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.
What are you talking about? Ft. Hood has not been declared a terrorist attack. No one on this thread said 9/11 was not a terrorist attack.
Give me a break, it won't be declared but we ALL know it was. Obama does not want to even use the word terrorist.
The killer was a terrorist period and you know it.
I did not say anyone said 9-11 was not a terrorist attack in this thread, but if you did your research you will find many post and threads that left wingers who believe that 9-11 was not a terrorist attack.
Like it or not Ft Hood was a terrorist attack and now the left wingers want us to feel sorry for the killer who is paralyzed.
Give me a break, it won't be declared but we ALL know it was. Obama does not want to even use the word terrorist.
The killer was a terrorist period and you know it.
I did not say anyone said 9-11 was not a terrorist attack in this thread, but if you did your research you will find many post and threads that left wingers who believe that 9-11 was not a terrorist attack.
Like it or not Ft Hood was a terrorist attack and now the left wingers want us to feel sorry for the killer who is paralyzed.
Why do liberals protect killers like this?
I know about the "truthers", they are as nutty as the "birthers".
Show me some documentation that "left wingers" want us to feel sorry for the Ft. Hood shooter.
Even excluding 9/11, we still had the anthrax attacks, the Los Angeles airport shooting, the Seattle Jewish Federation shooting, and perhaps a few others I am forgetting at the moment. Ms. Perino made a factually incorrect statement. Simple as that.
I know about the "truthers", they are as nutty as the "birthers".
Show me some documentation that "left wingers" want us to feel sorry for the Ft. Hood shooter.
Look up the thread on the people feeling sorry for the killer because he is paralyzed. He should not even be alive let alone worrying about the death penalty for him.
Case closed, guilty, firing squad ready and make an example of him.
Mess with us or any American and you will get your butt kicked period.
No more Mr and Mrs nice country. Time to kick ass and take names.
Look up the thread on the people feeling sorry for the killer because he is paralyzed. He should not even be alive let alone worrying about the death penalty for him.
Case closed, guilty, firing squad ready and make an example of him.
Mess with us or any American and you will get your butt kicked period.
No more Mr and Mrs nice country. Time to kick ass and take names.
Our legal system does give people the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. He'll get his day in court. I'm sorry if you find this inconvenient.
Look up the thread on the people feeling sorry for the killer because he is paralyzed. He should not even be alive let alone worrying about the death penalty for him.
Case closed, guilty, firing squad ready and make an example of him.
Mess with us or any American and you will get your butt kicked period.
No more Mr and Mrs nice country. Time to kick ass and take names.
I'm a democrat, a liberal and the wife of a paralyzed husband. I don't feel sorry for the Foot Hood shooter because he's lost the use of his legs. Big deal. My husband has lost far more than that. But what you're suggesting is that we just shoot this guy and do away with our justice system in the process. If we did that that would make us, as a country, no better than those we are fighting overseas. Also, the death penalty, to him, might be the lesser of two evils and it will turn him into a martyr to extremists. Think about it.
Last edited by Wayland Woman; 11-27-2009 at 08:34 PM..
Even excluding 9/11, we still had the anthrax attacks, the Los Angeles airport shooting, the Seattle Jewish Federation shooting, and perhaps a few others I am forgetting at the moment. Ms. Perino made a factually incorrect statement. Simple as that.
So wait, now you're arguing that all those are terrorist acts? Do you call the Fort Hood a terrorist act? How about Columbine?
Was Columbine designed to advance any sort of ideological agenda, or were the targets chosen for ideological reasons? If so, I don't know of it. That doesn't make the attack any less horrendous, but "terrorism" is not a term with precise boundaries. I think the wider question is this - is every spree shooting an act of terrorism?
Surely they are all acts of terror, but the "ism" part means something extra. It means some sort of connection to a larger ideology or political activity.
For instance, I would classify the Unabomber as a perpetrator of terrorism, as opposed to just "terror," since he had a specific ideology in mind, and he intended violence to at least partly draw attention to that ideology.
That's also why the Beltway sniper attacks don't really qualify as terrorism; the perpetrators seem to have been deranged sociopaths rather than deranged sociopaths with a specific ideological agenda.
Which is worse: that Dana Perino didn't know that 911 happened on Bush's term, or that FOX "news" didn't seem to know either?
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.
