Why its Important to call Major Hasan an Islamist Terrorist

WSJ/The Lid ^ | 11/22/09 | The Lid

[Shellybenoit]

To some people the debate about whether the Fort Hood Jihadist was a terrorist is a silly semantics discussion. The Fact is two years ago we were warned that future acts of terror would not come from al-Qaeda but from home grown Jihadists. Back in 2007 the Council on Foreign Relations reported:

“The possibility of a ‘homegrown’ terrorist attack against New York City or any other American city is real and is worsening with time (PDF),” Richard A. Falkenrath, New York City’s deputy police commissioner for counterterrorism, recently told the Senate Homeland Security Committee. This kind of threat is particularly troublesome to counterterrorism officials because it is hard to anticipate the motives or actions of a homegrown terrorist. Yet despite the high probability of a homegrown terrorist attack, experts say such an event is likely to have a relatively small impact when compared to attacks by conventional terrorist networks. As CFR Senior Fellow Steven Simon told a recent symposium, homegrown terrorists are often “feckless and ineffective,” though they have at times proven quite lethal. Simon cautioned that self-radicalized individuals and groups can become far more dangerous when they reach out for support from more established terrorist networks.

Two years after this report Major Hasan shot and killed 14 people at Fort Hood and we are still figuring out what to call it? Of course it is terrorism, it is what we were warned about.

[GOPJ]

Why its Important to call Major Hasan an Islamist Terrorist

BECAUSE it's the TRUTH! ( now I'll read the article and see what they have to say...)

[marron]

I think the proper term is “yet another” Islamist terrorist.