, Christian, Pagan, Wiccan, anyone showing signs of extremism should be reported. The problem was not that they failed to report his faith, it's that they failed to report his extremism.
the report is about fort hood... the shooter isn't a wiccan or buddhist extremist.

CANDYKISSES

01-20-2010, 05:08 PM

I can only hope that this report will address such and open eyes everywhere.

From the OP link:

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1954960,00.html?cnn=yes&hpt=C2#ixzz0dBi3JQBE

I'm hoping many questions are asked and answered Ian. The time for PC behaviors ended the day innocent people were murdered and injured at the hands of Hasan. Why wouldn't they address his connections and the failures in the system that contributed to him continuing under the radar? :sad: JMO

Tracian

01-20-2010, 05:12 PM

IMO, if he made a comment in regards to extremism of any religion, that was the motivation for the crime.

We (collective) have no problem when discussing the shooting at an abortion clinic as someone who is a Christian extremist as the motivation for their crime, if they made statements in those regards.

Details

01-20-2010, 05:18 PM

the report is about fort hood... the shooter isn't a wiccan or buddhist extremist.The report is about what should be done - and extremism is what needs to be reported - NOT Islam as a religion - many good Muslims in the force - they don't need to be reported for their religion - only extremists do. And extremism needs to be reported no matter what religion or philosophy it comes from.

CANDYKISSES

01-20-2010, 05:23 PM

beattherap

01-20-2010, 05:24 PM

btr .... Let's be fair here . Details was making a point in her post .... a very good one, I thought.

JMO
fairness is my middle name... the report is about a specific incident, a specific person... a report is incomplete if it doesn't address the signs or methods of promoting extremism of the fort hood murderer... when a wiccan extremist, as a result of their extremism, shoots people at a military base, my opinion would be the same.

Details

01-20-2010, 05:32 PM

fairness is my middle name... the report is about a specific incident, a specific person... a report is incomplete if it doesn't address the signs or methods of promoting extremism of the fort hood murderer... when a wiccan extremist, as a result of their extremism, shoots people at a military base, my opinion would be the same.The report is about the gaps, how did we miss this, who failed, what should we do in the future. Any such report that narrows the focus down to just the specifics of this shooter is very incomplete - they should be looking at the whole problem, not just the issue for any one shooter, religion, etc. Otherwise, they close the door to one category of shooter, and leave it open for others.

Mrs Robinson

01-20-2010, 07:07 PM

Because it wasn't about Islam - it was about extremism. The reason the Fort Hood shooter should have been spotted, reported, disciplined, etc. was not for his Muslim faith, but for the signs that he was going extremist.

An extremist white supremacist should also be reported. A Buddhist, Christian, Pagan, Wiccan, anyone showing signs of extremism should be reported. The problem was not that they failed to report his faith, it's that they failed to report his extremism.The fact that these extremists kill for their religion is an undeniable fact that is relevent, it should have been included in the report.

PosterGuy

01-20-2010, 07:25 PM

jammies

01-20-2010, 07:28 PM

The report is about what should be done - and extremism is what needs to be reported - NOT Islam as a religion - many good Muslims in the force - they don't need to be reported for their religion - only extremists do. And extremism needs to be reported no matter what religion or philosophy it comes from.

Yet we are at WAR with Islamic EXTREMISM. :patriot:

IaNsSyAlNuE

01-20-2010, 07:44 PM

I agree with you, Tracian. But that doesn't mean that we would be accusing ALL Christians of being extremists.

It's the same here .... we have an "Islamic extremist", but it also doesn't mean that all people who are Islamic are extremists.

JMO

No one said to blame all of Islam nor have they even come close to such.

IaNsSyAlNuE

01-20-2010, 07:46 PM

Yet we are at WAR with Islamic EXTREMISM. :patriot:

Exactly and a major factor was Extremist Islam as Hasan did not want to 'fight his brother'. He has been trying to get out of being deployed for such.

Annie143

01-20-2010, 07:47 PM

What does this have to do with current politics? It's all politics. :rolleyes:

Annie143

01-20-2010, 07:53 PM

The report is about the gaps, how did we miss this, who failed, what should we do in the future. Any such report that narrows the focus down to just the specifics of this shooter is very incomplete - they should be looking at the whole problem, not just the issue for any one shooter, religion, etc. Otherwise, they close the door to one category of shooter, and leave it open for others.I always respect your thoughts but, I think we would be fools if we did not admit that there a lot of MUSLIMS that want Americans DEAD. And, having said that, why would Muslims not be given more scuitiny than say a Wiccan or Christian or whatever. That is just being prudent. And I am a prudent person.

jammies

01-20-2010, 08:01 PM

Details

01-20-2010, 08:07 PM

I always respect your thoughts but, I think we would be fools if we did not admit that there a lot of MUSLIMS that want Americans DEAD. And, having said that, why would Muslims not be given more scuitiny than say a Wiccan or Christian or whatever. That is just being prudent. And I am a prudent person.Every threat is new at some time - we face threats from all kinds of groups. We've had hits from people like McVeigh, the Olympic bomber that had nothing to do with Islam, and of course, we've had 9/11 and plenty of attempted terrorist attacks from Muslim extremists. The thing that is common for ALL of these, is extremism. To focus on one type means that other types will be missed, excused.

Worse yet, it sends a message to the many Muslims who are fighting and dying for America right now, that we don't accept them as equal citizens, that the terrorists are right, America is fighting a religious war against Islam, rather than defending ourselves against terrorists.

This is a report about the errors made, steps to take. To focus that report on only one religion, only one threat - that just seems foolish. The same actions should be taken if some soldier starts talking about whether it's OK for a white soldier to take part in wars that kill white people, and sending emails to the KKK about terrorism against black people; or if it's a soldier expressing anarchistic anti-American ideals and contacting militia groups about taking down the American gov't, or whatever the next new threat is that we'll find.

The error here wasn't about religion - it was about ignoring increasingly extremist views, promoting and failing to investigate this officer.

Annie143

01-20-2010, 08:23 PM

Fairlady===I often wonder .... would this ever have happened to Timothy McVeigh had he NOT joined the Army ?? What WAS it that made him turn against this Country ?? I think it would have happened. My understanding was that McVeigh bombed the Murray building out of retaliation for the Waco debacle. The US gov essentially rode roughshod over the compound and children died. It became a power struggle between those in the compound and the gov't and, By God, the gov was going to win......! His protest was with the gov't. and was wrong, wrong, wrong.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTRIALS/mcveigh/mcveighwaco.html

Gore Vidals article in Vanity Fair was the best I had ever read and should be a must read for anyone that was alive during this period of our history.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/spl/vidal-mcveigh.html

Sorry, I got side tracked about McVeigh. Now that I have revisited it, I am off to refresh my memory with some of the writings on this tragedy.

MiamiNice1

01-20-2010, 08:50 PM

I think it would have happened. My understanding was that McVeigh bombed the Murray building out of retaliation for the Waco debacle. The US gov essentially rode roughshod over the compound and children died. It became a power struggle between those in the compound and the gov't and, By God, the gov was going to win......! His protest was with the gov't. and was wrong, wrong, wrong.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTRIALS/mcveigh/mcveighwaco.html

Gore Vidals article in Vanity Fair was the best I had ever read and should be a must read for anyone that was alive during this period of our history.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/spl/vidal-mcveigh.html

Sorry, I got side tracked about McVeigh. Now that I have revisited it, I am off to refresh my memory with some of the writings on this tragedy.

Wow. Thanks for sharing this great read Annie.....(I'm still reading...)

(jammies - did you see where they mention "The Manchurian Candidate"? :biggrin:)

Hey Paula

01-20-2010, 08:55 PM

Hi Paula .... I think that's correct though. We are at war with "Islamic extremists".

JMO

Hi FL,

But why leave out the word Islam/Islamic, especially in view of the fact that it is Islamic extremists who have continued to attack us from within, including from within our military. To deny properly identifying a specific group that has vowed to destroy us is to put us at continued risk.

Janet Napolitano had no qualms about identifying pro-lifers and ex-military as "terrorists", even at a time when that word was no longer being used.

IMO

RedPatriot

01-20-2010, 09:15 PM

Hi FL,

But why leave out the word Islam/Islamic, especially in view of the fact that it is Islamic extremists who have continued to attack us from within, including from within our military. To deny properly identifying a specific group that has vowed to destroy us is to put us at continued risk.

Janet Napolitano had no qualms about identifying pro-lifers and ex-military as "terrorists", even at a time when that word was no longer being used.

IMO:bored: It's not that simple. Think again about those whom Napolitano identified - none from any group, except those individuals who are so extreme as to kill.

Yet based on one individual and horrific incident, you want the broad brush applied to a religion that is based on peace. The Major was one man, seemingly a disturbed man who not only disgraced his uniform, but also his religion.

:sad: If we are to have a chance at prevention, perhaps we need to better understand mental illness and make it easier for those so stricken to seek help. imeo