Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )



Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> U.S. Army: 7 Dead, 20 Wounded In Ft. Hood Shooting, Breaking News
Bookmark and Share
MacEoghainn 
Posted: 01-Jan-2010, 05:53 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Fear-leanmhainn an Rìgh
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,949
Joined: 18-Jan-2004
ZodiacHazel

Realm: Cape Coral, Florida, USA, Planet Earth

male





QUOTE (Patch @ 01-Jan-2010, 05:20 PM)
It sounds to me like someone is trying to "fabricate" a story! When under oath one has to make sure all are on the same page! If a member of my family had done such a dastardly deed, the only contact I would want would be to witness the execution.

Slàinte,    

Patch    

Unless the "family member" is a co-conspirator or the defense attorney is trying to coach them on their "stories" why would they need to be in the room. If he was in jail (where he belongs) I seriously doubt they would be allowed in the room (but who knows in our PC world).


--------------------
MacE
AKA
Steve Ewing

I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. Job 19:25

"Non sibi sed patriae!"

Reviresco (I grow strong again)
Clan MacEwen motto

Audaciter (Audacity)
My Ewing Family Motto
(descendants of Baron William Ewing of Glasgow, born about 1630)

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." Abraham Lincoln

"Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." from "Epitoma Rei Militaris," by Vegetius

PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 03-Jan-2010, 04:54 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male






"The guy was an American citizen. If the Bill of Rights is thrown in the trash every time its inconvenient then for what do we as a country stand? You can't arrest people then worry about their free speech rights later, because a person doesn't have a right to free speech if he's arrested for exercising it."


Well said Antwn. A necessary reminder of what we value with our freedom. There were other indications that might have triggered further scrutiny here, besides his emails to the cleric. Some of his alleged professional behavior seemed quite telling of a man in need of help, behavior that was suspicious regardless of the outcomes that occurred. I would have thought his clinical supervisor would have seen the conflict within the man and granted him a removal from duty.


--------------------
Is beannaithe iad a shantaíonn an ceartas
(Blessed are those who desire justice)
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 03-Jan-2010, 06:33 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





He is a terrorist, nothing less. In acting in such a manner, he gave up many rights he would normally have. He should be in a military prison as the hospital at this point is performing custodial care. In any prison, he would not have unlimited prisoners. He does have visiting by his family. The military just controls the terms. Were he in a civilian hospital and under police guard, I am not sure the police would even let family into the room. I am told by a police officer that they would not.

Slàinte,    

Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
MacEoghainn 
Posted: 11-Jan-2010, 11:41 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Fear-leanmhainn an Rìgh
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,949
Joined: 18-Jan-2004
ZodiacHazel

Realm: Cape Coral, Florida, USA, Planet Earth

male





QUOTE
Yet no one in Hasan's chain of command appears to have challenged his eligibility to hold a secret security clearance even though they could have because the statements raised doubt about his loyalty to the United States. Had they, Hasan's fitness to serve as an Army officer may have been called into question long before he reported to Fort Hood.



How long and how many investigations does it take to understand what kind of damage "Political Correctness" is having on our military and its ability to fight terrorism,as well as detect problems within the ranks?
PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               
Top
Antwn 
Posted: 11-Jan-2010, 04:48 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,409
Joined: 18-Apr-2005
ZodiacBirch

Realm: UDA ond o linach Cymry

male





QUOTE (Patch @ 03-Jan-2010, 06:33 AM)
He is a terrorist, nothing less. In acting in such a manner, he gave up many rights he would normally have.

So what's the difference in terms of rights and nomenclature between Hasan killing several people on a military base and the man who gunned down several people in the federal courthouse in Nevada recently? Are they both terrorists in your view, since they "acted in the same manner", or is Hasan a terrorist only because of his political and religious views and his name? Why would constitutional rights be applicable to one and not the other if they're both US citizens?

What I'm finding difficult to understand is the endless harping about the constitution when it comes to guns or other hobbies of posters who simultaneously are all in favor of denying constitutional rights to those they personally dislike. Its as though you think the constitution was written for you and rights should be dispensed and withheld according to your personal preferences. This is a highly duplicitous attitude isn't it, for one so principled?


--------------------
Yr hen Gymraeg i mi,
Hon ydyw iaith teimladau,
Ac adlais i guriadau
Fy nghalon ydyw hi
--- Mynyddog
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Jillian 
Posted: 11-Jan-2010, 07:20 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Brittany
Posts: 703
Joined: 29-Jun-2008
ZodiacOak

Realm: Pennsylvania

female





A retired colonel I work with received some information about Hassan's "transfers" over parts of his career. He said the pattern of transfers displayed a tendency to pass Hassan on to a position less damaging. Only problem is he ended up providing therapy for veterans. Veteran must often discuss very sensitive issues when processing trauma. If Dr. hassan threaten to expose them (which I believe he did), then this issue would be ground for action.

If he was voicing extremist Islamic views, then the nature of his employment should also have led to performance evaluations. I think we all know the difficulty this situation presented. It is one thing to have personal opinions regarding politics, religion, culture, etc. (as all therapists do), but when those opinions alienate the patients--performance evaluations must occur.

We all have rights for sure. But as a Christian, I am not to discuss this w/any patients unless they wish to incorporate it into their treatment. The same goes for all other religious/spiritual views. I have the right to declare my religion...on my time...not while on my employers time.

I believe there is way more to this than meets the eye.

Jillian


--------------------

"Disappointments are inevitable. Discouragement is a choice."
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 11-Jan-2010, 07:32 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





QUOTE (Jillian @ 11-Jan-2010, 08:20 PM)
A retired colonel I work with received some information about Hassan's "transfers" over parts of his career. He said the pattern of transfers displayed a tendency to pass Hassan on to a position less damaging. Only problem is he ended up providing therapy for veterans. Veteran must often discuss very sensitive issues when processing trauma. If Dr. hassan threaten to expose them (which I believe he did), then this issue would be ground for action.

If he was voicing extremist Islamic views, then the nature of his employment should also have led to performance evaluations. I think we all know the difficulty this situation presented. It is one thing to have personal opinions regarding politics, religion, culture, etc. (as all therapists do), but when those opinions alienate the patients--performance evaluations must occur.

We all have rights for sure. But as a Christian, I am not to discuss this w/any patients unless they wish to incorporate it into their treatment. The same goes for all other religious/spiritual views. I have the right to declare my religion...on my time...not while on my employers time.

I believe there is way more to this than meets the eye.

Jillian

Your last sentence captures the entire essence of this terrorist act!

Slàinte,    

Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 12-Jan-2010, 06:18 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male





It strikes me that because the previous administration chose to declare a war on "terrorism", which is a method of fighting rather than an organization to be at war with, we don't know how to easily identify the combatants. If crimes of terrorism can also be acts of war we get more confused. Current law: United States Law Code – the law that governs the entire country – contains a definition of terrorism in its requirement that Annual Country reports on Terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year. (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

(d) Definitions (2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal criminal code. 18 U.S.C. §2331[25] defines terrorism 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…."

But whether he fits these definitions or not, he still has rights of trial. In his case it looks like he will be tried in Military court for murder as long as he isn't deemed a terrorist. If he is deemed to be one and depending on who he is involved with, it could be decided under the authority of Bush's Military Order that the President may try him in federal court for acts of terror.

I hope it stays with the military. I think his rights as a military officer will be protected and my little brain can handle a military trial for a military man allegedly committing murder of military personnel on a military base. I realize he also allegedly killed non military personnel, but my brain starts to hurt again.

We are a country that purports to uphold the rule of law and the rights of its citizens. We have a system that would rather free wrongdoers rather than incarcerate wrongly, to protect us from lack of due process. It is what those in the military and government take an oath to protect.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
MacEoghainn 
Posted: 12-Jan-2010, 07:41 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Fear-leanmhainn an Rìgh
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,949
Joined: 18-Jan-2004
ZodiacHazel

Realm: Cape Coral, Florida, USA, Planet Earth

male





Because Major Hasan is active duty military he and his actions fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

In addition to any murder or attempted murder charges I think he should have also been charged under the following articles:

Article 81—Conspiracy

Article 94—Mutiny and sedition

Article 104—Aiding the enemy

Article 106—Spies


I suspect the continued Political Correctness in the military and the current administration will prevent any charges based on any of those articles.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 13-Jan-2010, 02:18 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male





Good information MacE. I think there is still a chance for more charges pending further investigation. I did see that Bush's Military Order only applies to non citizens, so that won't be the issue I thought is was in my previous post.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 13-Jan-2010, 02:40 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





In my opinion, the Major, as a member of the military and having committed acts of murder/terrorism on a military base should be held in a military prison hospital under the rules of the UMCJ. When you sign your contract with the military you agree to submit to the rules (laws) as set forth by the UCMJ. His attorney wants those waived. I question whether additional charges will be brought at this late date. However with the number of counts of murder lodged against him he should certainly be executed. There are plenty of witnesses to the crime and forensics tracing the bullets back to his firearm.

Slàinte,     

Patch    

PMEmail Poster               
Top
MacEoghainn 
Posted: 15-Jan-2010, 07:35 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Fear-leanmhainn an Rìgh
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,949
Joined: 18-Jan-2004
ZodiacHazel

Realm: Cape Coral, Florida, USA, Planet Earth

male





Officials: Pentagon report faults Hasan's bosses

The search for scapegoats is apparently complete and the guilty have been determined. Naturally Army Brass, Army policies, and political correctness could have had nothing to do with this incident. unsure.gif rolleyes.gif
PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 15-Jan-2010, 08:11 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





I guess with this administration this should not come as a shock. None of the top brass today accepts any responsibility even though they set the policy. I should add that this is not a problem that came into being in the last year.

Slàinte,    

Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Jillian 
Posted: 15-Jan-2010, 08:29 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Brittany
Posts: 703
Joined: 29-Jun-2008
ZodiacOak

Realm: Pennsylvania

female





QUOTE
(d) Definitions (2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal criminal code. 18 U.S.C. §2331[25] defines terrorism 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…."

wdorholt


With all the talk about whether to profile or not to profile, I began thinking about other examples of terrorism. The Kansas minister Fred Phelps (who goes around protesting funerals of gays, political people, Irish, Jew, etc), delicately seems to balance on the verge of the above definition of terrorism. Personally I believe the man to be a terrorist. Phelps avers it is his 1st amendment right.

So when do one's political or religious views actually become terroristically threatening? If I'm at a friend's funeral who happens to be gay, and this guy shows up with his minions to protest, I would be fearful (due to the fact that I believe he is an unstable nut) that harm may come to me. How am I protected by law?

Another example is the violence errupting from anti-abortion groups or retaliations by pro-abortion groups. I feel they are terrorists as well because they threaten the freedoms of this country. McVey = terrorist.

Where do we draw the line? I think we can profile terrorists. If they happen to be Euro-American like Fred Phelps--so be it. If they happen to be mideastern like Hasan--so be it. But we really do need the discourse to flesh out some firm boundaries. It is the world we now live in.

Jillian

PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 15-Jan-2010, 11:18 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





QUOTE (Jillian @ 15-Jan-2010, 09:29 AM)


With all the talk about whether to profile or not to profile, I began thinking about other examples of terrorism. The Kansas minister Fred Phelps (who goes around protesting funerals of gays, political people, Irish, Jew, etc), delicately seems to balance on the verge of the above definition of terrorism. Personally I believe the man to be a terrorist. Phelps avers it is his 1st amendment right.

So when do one's political or religious views actually become terroristically threatening? If I'm at a friend's funeral who happens to be gay, and this guy shows up with his minions to protest, I would be fearful (due to the fact that I believe he is an unstable nut) that harm may come to me. How am I protected by law?

Another example is the violence errupting from anti-abortion groups or retaliations by pro-abortion groups. I feel they are terrorists as well because they threaten the freedoms of this country. McVey = terrorist.

Where do we draw the line? I think we can profile terrorists. If they happen to be Euro-American like Fred Phelps--so be it. If they happen to be mideastern like Hasan--so be it. But we really do need the discourse to flesh out some firm boundaries. It is the world we now live in.

Jillian

Your first paragraph describes first amendment rights. I do not like the guy but he has rights.

The second paragraph describes your discomfort with the man which though real is not something the Constitution or the govt protects you from.

McVey was a "domestic" terrorist. He acted.

We have the Constitution and the Patriot act, which it's self may be unconstitutional and which the govt only uses as it sees fit. Our govt has the tools to deal with terrorists and had them through most if not all of our wars. Giving up more freedoms to a govt that can and will not use the tools it has gains nothing. Not only do we loose even more safety but the legal ability to defend ourselves in lieu of any help from the govt.

I do not believe that this administration will ever take any "real" action that would single out the possible terrorists if it involves politically incorrect actions. PC will be foremost.

Israel with the best security in the world and Russia with it's web of secret police can not stop terrorist attacks so we should not expect much here. We are using our security/spy satellites in part to watch icebergs melt. That should indicate the priority this administration puts on our safety!

Slàinte,   

 Patch    

PMEmail Poster               
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 








Celtic RadioTM broadcasts through Live365.com and StreamLicensing.com which are officially licensed under SoundExchange, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SOCAN.
©2014 Celtic Radio Network, Highlander Radio, Celtic Moon, Celtic Dance, Ye O' Celtic Pub and Celt-Rock-Radio.
All rights and trademarks reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.
Celtic Graphics ©2014, Cari Buziak


Link to CelticRadio.net!
Link to CelticRadio.net
View Broadcast Status and Statistics!

Best Viewed With IE 8.0 (1680 x 1050 Resolution), Javascript & Cookies Enabled.


[Home] [Top]

Celtic Hearts Gallery | Celtic Mates Dating | My Celtic Friends | Celtic Music Radio | Family Heraldry | Medival Kingdom | Top Celtic Sites | Web Celt Blog | Video Celt