Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pentagon will not label Fort Hood shootings as terrorist attack (Hasan must get fair trial)
The Washington Times ^ | 10/22/12 | Susan Crabtree

Posted on 10/22/2012 5:18:38 PM PDT by markomalley

Already facing intense scrutiny for its shifting narrative about the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya, the Pentagon now says it will not reclassify the Fort Hood shootings as a terrorist attack over concern about biasing the case against the gunman — an argument that is getting a mixed review from legal experts.

Late Friday, after 160 victims of the Fort Hood shooting called on the Pentagon to label the attack terrorism instead of workplace violence as it has for the past three years, the Department of Defense said it would not reclassify the attack.

In rejecting the victims outcry, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s spokesman cited concern that having the government weigh in could bias the case against Mr. Hasan. Maj. Hasan, 42 is awaiting trial and faces the death penalty if convicted.

When asked how Mr. Panetta plans to respond to the victims, his spokesman took a day and a half to respond, eventually emailing a statement Friday night.

“The Department of Defense is committed to the integrity of the ongoing court martial proceedings of Major Nadal Hassan and for that reason will not further characterize, at this time, the incident that occurred at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009,” Pentagon spokesman George Little said in the statement. “Major Hassan has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder, and 32 counts of attempted murder. As with all pending UCMJ matters, the accused is innocent until proven guilty.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: domesticterrorism; forthoodmassacre; fthoodmassacre; nadilhasan; nakedtreason; obamafails; obamaforeignpolicy; obamalegacy; obamalies; proislamist; proterrorist; traitor; treason; warcrime; waronterror; whywefight

1 posted on 10/22/2012 5:18:43 PM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley
It was Jihad, pure and simple.

I'm not sure what this terrorism is thing is.

2 posted on 10/22/2012 5:22:12 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
It was Jihad, pure and simple.

I'm not sure what this "terrorism" thing is.

3 posted on 10/22/2012 5:22:38 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Only workplace violence.

Nothing to see here, except the 14 dead, including a prenatal infant, and dozens wounded.

Move along, now, move along ...


4 posted on 10/22/2012 5:25:46 PM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This excuse is CYA for the fairies at the Pentagon. If they call it a terrorist attack, heads in the Pentagon would have to roll because of their bull**** political correctness. “Workplace violence” makes it where those sorry bass turds won’t have to explain to Americans what our enemy was doing an U.S. Army uniform.


5 posted on 10/22/2012 5:27:50 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Get the transcript Candy! - Barack Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I would think a ‘fair trial’ implies that the actions be judged on the basis for what they were—i.e., blatant terrorism.


6 posted on 10/22/2012 5:27:57 PM PDT by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
It was Jihad, pure and simple. I'm not sure what this "terrorism" thing is.

Indeed: it would be far more useful for it to be called an act of war committed by a traitor than for it to be called "terrorism", and to issue the wounded and the dead Purple Hearts.

7 posted on 10/22/2012 5:31:08 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

A civilian could be charged with terrorism for doing the same thing on a city street. Is terrorism by an Army officer on a military base against military personnel an less of a crime? If the definition of terrorism is the same, the jurisdiction shouldn’t matter and the “suspect” should be charged with that offense, judged guilty, and executed.

Panetta has no balls, just like the rest of this administration.


8 posted on 10/22/2012 5:31:17 PM PDT by beelzepug ("0bama is a feckless crapweasel")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Maybe Panetta should be in the docket with Hassan. As a country, we cannot name the enemy. We cannot win if Islam is endlessly whitewashed by our own government and its infiltration into our government and country is facilitated by Obama appointees.
9 posted on 10/22/2012 5:33:26 PM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The Pentagon will not label the shooting as a terrorist act because they have been ordered not to by Obama.

Who do they think they are Bullsheiting?

The Pentagon is screwing those dead out of benefits those, living out of Purple Hearts,because their Commander In Chief does not want his Muslim friends blamed, and these political Pentagon suck butts know it, and are covering for him.


10 posted on 10/22/2012 5:47:04 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug
"The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged,[5] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition.

Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”.[6][7]

The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[8] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).[8][9]"

11 posted on 10/22/2012 6:19:48 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
"The Department of Defense is committed to the integrity of the ongoing court martial proceedings of Major Nadal Hassan"

Uh, it only takes about an hour to shave the Jihadi rather tahn dragging teh issue out for weeks.

12 posted on 10/22/2012 6:23:47 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth29
"The Fort Hood shooting was a shooting that took place on November 5, 2009"

Four years is WAY too long for a trial that is fair to the victims to be completed.

13 posted on 10/22/2012 6:29:01 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

I agree completely.


14 posted on 10/22/2012 9:25:47 PM PDT by beelzepug ("0bama is a feckless crapweasel")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

So, if I went through Ft. Hood yelling some horse hockey about Allah, the MPs wouldn’t handcuff me and throw me in jail for terroristic threats? I - don’t - think - so.


15 posted on 10/22/2012 9:53:40 PM PDT by bgill (Evil doers are in every corner of our government. Have we passed the time of no return?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
One of President Romney's first efforts must be to fire/clean out the so-called "flag officers" in the Pentagon who push forward this horseshit.

I have not heard Romney's position on the Ft. Hood terrorist attack.....

16 posted on 10/22/2012 9:57:46 PM PDT by Victor (If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert." -David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley; Revolting cat!; Slings and Arrows

I notice that Osama Bin Laden and Momar Gaddafi didn’t get fair trials.

Saddam Hussein did get a fair trial, by the way.


17 posted on 10/22/2012 10:23:42 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Obama likes to claim credit for getting Osama. Why hasn't he tried Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

Obama’s foreign policies have been decidedly PRO-Islamist. He ain’t gonna stand up against domestic terrorists. He denies any have happened on his watch. He’s a fifth columnist sitting in the damned White House.


18 posted on 10/22/2012 10:27:16 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Obama likes to claim credit for getting Osama. Why hasn't he tried Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This is all baloney. The guy should have been given a death sentence months ago. I believe the high ranks of the military including the jurors and chief judge in the Akin(?) court martial and all the way up to Gen. Dempsey are shills for Islam and the Muslims that have wormed into top government posts. My concern is what if anything Romney will do to rectify the situation.


19 posted on 10/22/2012 10:37:36 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Why the surprise? It is widely known that Zero’s administration has done everything it can to erase the words “terrorism” and “islamic extremism” from the English vocabulary.


20 posted on 10/23/2012 3:59:36 AM PDT by trebb (Allies no longer trust us. Enemies no longer fear us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Four years on the public dole drawing a salary and medical care AND still refusing to shave his non-regulation beard.

Obama sides with this human piece of crap.


21 posted on 10/23/2012 9:00:15 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Obama likes to claim credit for getting Osama. Why hasn't he tried Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Fair trial?
He admitted he did it. There are a large number of witnesses who saw him do it. There is ballistic evidence he did it.
Hell, they should be able try and convict him in 30 minutes.

The problem, I guess, is they are trying him for the wrong thing. They SHOULD be trying him as an unlawful enemy combatant, instead of for murder. If they call it “Terrorism” then they’d have to change the entire trial.


22 posted on 10/23/2012 9:30:16 AM PDT by Little Ray (AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson