Community | November 13, 2009 | 19 comments

Why Won't Obama Call Fort Hood Killer a Terrorist?

source: http://FOXNews.com

Image
dabne
Fort Hood massacre suspect Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan had business cards that identified him as a "soldier of Allah," and federal investigators are looking at whether he wired money to Pakistan militants.

Hasan also communicated by e-mail with a radical imam who called the Fort Hood gunman a hero.

He also told colleagues that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats.

He also shouted Allah Akbhar while killing the "infidels."

So why isn't the President calling this domestic radical Islamic terrorist a terrorist?

Is it because the killer wasn't dressed like the guys above in the photo?

Do you have to be wearing terrorist clothing?
  1. groups:
    Community
  2. tags:
    President Obama,  American Politics,  Fort Hood massacre
  3.     
    |

19 comments // Why Won't Obama Call Fort Hood Killer a Terrorist?

  • force12
  • medHead
  • humanpasta
    • 0
      humanpasta  

    • This was a tragic rampage that was carried out by one mentally disturbed individual, not a strategic well planned attack meant to further a political and ideological agenda. I guess it all depends on your definition of terrorism.

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  

    • Ahh the right wing loves lables. It removes the necessity for critical thinking. "Keep it simple stupid" is their mantra. It could also be "If it doesn't fit on a bumper sticker, I don't have the time or ability to think about it."

    • 2 years ago
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  

    • Allahu Akbar equals terrorist.

      The reason Obama won't call him a terrorist is because Obama doesn't think there is any such thing as a terrorist.

    • 2 years ago
  • reactionforce
    • 0
      reactionforce  

    • He's not a terrorist. At least not in the knee-jerk lets hate Muslims way. The only reason I can see for calling this guy a terrorist is to perpetuate the myth that Muslim = Terrorist or at least potential terrorist.

    • 2 years ago
  • macfan
  • artemis6
  • dabne
    • 0
      dabne  
    • artemis6:

      Not enough info?

      But what about when he said the Cambridge Police acted "stupidly" after admitting he didn't have all the facts?

      Was he sane and reasonable then?

    • 2 years ago
  • ocanada
  • kennymotown
  • dabne
  • dabne
    • 0
      dabne  

    • The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal criminal code as...

      …activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping…."

    • 2 years ago
  • ocanada
    • 0
      ocanada  

    • I think that your hungry for a terrorist attack for political considerations and because you seek to generalize all violent actions as terror, for political gain and because of a stymied and unrational view of the world.

    • 2 years ago
  • dabne
    • 0
      dabne  
    • ocanada:

      So you have decided to analyze my intentions...Awesome!

      How about you just answer the question that I asked?

      Why does Obama not call the Fort Hood shooter a terrorist?

    • 2 years ago
  • dabne
    • 0
      dabne  

    • Maybe he doesn't want to have the largest terrorist act on a U.S. military base in America happen on his watch?

      Maybe he doesn't want to offend Radical Muslims?

      Maybe he doesn't know the definition of Terrorist?

      Maybe he sympathizes with Radical Islam?

      I don't know, what do you think?

    • 2 years ago
  • macfan
more from Community:
from the community

top videos