Tweet
Separation of Church and State mother fucker. No lethal injection. Firing squad. All with .50 cal's from whatever distance is most lethal.
-
"Any dog under 50lbs is a cat and cats are pointless." - Ron Swanson -
With a .50 all distances within eyesight are lethal. Don't kill him. Put him in general populationOriginally posted by jdgregory84 View PostI wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
he can eat his cock meat sandwich. every day for life!sigpic🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄
Without my gun hobby. I would cut off my own dick and let the rats eat it...
🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄Comment
-
Maj. Nidal Hasan appears to be stoically slouching toward martyrdom at his court-martial – instead of using the trial as a soapbox to spout jihadist ideology, as have others in a similar position.
Inside a heavily fortified compound at Fort Hood, Texas, a court-martial expected to take months is moving quickly ahead of schedule. The Army psychiatrist, accused of murdering 13 fellow soldiers and injuring more than 30 in an attack on Nov. 5, 2009, has remained cool, collected, and businesslike, even amid riveting and horrific testimony.
To be sure, he could still let loose invective on the courtroom, particularly during closing arguments, terror law experts say. But the bald, bearded Hasan, who is representing himself, has already suggested that he is basically on board with the prosecution’s plan to convict him and sentence him to death: He told the Army after his arrest, according to a report released this week, that he “would still be a martyr” even if the Army executes him.
It has become a core mystery of the court-martial: Is that tactic, in fact, a piece of brilliant reverse psychology doubling as a defense strategy – in other words, will the military jury be inclined to grant Hasan his death wish or instead spitefully order him to the prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., for the rest of his life?
So far, the trial has been packed with barely contained emotion as more than 60 witnesses have recounted the attack, often in graphic terms. Hasan, however, has remained unfazed, raising few objections and declining to cross-examine the victims.
Despite an absence of demagoguery, the taut proceedings, terror law experts say, are still giving Americans a valuable glimpse into the mind of a self-described American jihadist, for whom Western norms of justice appear meaningless.
Want your top political issues explained? Get customized DC Decoder updates.
“The fact is, he has used this trial as a platform, even though he hasn’t done any ranting and raving,” says Jeffrey Addicott, director of the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary’s University in San Antonio. “Instead, this guy is very cool, very methodical, very collected and rational. He’s not playing mind games. He wants a martyr’s death, and the only [thing] that’s important in his mind is, how does Allah view what I’m doing? His audience is Allah; it’s not any one person.”
On Wednesday, Hasan told the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, that he authorized the release of a psychological report from 2010 where he makes the comment about an Army execution equaling martyrdom.
Military prosecutors have painted Hasan as a jihadi extremist, while the Pentagon has classified the attack as an act of workplace violence. (According to one Pentagon memo, the classification is geared to protect victims, since a government portrayal of Hasan as a terrorist before a trial could be grounds for appeal.)
President Obama this spring acknowledged that Hasan may have been inspired by jihad, but his administration has stopped short of calling him an Islamic terrorist.
Hasan, terror law experts note, has chosen not to pursue defense strategies around what might have caused him to snap at work. Nor has he used his background as a psychiatrist to paint himself as a mentally unstable soldier.
Instead, the Virginia-born Hasan has explained in plain language his reasoning: He “switched sides” and launched the attack to preemptively protect Islamic soldiers in Afghanistan, where many of the soldiers he killed and wounded were set to deploy.
“We’ve got to understand who the enemy is and what motivates him, which is something most of our political leaders refuse to do,” Mr. Addicott says. “At least this trial is an opportunity for [one terrorist] to tell us who he is – a jihadist who doesn’t care about the rule of law and Western concepts of life and freedom, which are hateful to him.”
Paralyzed and in a wheelchair after getting shot during the attack, Hasan has listened to victims recount the death of a pregnant soldier, as well as the last words of a lieutenant colonel, who told rescuers to try to save others.
Occasionally, Hasan takes notes, write Nomaan Merchant and Paul Weber of the Associated Press, who are part of a small press contingent allowed to witness the trial.
I wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
They failed with Zimmerman...Originally posted by Dave586 View Post"Self-government won't work without self-discipline." - Paul HarveyComment
-
"Work-place violence" is a bitch.Comment
-
The victims and survivors of the November 2009 Fort Hood massacre filed a lawsuit against federal and Pentagon officials because they believe the shooting was preventable. The New York Times received two emails sent by the accused shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, sent prior to his attack and provides additional evidence suggesting the Army missed many opportunities to investigate him before the rampage.
Hasan, a military psychiatrist, emailed his supervisors 13 days before the attack about three cases he found disturbing. Hasan requested the release of the emails to the Times through his lawyer, John P. Galligan. The Times reports:
In one case, a soldier reported to him that American troops had poured 50 gallons of fuel into the Iraqi water supply as revenge; the second case involved another soldier who told him about a mercy killing of a severely injured insurgent by medics; and in the third, a soldier spoke of killing an Iraqi woman because he was following orders to shoot anything that approached a specific site.
Hasan's superiors never followed up on those communications. Hasan said he opened fire on soldiers on November 9, 2009, to protect Muslims and members of the Taliban from American troops. The NYT provided more examples when the Army could have stopped Hasan:
In 2007, when Major Hasan was a resident in the psychiatric program at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, the academic presentation he made that was required for graduation – known as his grand rounds presentation – stated that a risk of having Muslim Americans in the military was the possibility that they would murder their fellow troops.
He had also asked a supervisor at Walter Reed whether he qualified for conscientious objector status, told classmates during a fellowship that his religion took precedence over the Constitution and in an academic paper defended Osama bin Laden.
Soon after making the grand rounds presentation in 2007, Major Hasan made another presentation in which he argued that the United States’ war on terrorism was a war on Islam, and the class was so offended that the instructor stopped him before he finished. Despite those episodes, Major Hasan was promoted from captain to major in May 2009 and assigned to Fort Hood that July, and his officer evaluation reports referred to him as a star officer.
Judge Col. Tara Osborn threw out this evidence in Hasan's military trial, including the emails he exchanged with Anwar al-Awlaki. In February 2011, The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee released their report “A Ticking Timebomb: Counterterrorism Lessons from the U.S. Government’s Failure to Prevent the Fort Hood Attack” and found government officials had plenty of information to stop Hasan. However, Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) were disappointed the report did not state the root cause of the attack, which they argued was violent Islamist extremism.
The prosecution rested their case against Hasan on Tuesday afternoon; the defense is expected to present their case on Wednesday.I wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
Lawyers representing the family members of those killed and injured in the Ft. Hood shooting rampage were outraged today when an Army judge limited prosecutors from introducing evidence, including emails to a known Al Qaeda operative, that would establish accused shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan's "jihadi" motives.
The judge's rulings could inhibit the ability of the victims' families to claim in a civil suit that the shootings were an act of terror. Federal lawyers involved in the civil suit claim that the people shot during Hasan's murderous rage were victims of workplace violence, a designation that could sharply limit the damages in a civil suit.
"This is first degree mass murder case and motive is absolutely relevant to prove premeditation," said Neal Sher, a lawyer representing many of the victims and their family members in a separate civil suit against the government.
Prosecutors have sought to portray Hasan as a Muslim extremist, motivated by Islamist ideology and in touch with known al Qaeda member Anwar Alwaki.
"He didn't want to deploy and he came to believe he had a jihad duty to murder soldiers," lead prosecutor Col. Steve Henricks said in his opening statements. He wanted to "kill as many soldiers as he could."
The judge, Col. Tara Osborn, ruled today that prosecutors could not mention Hasan's correspondence with Alwaki, an American born al Qaeda recruiter and organizer. Osborn also barred prosecutors from mentioning Hassan's interest in seeking conscientious objector status and drawing parallels to a 2003 incident in which another Muslim American soldier attacked U.S. troops in Kuwait, according to the Associated Press.
The judge found much of that evidence was too old, but permitted prosecutors to introduce evidence about Hasan's internet usage and search history from the time of the attack.
Many of the victims and their family members have filed a civil suit against the government, arguing that the attack should be classified as a terrorist attack, allowing victims to receive combat medals, like the Purple Heart, and receive better benefits.
The government maintains that the attack was an incidence of "workplace violence."
"The government is talking from both sides of its mouth," Sher said to describe the Pentagon's decision on the one hand to deny that the attack was an act of terror, while having prosecutors argue that Hasan was motivated by "jihad," or Muslim holy war.
"Our view is pretty basic: It's obvious that the government knew he had jihadist leanings years before the attack," Sher said.
Hasan, who is representing himself, previously called himself a "mujahedeen" or Muslim holy warrior and said he had switched sides in the war between the U.S. and Islamic terrorism.
Prosecutors said on Friday they would soon be wrapping their case against Hasan, which means he may begin his defense as early as Tuesday.
If convicted, he could face the death penalty.
I wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
Thanks for the update Frost. Other than the obvious, what outcome would you like to see Frost?Comment
-
I'd like to see his commission revoked and him put in general population with the SF and Ranger guys who lost it overseas and were locked up in Leavenworth. Long prison sentence, no possibility of parole and general population would make me happyI wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
Bradley Manning and Nidal Hasan get into a fight over a fruit cocktail. Who do you want to win?Comment
-
They kill each otherI wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
Here's an idea. Let me be fucking armed even when going about my business on base. I'm not even asking for open carry let me carry my fucking concealed weapon. :/2004 Suzuki DL650
1996 Hy-Tek Hurricane 103Comment
-
So was anyone surprised when he didn't testify? I really thought he'd use the opportunity to try to drive home his position and thinking.
Asked to call the first witness for the defense and come back with Defense rests?Comment
-
Update on Hasan
He's probably thinking he will have a better chance to drive home his thoughts in closing, than himself as a witness. Although he will be limited on what can and cannot be used in closing.Originally posted by SonicblueGT03 View PostComment
Comment