15 November 2018, 17:39:05 *

Login with username, password and session length
Welcome to War and Tactics!    War and Tactics Forum is currently undergoing some modifications that might disable features you are used to. This is unabvoidable as we have to update the forum engine to a new structure that is incompatible with many of the features we had used so far. The good news: WaT will be more secure and stable, and most of the features we uninstalled will be a natural part of the new structure anyway. For the rest we will be looking for solutions. (APR 23, 2018)
   
  Home   Forum   Help ! Forum Rules ! Search Calendar Donations Login Register Chat  
Pages:  1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Share this topic on Del.icio.usShare this topic on DiggShare this topic on FacebookShare this topic on GoogleShare this topic on MySpaceShare this topic on RedditShare this topic on StumbleUponShare this topic on TechnoratiShare this topic on TwitterShare this topic on Yahoo
Author Topic: 7 Dead and at least 15 injured in Ft. Hood shootout  (Read 10432 times)
FACman
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

United States

Location: Ar-kansas
Posts: 819




View Profile
« Reply #20 on: 14 November 2009, 18:15:12 »
ReplyReply

No doubt he had God on his side. From a personal experience I can see where his thoughts may have lay. I was raised in the Catholic religion, one of the tenets I distinctly remember was, a soldier (Marine, Sailor, Coastie or Zoomie) who died defending his country went to heaven. There was no mention of any other rewards, i.e; virgins, in the deal, just a free pass from St. Peter. Though there is a mythology that as a Marine, my ticket was punched already, as I had to report for duty in heaven anyway.

Though I never understood why the streets of Heaven needed Marines to guard them, when all those Angels  xangel could whup ass on any miscreants  reddevil that managed to sneak in.
Logged

"You can call me by my first name...Sarge."
Tanker
Sergeant Major
**

Offline Offline

United States

Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: 14 November 2009, 22:20:42 »
ReplyReply

abot Montie´s:

On the contrary, it prevents re-offending and that is a worthwhile outcome.


I do not think that Death Penalty prevents re-offending by others from an exemplary POV.

Rattler


True, but I think the original statement meant that Major Nidal would not be re-offending.
Logged
FACman
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

United States

Location: Ar-kansas
Posts: 819




View Profile
« Reply #22 on: 14 November 2009, 22:43:13 »
ReplyReply

I would point out that the likes of Sirhan Sirhan, have not done so either. So it appears that there are other means of restraining their impulses other than...the final solution.

 hangem    behead  :crux   
Logged

"You can call me by my first name...Sarge."
Rattler
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Germany

Location: Med Island
Posts: 2268




View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: 15 November 2009, 22:26:56 »
ReplyReply

Glad TA added those smileys, finally they make sense!

Rattler
Logged

"War does not determine who is right, war determines who is left...": The Rattler Way Of Life (thanks! to Solideo)... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9v3Vyr5o2Q
Tanker
Sergeant Major
**

Offline Offline

United States

Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: 16 November 2009, 04:57:01 »
ReplyReply

Any need to keep Charlie Manson alive all these years?  Maybe we can reform him. 
Logged
Tanker
Sergeant Major
**

Offline Offline

United States

Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: 16 November 2009, 04:58:31 »
ReplyReply

I would point out that the likes of Sirhan Sirhan, have not done so either. So it appears that there are other means of restraining their impulses other than...the final solution.

 hangem    behead  :crux   


Especially if you like supporting murderers into their old age.
Logged
FACman
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

United States

Location: Ar-kansas
Posts: 819




View Profile
« Reply #26 on: 16 November 2009, 10:11:56 »
ReplyReply

Quote
Any need to keep Charlie Manson alive all these years?  Maybe we can reform him.
Especially if you like supporting murderers into their old age 



The reason I dislike the death penalty is that there is to much chance for an innocent to receive the sentence. I feel that if we are going to have a death penalty, it is the victims family who should make the decision and not the state. Ol' Charlie is a loony and cant be reformed, but he wont ever get the chance to do it again, so the system works, most of the time. Yes occasionally one will escape and repeat his offenses, but there are no more of them than there are innocents executed. As for supporting them til they're old, its a proven fact that it is cheaper to give them life without parole than to sentence them to death and go through the expensive appeals process. There are many states looking at that very cost benefit today. Besides, I think there is justice in not allowing them to breathe free fresh air into their dotage. Personally, I would rather be the executioner of anyone that hurt my son & granddaughter.
Logged

"You can call me by my first name...Sarge."
Tanker
Sergeant Major
**

Offline Offline

United States

Posts: 221


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: 16 November 2009, 16:59:58 »
ReplyReply

All good points Jody.  I have mixed feelings about it myself.
Logged
Rattler
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Germany

Location: Med Island
Posts: 2268




View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: 16 November 2009, 22:08:58 »
ReplyReply

The reason I dislike the death penalty is that there is to much chance for an innocent to receive the sentence. -snip-


For me the reason to be *absolutely* against it as a concept (however clear it might be in the individual case that it is not applied to an innocent).

Just one innocent life taken by government is under no (legal, religious, ethic, philosophic or whatever other) concept justificable, whatever the majority feels.

This scenario (killing an innocent) simply is, under all above concepts and many more, murder or at least homicide, again, independently of what the mayoity of subjects feel about the issue.

I believe that if any governor, executor or else ever would have Nuremberg Trial rules applied and so would have to theoretically face the consequences of a homicide charge against him for slaughering an innocent (as, according to Nuremberg, "I followed orders" does not apply), we suddenly would see a lot less of executions.

Just this belief by itself or the doubt of whether it might be correct is argument enough to get rid of Death Penalty.

I will not talk cost on that issue.

And, call me stupid, I would say the same if the victim was one of my tribe, I belive in an overall idea of what is "right, just and legal" that we need to seperate from our feelings of revenge in those issues.

This does not mean that I would not hunt the ETA member that blew one of my family to the other side down personally, but I would be well aware of the consequences and be simply breaking the law.

Rattler
« Last Edit: 16 November 2009, 22:23:35 by Rattler » Logged

"War does not determine who is right, war determines who is left...": The Rattler Way Of Life (thanks! to Solideo)... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9v3Vyr5o2Q
Mad Russian
Guest

« Reply #29 on: 19 November 2009, 07:59:05 »
ReplyReply


For me the reason to be *absolutely* against it as a concept (however clear it might be in the individual case that it is not

Just this belief by itself or the doubt of whether it might be correct is argument enough to get rid of Death Penalty.


Those are the main reasons for doing away with the death penalty. I agree with them all.

Quote
And, call me stupid, I would say the same if the victim was one of my tribe, I belive in an overall idea of what is "right, just and legal" that we need to seperate from our feelings of revenge in those issues.

This does not mean that I would not hunt the ETA member that blew one of my family to the other side down personally, but I would be well aware of the consequences and be simply breaking the law.

Rattler


So, you're saying it's against your beliefs that the government should not kill someone after a judicial trial and due process but in a fit of revenge it's okay for you to do it?

That makes no sense.

Good Hunting.

MR
Logged
Rattler
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

Germany

Location: Med Island
Posts: 2268




View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: 19 November 2009, 19:54:55 »
ReplyReply

And, call me stupid, I would say the same if the victim was one of my tribe, I belive in an overall idea of what is "right, just and legal" that we need to seperate from our feelings of revenge in those issues.

This does not mean that I would not hunt the ETA member that blew one of my family to the other side down personally, but I would be well aware of the consequences and be simply breaking the law.

Rattler


So, you're saying it's against your beliefs that the government should not kill someone after a judicial trial and due process but in a fit of revenge it's okay for you to do it?

That makes no sense.


From my POV it does: I am human and *have* feelings of revenge (or not) that might trigger actions that stem from them. I am not saying (and was not if you read it again) that "that is ok". I just cannot exclude such a possiblity neither for me nor for any person, however wrong this might be, it would be understandable to some point (and then the avenger would have to face a trial for murder, and rightly so).

For a state/government this excuse does not apply, not even after a formally correct trial.

Rattler
Logged

"War does not determine who is right, war determines who is left...": The Rattler Way Of Life (thanks! to Solideo)... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9v3Vyr5o2Q
FACman
WaT Supporter

*

Offline Offline

United States

Location: Ar-kansas
Posts: 819




View Profile
« Reply #31 on: 19 November 2009, 23:28:58 »
ReplyReply

Quote
So, you're saying it's against your beliefs that the government should not kill someone after a judicial trial and due process but in a fit of revenge it's okay for you to do it?


You are correct, it makes no sense, but then again, the human mind is a frail instrument at times and the psychological pressures upon it can be enormous. I have been over the edge and know its power, and its insanity. To this very day it scares the hell out of me and may be one of the greatest contributors to my PTSD. I think of it every day, yet I have no understanding, nor can I rationalize the resultant behaviors. Suffice to say it is torturous.
Logged

"You can call me by my first name...Sarge."
Koen
Poster

****

Offline Offline

Belgium

Location: Belgium
Posts: 4247




View Profile
« Reply #32 on: 24 November 2009, 21:29:26 »
ReplyReply

http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=anwar_al_aulaqi

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/17/nidal-hasan-anwar-aulaqi-extremism

Quote
It is now clear US army major Nidal Hasan had a series of connections to the Islamist cleric, Anwar al-Aulaqi. For those of us who have studied, with increasing concern, the extreme teachings of this cleric, this tragedy is the inevitable consequence of unchecked Islamist radicalisation. This situation has been made all the more distressing by the apparent lack of concern shown by the US intelligence and military authorities in taking Aulaqi's influence seriously. I fear that, in the United Kingdom, the authorities are similarly turning a blind eye to Aulaqi's followers.

Inayat Bunglawala is right to say that most Islamic scholars, particularly in Britain, are opponents of the extremist fighting talk that is replete in Aulaqi's sermons. Even within political Islam, Aulaqi's teachings fall into the most extreme, al-Qaida-aligned territory. What should concern us most, however, is this: Aulaqi has a huge internet following among Muslims, all over the world. His sermons, delivered in word perfect English and Arabic, are downloaded and shared by vast numbers of people in the Middle East and in the west.

Most disturbingly of all, Aulaqi has been actively promoted by some of the United Kingdom's most prominent Islamist organisations. Bunglawala's description of Aulaqi's relationship with these organisations is an understatement of the seriousness of the problem. There are two points that are central to Bunglawala's discussion of Aulaqi's connections in the UK. The first is that when Islamic organisations began inviting Aulaqi to this country in the late 1990s, Aulaqi showed "no hint of his later extremism". The second, that Aulaqi only became radicalised due to the US war against Iraq in 2003, and is therefore somehow the product of western foreign policy. However, under greater scrutiny, neither of these claims stand up, even from the data available in the public domain on Aulaqi.

Aulaqi has been a supporter of violent jihad from early on, with links to al-Qaida and recruiters for the Taliban stretching back to the late 1990s. According to Charles E Allen, the US under-secretary for intelligence and analysis and chief intelligence officer, Aulaqi is the former spiritual leader to three of the 9/11 hijackers. He was also identified by the 9/11 Commission report as having provided advice to two of the 9/11 hijackers. Bunglawala refers to an interview with Aulaqi in the National Geographic from 2001, in which Aulaqi's responses appear reasonable and moderate. But in a contemporary interview with IslamOnline, the website founded by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, he suggested that the 9/11 attacks may have been carried out by Mossad.

But it is what happened from 2002 onwards that is more important in the UK context. Since that date, Aulaqi has been invited to speak in person, or via video link-up, by a large number of private Muslim organisations, university Islamic societies and registered charities that have benefited from government funding. Some of these speeches have been very politically extreme. Since then, a host of organisations and individuals who operate within the Islamist landscape in this country who have, at one point or another, praised or defended Aulaqi.

I have posted a timeline of British Islamic support for Aulaqi on the Spittoon blog. In June 2003, the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), organised a series of meetings with Aulaqi as guest speaker. Later that year, at an event held at the East London Mosque (ELM) in December, Aulaqi addressed Muslims on the subject of terrorism arrests in the UK and urged them to never report on or turn over their fellow Muslims, under any circumstances. Two months prior, in October 2003, the Islamic Forum Europe (IFE), an organisation closely associated with the ELM, invited Aulaqi to speak at its Expoislamia event.

In January 2009, ELM hired out its premises for an event, entitled The End of Time, with Aulaqi this time as delivering a video message. In spite of the fact that Aulaqi's "presence" at the event was reported in the national press, ELM did not cancel the meeting, insisting it had simply rented out its hall for the event.

This summer, the Cordoba Foundation sponsored an event in the Kensington and Chelsea town hall called Beyond Guantánamo, which was to feature an online video address by Aulaqi. That event was organised by an organisation called Cageprisoners, a successor organisation to Stop Political Terror, which also campaigns for Muslims who have been detained or imprisoned. The Cageprisoners website contains an extensive and friendly interview between Aulaqi and Moazzam Begg, one of its directors and a former Guantánamo detainee.

As late as 2005, Bunglawala and Aulaqi were both listed as supporters of Stop Political Terror. Many of those supporters were vocally defending Aulaqi until last week, and defaming those concerned about this man as Muslim-haters or self-loathing Muslims. Some are now arguing that Aulaqi only recently became a jihadist. This is simply not correct.

Although I believe the leadership of the Aulaqi-supporting organisations cannot have mistaken him for a moderate, the same does not necessarily hold true for their rank and file. Ordinary Muslims, turning up at events at which Aulaqi was promoted, may well have taken on trust the assertion that he is a religious authority with prodigious qualifications and a sincere and important message. It is these ordinary members who have been imperilled, by being exposed to jihadi theology in its purest form. They have been betrayed by their leadership.

Logged
Pages:  1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Unique Hits: 22461151 | Sitemap
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page 15 June 2018, 16:46:10