Congress Debating Making U.S. Like China by Creating Internet Blacklist

[El Barto]

Not every act of violence by a Muslim is terrorism.  Body count is irrelevant.  A terrorist attack can kill 0, and a Muslim attack that kills 400 might not be terrorism.

[Genowyn]

What if a Muslim just really hated his job and decided to shoot up the place and then kill himself? How quickly do you think Fox news would be screaming terrorism? If a white guy did it, would they say the same thing? Hell no.

[EPICVIEW]

Not every act of violence by a Muslim is terrorism.  Body count is irrelevant.  A terrorist attack can kill 0, and a Muslim attack that kills 400 might not be terrorism.

agreed.. but the ones sited are terrorist attacks by your own rules..

and do you really doubt Im not 100% facile on what is and isnt a terrorist attack?

[EPICVIEW]

What if a Muslim just really hated his job and decided to shoot up the place and then kill himself? How quickly do you think Fox news would be screaming terrorism? If a white guy did it, would they say the same thing? Hell no.

sorry, but again Fox would be as valid as any network...the real issue is why the other networks will not report the reality of the TRUTH if it is..

[El Barto]

Not every act of violence by a Muslim is terrorism.  Body count is irrelevant.  A terrorist attack can kill 0, and a Muslim attack that kills 400 might not be terrorism.

agreed.. but the onces sited are terrorist attacks by your own rules

I haven't quoted my own rules yet.  But funny you bring it up, because here they are.  

Muslim group wants government to call plane attack terrorism
This is something that's been bugging me for a while, and since this article was posted in a different thread, I'll bring it up now.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations is both absolutely correct and absolutely wrong.  Had a Muslim carried out the attack, I have no doubt it would have been immediately described as terrorism.  Yet, I don't think it qualifies as such regardless of the actors ethnicity.  Somehow the definition of terrorism has become nothing more than killing civilians for political motives, and since not every act of political violence can be terroristic, arbitrary qualifiers like ethnicity and body count have become important.  It seems that nobody is capable of differentiating between a lone act of violence and an orchestrated scheme to scare the shit out of a society.  Not every mass murder is an act of terrorism.  

The Army Major who snapped at Ft. Hood is a fine example.  Did his attack really leave anybody scared after it was over?  Did he have an actual agenda other than killing people?  He was pissed off and killing people was his only motivation.  In an act of terrorism, killing is one means to an end.  It's not and end itself.  Had he left a note saying that he was only the first of many unless America ended the war, then it would certainly qualify--even if there actually were no others.  

Which leads to something that I now feel I've been totally off base on.  Why does the Oklahoma city bombing qualify as terror?  I don't see how McVeigh and Nichols were really trying to accomplish any sort of agenda.  They wanted to kill a bunch of federal employees.  They had no position to promote.  They had no longer term plan.  They were just fucking angry.  There's no evidence that they had any other schemes in the works.  Furthermore, when busted, they never opted to even explain what they were pissed off about.  There's an adage that says criminals take responsibility for their actions while terrorists claim the credit.  How is it terrorism if you don't even want people to know why you acted?  They're mass murders, no different than George Henard, James Oliver Huberty or Charles Whitman except in the level of their success.  I'm pretty sure any one of those three would have loved to kill 168 people.

It seems to me that terrorism has become just a label thrown about for two reasons.  First, for people other than the actual bad guys to scare the hell out of everybody.  Fox and CNN cause more terror than any actual act of violence.  Second, it makes people feel better after they've been clobbered.  I think people would rather feel that the victims were good, righteous people murdered by evil bastards for reasons completely beyond their control.  In the mean time, a very real and horrible thing gets watered down.  There are people in the world who can't live normal lives out of fear that some asshole will blow up the pizza parlor they eat at; a fear they've had to endure for years.  Somehow I really don't think their situation is comparable to the occasional, random act of mass murder.

[EPICVIEW]

PS: sorry but you are 100% wrong on Fort Hood.. he was a terrorist in a terrorist network..period.

you may want to retract your post..its flawed and WRONG...

[EPICVIEW]

Officials: U.S. Army Told of Hasan's Contacts with al Qaeda
Army Major in Fort Hood Massacre Used 'Electronic Means' to Connect with Terrorists
 
602 comments By RICHARD ESPOSITO, MATTHEW COLE and BRIAN ROSS
Nov. 9, 2009
PrintRSSFont Size:  Share:EmailTwitterFacebookMoreFarkTechnoratiGoogleLiveMy SpaceNewsvineRedditDeliciousMixxYahooU.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with an individual associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

Army knew suspected Fort Hood gunman had contact with al Qaeda recruiter.According to the officials, the Army was informed of Hasan's contact, but it is unclear what, if anything, the Army did in response.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI), the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that he requested the CIA and other intelligence agencies brief the committee on what was known, if anything, about Hasan by the U.S. intelligence community, only to be refused.

In response, Hoekstra issued a document preservation request to four intelligence agencies. The letter, dated November 7th, was sent to directors Dennis Blair (DNI), Robert Mueller (FBI), Lt. Gen Keith Alexander (NSA) and Leon Panetta (CIA).

Hoekstra said he is "absolutely furious" that the house intel committee has been refused an intelligence briefing by the DNI or CIA on Hasan's attempt to reach out to al Qaeda, as first reported by ABC News.

"This is a law enforcement investigation, in which other agencies—not the CIA—have the lead," CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said in a response to ABC News. " Any suggestion that the CIA refused to brief Congress is incorrect."

Related
WATCH: Fort Hood Suspect's Ties to Terrorists'Cop Killer' Gun Used In Ft. Hood Shooting, Officials SaidWATCH: What Turned Major Into Alleged Killer?Investigators want to know if Hasan maintained contact with a radical mosque leader from Virginia, Anwar al Awlaki, who now lives in Yemen and runs a web site that promotes jihad around the world against the U.S.

In a blog posting early Monday titled "Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing," Awlaki calls Hasan a "hero" and a "man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people."

According to his site, Awlaki served as an imam in Denver, San Diego and Falls Church, Virginia.

The Associated Press reported Sunday that Major Hasan attended the Falls Church mosque when Awlaki was there.



 EmailsSign Up For Blotter Alerts!



E-mail address:
More Newsletters »
Subscribe RSS Feeds Podcasts Mobile

The Telegraph of London reported that Awlaki had made contact with two of the 9/11 hijackers when he was in San Diego.

He denied any knowledge of the hijacking plot and was never charged with any crime. After an intensive investigation by the FBI , Awlaki moved to Yemen.

People who knew or worked with Hasan say he seemed to have gradually become more radical in his disapproval of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On Sunday, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) called for an investigation into whether the Army missed signs as to whether Hasan was an Islamic extremist.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have a zero tolerance," Lieberman told Fox News Sunday

[AcidLameLTE]

The Telegraph is certainly a good source of information.

[EPICVIEW]

Fort Hood shooting: Texas army killer linked to September 11 terrorists
Major Nidal Malik Hasan worshipped at a mosque led by a radical imam said to be a "spiritual adviser" to three of the hijackers who attacked America on Sept 11, 2001.
 
By Philip Sherwell and Alex Spillius
Published: 8:17PM GMT 07 Nov 2009

Previous1 of 2 ImagesNext
Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas Photo: GETTY  The radical Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, accused of supporting attacks on British troops
Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt. His mother's funeral was held there in May that year.

The preacher at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organisations.

 
Related Articles
Inside story of how massacre on military base happened
Policewoman awoke from surgery and asked if anybody died
Fort Hood gunman used 'cop killer' weapon
Fort Hood shooter is deeply sensitive introvert, say Palestinian relatives
Fort Hood shooting: President Barack Obama will travel to Texas for Fort Hood memorial service
Chinese authorities ban Uighurs from mosquesHasan's eyes "lit up" when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki's teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas, the scene of Thursday's horrific shooting spree.

As investigators look at Hasan's motives and mindset, his attendance at the mosque could be an important piece of the jigsaw. Al-Awlaki moved to Dar al-Hijrah as imam in January, 2001, from the west coast, and three months later the September 11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hamzi and Hani Hanjour began attending his services. A third hijacker attended his services in California.
( This is from the UK Telegraph)

[rumborak]

FOX, Telegraph ... next stop, Andy thread!

rumborak

[EPICVIEW]

can we please get back on subject of how Obama is trying to cotrol the net and Net Nuetrality laws he wants to impose?

[El Barto]

You're picking and choosing facts to support a spurious claim.  He did contact the radical Cleric.  It was investigated and deemed to be in line with his research in to psychiatry and Islam.  [I believe the cleric in question had written books about dream interpretation in Islam]   Regardless, his motivation was just to kill as many people as possible.  

[EPICVIEW]

You're picking and choosing facts to support a spurious claim.  He did contact the radical Cleric.  It was investigated and deemed to be in line with his research in to psychiatry and Islam.  [I believe the cleric in question had written books about dream interpretation in Islam]   Regardless, his motivation was just to kill as many people as possible.  

Your circuitous argument is losing its way... you sound like an apologist for him sadly ( I know you are not), but you want to put everything in some sort of neat box that you want it in....

this is it : He was a terrorist.. he excuted his plan of Jihad.. thats all ...period.  Obama cant get this either so you are in good company!!! LOL

[icysk8r]

  at this thread

[AcidLameLTE]

You're picking and choosing facts to support a spurious claim.  He did contact the radical Cleric.  It was investigated and deemed to be in line with his research in to psychiatry and Islam.  [I believe the cleric in question had written books about dream interpretation in Islam]   Regardless, his motivation was just to kill as many people as possible.  

Your circuitous argument is losing its way... you sound like an apologist for him sadly ( I know you are not), but you want to put everything in some sort of neat boxing that you want....

this is it : He was a terrorist.. he excuted his plan of Jihad.. thats all ...period.  Obama cant get this either so you are in good company!!! LOL

LMAO

[Seventh Son]

at this thread

I know! But I'm having fun with the troll myself  
They're so cute when they are cranky and upset  

[EPICVIEW]

at this thread

I know! But I'm having fun with the troll myself  
They're so cute when they are cranky and upset  

I know...they really are cute!!!! what shall we do with them???

[El Barto]

I honestly don't know WTF that was supposed to mean.  However:

and do you really doubt Im not 100% facile on what is and isnt a terrorist attack?

and

this is it : He was a terrorist.. he excuted his plan of Jihad.. thats all ...period. 

There's nothing I can say that'll top that.  You win. 

[EPICVIEW]

I honestly don't know WTF that was supposed to mean.  However:

and do you really doubt Im not 100% facile on what is and isnt a terrorist attack?

and

this is it : He was a terrorist.. he excuted his plan of Jihad.. thats all ...period. 

There's nothing I can say that'll top that.  You win. 

Id settle for a tie  lol...I dont want to win..I want people to THINK!!!

[Seventh Son]

at this thread

I know! But I'm having fun with the troll myself  
They're so cute when they are cranky and upset  

I know...they really are cute!!!! what shall we do with them???

Edit: nevermind

[EPICVIEW]

EB,

I will talk in PM anytime to clarify..I enjoy the banter.. and to me I have been clear, concise and consistent ..what you quote of mine above is accurate..." I know what constitutes terrorsim and the Fort Hood shooter is obviously part of the Jihad against our country and he is part of a politcal movement against us, hence he is a terrorist by definition"

[EPICVIEW]

I have a really hard time seeing this happening. The American people put up with a lot of the Government's shit, but if this were to go into affect, I think a lot of people would be straight up furious. I know I would be pissed off as hell. The internet is the one of the last methods that the American people have for true free speech. If such a bill did manage to pass, I think it would be too difficult to keep track of the content they are trying to block. Look at music downloading, even with all the effort into stopping it, it still get easier to get around every year. Now imagine trying to apply that to all of the internet. Obviously too an extent it can be done, other countries are doing it, but I think there would be ways around it.

I would have believed this argument until the health care bill that just passed here. 57% of Americans favor repealing it, and as we can see from the news they're certainly vocal about it, but the politicians don't care. It's strange, because I have a hard time saying politicians even are trying to get re-elected anymore. The Democrats had to know that between the health care bill, the cap and trade bill, and the second stimulus, that the American people would flip out and wipe them out of Congress. So why was it in their best interests to push for these laws? Whatever that interest is, American public opinion is obviously not part of it.

Well said Reapsta! right on

[El Barto]

I haven't put that much thought into it, but it seems to me that Jihad and terrorism are two completely different concepts.  You seem to be equating the two.  Furthermore, if memory serves correctly, Hasan's motivations weren't political, though there was a religious element.  He didn't want to serve in an area where he'd have to fight Muslims and he snapped.  While he might (or might not) have been sympathetic towards jihadists, that doesn't mean he acted on their behalf, and again, it wouldn't make him a terrorist anyway.  

A lone gunman killing a bunch of people with no other plan whatsoever, and with no political goals to promote, is not a terrorist.  Hasan's actions seem to be more sociopathic than anything else.  He wanted out and he wanted to take the people who cornered him out with him.

[EPICVIEW]

EB,

I agree with how the two can become merged or confused.. but under any test of terrorism, Fort Hood was one..

we were told he didnt want to go, but thats for debate, we are not sure of the veracity of that ..he wass not going to be in combat that was for sure..so the fake complaint peddled by the lib media that he would have to fight is again wrong..he did not snap. he executed his Jihad on the infidels.. aka a terrorist shooting of civilians..not an enemy in uniform..

we are sure now that he  had contact with Terrorists and had been with them.. screamed "allah Akbar" during his shooting.. and had SOI on his business card.. all the elements of terrorsim is found.

[El Barto]

At first glance, I see about 7 different non-sequiturs in that post.  However, I gotta get to work.  Maybe, if this thread is still going on, I'll dissect it later. 

[Adami]

EB,

I agree with how the two can become merged or confused.. but under any test of terrorism, Fort Hood was one..

we were told he didnt want to go, but thats for debate, we are not sure of the veracity of that ..he wass not going to be in combat that was for sure..so the fake complaint peddled by the lib media that he would have to fight is again wrong..he did not snap. he executed his Jihad on the infidels.. aka a terrorist shooting of civilians..not an enemy in uniform..

we are sure now that he  had contact with Terrorists and had been with them.. screamed "allah Akbar" during his shooting.. and had SOI on his business card.. all the elements of terrorsim is found.

What if a christian, or athiest white guy went to a mall and started shooting tons of people. Would he be a terrorist?

[EPICVIEW]

At first glance, I see about 7 different non-sequiturs in that post.  However, I gotta get to work.  Maybe, if this thread is still going on, I'll dissect it later. 

cool...have a great day EB...thanks for the banter.. I enjoy these type of debates and subjects..

[EPICVIEW]

^ to Adami two posts up... it could be terrorism, we would have to know a lot more about the shooter, motives, ideology and if he is involved in supremecy of one group to be subjugated by another...and if the shooting was to hold a group of people under the threat of more terrorism.. if he is a radical part of a radical political movement of domination at all cost, is it in their by laws, is it taught in the schools ( madrasses) etc, is thre brain washing involved of the their children.. are they tolerant of others to live in peace..

[Adami]

Why? To see if he were muslim? There were plenty of school shootings and so forth under bushs' watch. Those don't count as terrorism to you. Yet when the person happens to be muslim, then it's not only terrorism, but it's linked to the major terrorist organizations.

[EPICVIEW]

Why? To see if he were muslim? There were plenty of school shootings and so forth under bushs' watch. Those don't count as terrorism to you. Yet when the person happens to be muslim, then it's not only terrorism, but it's linked to the major terrorist organizations.

point to the case and I will be tell you my thoughts.. post the case please

[EPICVIEW]

To Adami if it was a crazy KKLan member id say YES... its a form of terrorism as they are hate mongers who are radical and indoctrinate hate into their children... if they went violent and started a series of shootings to hold the african americans in a state of fear, Id say YES....thats Terrorism and they should be destroyed ( which I hate the Klan ( obviously)..so Id be fine with them being wiped out of our society)

[Adami]

What if a muslim, a devout muslim, lost his mind because his wife left him and shot tons of people. Is that terrorism? Even if yelled Alahu Akbar?

[rumborak]

It seems terrorism is decided the Judge Stewart kind of way. "I know it when I see it!". Which is short for "I will label it the way it is the most convenient to my views".

rumborak

[EPICVIEW]

What if a muslim, a devout muslim, lost his mind because his wife left him and shot tons of people. Is that terrorism? Even if yelled Alahu Akbar?

NO.. Id say thats NOT terrorism at first galnce.. but would still strike fear as a terrorist act because of the inference..again the aftermath of his connection or lack there of would be variable needed to be explored.. and where does the incident occur ,, Saudi Arabia or in NYC?

this is a tough one.. I could argue that his losing face within his Muslim society and the blaming of infidels currupting his wife to leave could be involved and that element could lean towards terroristic outrage,,etc

I thought for a second you were talking about Honor Killings.. because if he was devout there would be a possibiltiy of that... sadly

[Arcaeus]

EPICVIEW:

Great troll or greatest troll?