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.
Its a crime to associate with terrorists organizations. Exchanging emails are indeed an "association".. If I recall we have had american citizens charged with similar crimes. (Bryant Neal Vinas being one)
So far after a thorough culling of the stories surround this issue what I have gleaned is another case of shoddy journalism not to dissimilar to the run-up to the Iraq war.
[indent]Counterterror agents intercepted messages between the Army shrink who killed 13 at Fort Hood and a radical imam in Yemen with ties to Al Qaeda - but decided they were harmless, U.S. officials said Monday night.[/quote]
U.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.
Which turns out once again to be his former Iman Anwar Aulaqi whose "association with al Qaeda" so far is that two of the 9/11 hijackers attended the services where he presided.
So what is the charge, associating with individuals that associate with al Qaeda? I'd love to watch that trial.
As for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ACT, that's a pretty tough prosecutorial nut to crack absent any criminal offense on the part of Maj. Hasan.
Of course if I were having a discussion with folks who really like to have honest discussions, I would point out, that both law enforcement and the intelligence services just might have been keeping an investigation open to see where it could eventually lead having not indication that he would act upon his beliefs in such a manner.
Provide a link showing he contacted terrorist groups. He contacted some people, individually. Do keep in mind, there were concerns about him during his residency at Walter Reed Army Hospital, which was prior to the Obama administration, if you're going play the blame game.
And Clinton was warned about 911 as well.. How far do you want to take this game?
Yeah??? You are really asking such a dumb question? I think the right to take action is there when this person believes that killing in the name of Allah is acceptable. I think in the Constitution it says something about protecting the country AND the Constitution itself from foreign and domestic enemies? I could be wrong, but I do think it says that somewhere.
What action did you want taken?
You want to arrest someone for being a Muslim?
You want to arrest someone for protesting American involvement in a war?
You want to arrest a native-born American for criticizing his country?
Wake up, you're criticizing this country and the government right now, right in this thread.
Provide a link showing he contacted terrorist groups. He contacted some people, individually. Do keep in mind, there were concerns about him during his residency at Walter Reed Army Hospital, which was prior to the Obama administration, if you're going play the blame game.
I actually expected the government do what they did.. Monitor emails, (using that old Patriot Act that you liberals all hated) and to use the contacted information to find and locate more terrorists. Should he have been arrested? Dont know, I wasnt privy to the conversations that took place but to pretend Obama wasnt notified is just foolish.
Government should monitor, locate, then kills the terrorists, followed by the arrest of Hasan for VIOLATING laws, which he did violate.
This doesnt mean that the comparison between 911 is flawed because in order for the comparison to be flawed, people would have to argue that we were not monitoring for terrorists attacks back then. We all know thats not true.
Our government should monitor, locate and then KILL suspected terrorists?
This doesn't actually go along with the rule of law. We are a country of laws, you know. The whole government of the people, by the people, for the people thing, it means the government has to follow the rules of law, too.
Before opening fire, what laws did Hasan VIOLATE? Out of curiosity.
Again, your argument was not logical, and your attacking my "honesty" doesn't further your argument.
Your assertion that the government didn't want to offend anyone is not supported by the facts. The facts are that the government has to evaluate thousands and thousands of potential threats, and that there wasn't any indication that Hasan was likely to take guns on to the military base where he worked and open fire. He never said in any of his posts that he planned to do this.
You are just plain out dishonest. So according to you, they did the right thing by putting Hasan on the back burner and let people get killed. You have no where to go with this argument, you should just concede now and save whatever humility you have left.
"The conviction in this case validates the FBI's approach that we do not need to wait, nor should we wait, for an individual to be caught with his hands on a bomb before we recognize and respond to the threat,"
Our government should monitor, locate and then KILL suspected terrorists?
This doesn't actually go along with the rule of law. We are a country of laws, you know. The whole government of the people, by the people, for the people thing, it means the government has to follow the rules of law, too.
Before opening fire, what laws did Hasan VIOLATE? Out of curiosity.
Ahh, actually it does go along with the rule of law provided the "terrorists" are not on american soil. Did you forget that we have two wars going on to do this exact thing?
Government, of the people, by the people, for the people, involved the Gettysburg Address, not the Constitution..
Our government should monitor, locate and then KILL suspected terrorists?
This doesn't actually go along with the rule of law. We are a country of laws, you know. The whole government of the people, by the people, for the people thing, it means the government has to follow the rules of law, too.
Before opening fire, what laws did Hasan VIOLATE? Out of curiosity.
You just proved how not bright you are... He broke the law by communicating with terrorist organizations.
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.
