Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why would the Gettysburg Address have to be a law to be a valid citation showing that this country actually perceives itself to be a nation of laws?
Because speeches are not laws, heck each year the president gives a speech to discuss their upcoming adjenda, they dont become law, just goals
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
A President addressing the country, and remarking that the government is not separate from the people but, in fact, an extension of the people, and therefore subject to the same restrictions, laws, and rules that it imposes, is not a valid argument? What country did you say you were from?
Is the federal government a current extension of the people? Do we have to begin to list laws written that the people "didnt want"? The government is limited by the constitution and other laws, but there are numerous examples of them ignoring these laws to do whatever they want. Its reality.
Not a single one of these comments bears any relationship whatsoever to either your first comment or my response to it. WTH??? Are you taking narcotics?
You made a comparison between Muslims and Jews, between Bush and Nazis (so original of you). I pointed out the ABSURDITY of your comparison. And this "list" of unrelated comments is your response?
Maybe you should change your screen name to "Distortionist" - It would alert the others of your mission.
and my view, along with many, many others is a bit more sane. HE WAS A TERRORIST!
Sane? Your view is to jump to conclusions, while my view is that we don't have enough information to rush to judgment yet. And yet you think your view is the sane one. Shame on you.
Sane? Your view is to jump to conclusions, while my view is that we don't have enough information to rush to judgment yet. And yet you think your view is the sane one. Shame on you.
They could have bounced him on a consorting with the enemy charge. The military has the power to discharge its personnel administratively. The conduct doesn't need to rise to the level of a criminal offense. Here's this high-ranking officer playing patty cakes with a known radical cleric. That behavior, by itself, would have provided grounds for an administrative discharge. Hell, the military discharges people who are chronically late in paying their bills!
It didn't happen largely because of political correctness. The Army didn't want to have to defend itself against a discrimination suit. Remember the flying imams? More importantly the Army didn't want to be seen sabotaging one of Obama's top foreign policy initiatives. When he came into office Obama made it his top foreign policy goal to repair relations with the Islamic world. His first sit down interview was with an Arabic news service. Then he gives his big Cairo speech in which he throws Israel under the bus to appease the Islamists. Imagine the hell to pay if the Army had discharged Hasan! Rahm would have had the Secreatary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs in the woodshed for a lttle sensitivity training if that had happened. The Army knew what they were dealing with in this administration and they sacrificed a few troops to stay on the right side of the thugs in the White House. Shameful all around!
Consorting with the enemy???? Based on what?
Do you always put the cart ahead of the horse?
You have to prove that the iman is the enemy. Suspected ties to Al Qaeda is not enough. The iman was also once Hasan's religious counselor at a mosque, and the FBI, who evaluated Hasan's conversations with the iman, determined that the conversations were consistent with Hasan's job responsibilities. Evidently, the idea of Hasan taking up arms and shooting up an army base wasn't part of any of the conversations.
You've got a man who was a devout, fundamentalist Muslim.
You've got a man who clearly was no longer rational, and who resorted to violence and to shooting down strangers.
You don't have the reasons why he decided to do this. All you have is surmise and guesswork. And we may never know why he did this. And that's okay. We can put him behind bars for the rest of his life anyway. We can punish him without understanding why.
But if we make up our minds now as to the why, and that why goes beyond this man, this one man and his actions, if we start spreading the blame beyond this one man to a community of people, then we've abandoned our values.
For me, the real threat to America is that we abandon our values because of our fears. I won't allow people to instill fear in me of all Muslims because there are some religious extremists out there who hate all Americans. Hate is the enemy. Fear is the enemy. Ignorance is the enemy.
I always find it funny when people say Political Correctness takes away liberties, then use the '1st amendment shield' to make slanderous and bigoted attacks on other religions and ethnicities they dont like.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
"Saying anything bad about MY group is unpatriotic and treasonous but Im well within my liberties to say everything bad about YOUR inferior people!"
My view is that he thought he might possibly die. And since he was shot four times, and was taken to the hospital in critical condition, that seems that death was a possibility. What's unreasonable is your continued argument that he couldn't possibly have expected to be killed as an outcome of his actions. Because no one involved in these mass shootings is ever shot dead themselves, or perhaps plans on killing themselves at the end?
I can not say whether he yelled before or after he was shot. From what I have heard it was while HE was shooting not after he was shot. I have no idea what his plan was had he not been stopped but based on what I have heard it sounds like the man was killing in the name of his God not praying to him.
You have to prove that the iman is the enemy. Suspected ties to Al Qaeda is not enough. The iman was also once Hasan's religious counselor at a mosque, and the FBI, who evaluated Hasan's conversations with the iman, determined that the conversations were consistent with Hasan's job responsibilities. Evidently, the idea of Hasan taking up arms and shooting up an army base wasn't part of any of the conversations.
Imagine in WWII an American citizen of German descent exchanging correspondence with a propagandist for the Nazi government. How long do you think that guy would have stayed in uniform?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
