PDA

View Full Version : Why wont Obama call Nidal Hasan A terrorist?


NDPENDANT
11-13-2009, 01:17 PM
http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=urbanlegends&cdn=newsissues&tm=17&gps=256_642_1251_837&f=00&su=p504.3.336.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.gwumc.edu/hspi/old/PTTF_ProceedingsReport_05.19.09.pdf (http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Furbanlegends.about.com%2Fgi%2 Fo.htm%3Fzi%3D1%2FXJ%26zTi%3D1%26sdn%3Durbanlegend s%26cdn%3Dnewsissues%26tm%3D17%26gps%3D256_642_125 1_837%26f%3D00%26su%3Dp504.3.336.ip_%26tt%3D2%26bt %3D0%26bts%3D0%26zu%3Dhttp%253A%2F%2Fwww.gwumc.edu %2Fhspi%2Fold%2FPTTF_ProceedingsReport_05.19.09.pd f&h=03f05b8a89acf6fbee39e9ba55761a57)

look at page 32, Nidal Hasan the shooter at ft hood last week was consulting on obamas presidentail transition team, thats why he refuses to call him a terrorist. Also today, Obama administration has decided to have Nidal tried in a military tribunal instead of federal court like the 10 coming from Guantanimo Bay.
Why is this important you say?
Well here is why. The obama administration has done this to shield themselves from any questioning about Nidal and the shooting. obama was given email well ahead of the shooting, documenting Hasans contact with people in Yemen. By the trial happening in the military tribunal, Obama cannot comment on the case because as the commander in chief, he may be the last decision maker in a death sentence for nidal as convicted. By being that person, he cannot make any appearances of a "conflict or bias" by answering any questions about the shooting, the case or the accused. Interesting that people who killed 3000 in new york are given full run of our judical system where the rules will not allow a lot of evidence that would be used in a military trial, when convenient will be used for someone who executed 13 soldiers and an unborn child. disgusting.

Snoman
11-13-2009, 09:50 PM
We are really screwed up in this country I say no trail an eye for an eye the END :smflame:

EssexExport
11-13-2009, 09:54 PM
Either of you guys been in the military? I was. A trial
by the military can result in frying your ass! The guy
was in the military (& technically still is) resulting in a
non-civilian trial. End of story.

Snoman
11-13-2009, 10:05 PM
As a matter of fact Bob YES I served and I did it with great honor :tu: My point is this country and it's politicians are just getting worse by the minute :mad: What do you think George Washington or John Adams would have to say about these low life assholes ruining our once great country :confused:

NDPENDANT
11-14-2009, 12:26 AM
Essex, I agree with you, that a military trial is the way to go, the point I was trying to make is that Obama is bringing 10 terrorists that were supposed to be put through military tribunal trials, to NY to stand trial in federal court, where they receive all the protections of a US citizen. The evidence obtained in the battlefield and under interogation at guantanimo may not be allowed in that trial. Can you imagine if someone gets acquitted?
The fact that obama has elected in the Hasan case to keep it a military trial is ONLY to shield himself from the fact that he directly knew ahead of time that Hasan was emailing people in Yemen connected with alQueda. Can you imagine the media firestorm that Bush would be going through if he has been handed emails from the CIA and NSA in his daily briefing and did nothing about it, let alone even had been briefed on it, he would be impeached. did anyone even raise that question today in the press briefing? no, they just showed how 'upset' they were because people are still asking when he will send more troops to afghanistan. ITs criminal, the blood of those injured and killed is on his hands, his watch, his intelligence and NO one is asking about it.

EssexExport
11-14-2009, 06:10 AM
I'm in complete agreement with you guys that those 10 should not be
given a civil trial. The media circus will be coverage by the second.

Now with this Hasan thing, would you as President want to put your
own military in a bad light by saying it enlists terrorists in its ranks?
More media frenzy, more get the person that swore the guy in,
more get the guy's commanding officer, more track down the person
that issued or sold him his firearms, etc., probably all legal &
lawful at that. Who needs that?

NDPENDANT
11-15-2009, 07:55 PM
Every so often you clean out the closet. This is a closet full of guns, RPGs, serin Gas, dirty bombs, busses full of kids being blown to bits, women being burned and beheaded for going outside and reading. If it takes down a recruiter, a captain, a general and a president to stop our people from being slaughtered whether its 13 at a time or 3100 at a time, it needs to be cleaned out. CAn you imagine if he had just 2 more armed people with him as the 82nd airborne or the 1st marines were getting ready to deploy? Can you imagine the chaos if just one suicide bomber borded a morning bus or subway in NY, Chicago, Denver, Dallas and LA at the same time? Thats only 5 people that shuts down our transportation. Remember it took only 4 airplanes to stop all flights in and out of the USA.

EssexExport
11-15-2009, 10:27 PM
I'll quote the immortal Ben Franklin here:

"Any country that gives up a little freedom for
a little security deserves neither & loses both."