:thumb: I agree on both points.

 

Bottom line, it is premeditated murder of innocent people by a bunch of low life punk-faces. Loose screw or not.

 

It is obvious the President and others are going out of there way not to call it terrorism, but it is as equally obvious a lot of those on the other side of the fence are using this tragedy to politicize.

 

It's a lot more than just premeditated murder. I think causing fear is a big part of it as well.

 

And I don't see a problem with the President agreeing with the FBI at this point. I wouldn't contradict what they say either. I'd let them do their jobs.

I guess my question is, why does it matter?

 

Why does anything matter? It's a good discussion on a very important topic, that's why it matters.

I think it's best for him to leave that decision up to the responsible agency. Why would he say differently than the FBI?

As Commander in Chief, wouldn't this fall under the category of one of his responsibilities?

As Commander in Chief, wouldn't this fall under the category of one of his responsibilities?

 

I do not think it is his responsibility to make the decision as to whether something is or is not a terroristic act. That should be left up to those who perform the investigations. In this case, the FBI, right?

Why does anything matter? It's a good discussion on a very important topic, that's why it matters.

 

Umm, ok. Murder is murder, why does what we call it matter?

Umm, ok. Murder is murder, why does what we call it matter?

 

Terrorism and murder are two very different things.

 

A terroristic act could involve murder, but they are still two separate things.

I do not think it is his responsibility to make the decision as to whether something is or is not a terroristic act. That should be left up to those who perform the investigations. In this case, the FBI, right?

I disagree. I do not view what happened as a crime. I view it as an ongoing War between radical islam and the United States. Anyone who can not see that should remove thier head from the sand.

I disagree. I do not view what happened as a crime. I view it as an ongoing War between radical islam and the United States. Anyone who can not see that should remove thier head from the sand.

 

How in the world could this not be a crime?

How in the world could this not be a crime?

As i stated previously, it is an act of War as far as i'm concerned. Do you think enemy combatants should recieve due process, Miranda rights, trials, etc.....

As i stated previously, it is an act of War as far as i'm concerned. Do you think enemy combatants should recieve due process, Miranda rights, trials, etc.....

 

It might be an act of war in your opinion, but I trust the opinions of those investigating the crime more than I do yours. And at this point they are not calling it an act of terrorism.

 

And I do think he should receive due process, miranda rights, trials etc. I also think that if/when he is convicted he should recieve the proper punishment as well. If that is the death penalty, so be it.

I disagree. I do not view what happened as a crime. I view it as an ongoing War between radical islam and the United States. Anyone who can not see that should remove thier head from the sand.

 

So is anything declared to be "an act of war" not possibly a crime as well?

 

Do we redefine: My Lai? Execution of prisoners in the Argonnes in WW II? Slaughter of Prisoners at Goliad? Andersonville?

 

Are these all now considered only "Acts of War?"

It might be an act of war in your opinion, but I trust the opinions of those investigating the crime more than I do yours. And at this point they are not calling it an act of terrorism.

 

And I do think he should receive due process, miranda rights, trials etc. I also think that if/when he is convicted he should recieve the proper punishment as well. If that is the death penalty, so be it.

As far as miranda rights,trials, etc.... I was reffering to emeny combatants that are not U.S. Citizens. Again, i ask the question. Do you think enemy combatants out in the field should recieve those rights?

As far as miranda rights,trials, etc.... I was reffering to emeny combatants that are not U.S. Citizens. Again, i ask the question. Do you think enemy combatants out in the field should recieve those rights?

 

That question is completely irrelevent to this discussion.

So is anything declared to be "an act of war" not possibly a crime as well?

 

Do we redefine: My Lai? Execution of prisoners in the Argonnes in WW II? Slaughter of Prisoners at Goliad? Andersonville?

 

Are these all now considered only "Acts of War?"

 

:thumb:

So is anything declared to be "an act of war" not possibly a crime as well?

 

Do we redefine: My Lai? Execution of prisoners in the Argonnes in WW II? Slaughter of Prisoners at Goliad? Andersonville?

 

Are these all now considered only "Acts of War?"

Sorry, my knowledge of what you are talking about is very minimal. I will have to research it and get back to you with an informed opinion. Although i get the feeling you are referring to War Crimes, which i would consider differently.