You Decide:Obama Won't Call Fort Hood Suspect a Terrorist

[Deinonychus]

The Justice Department and President Obama are not calling the murders an act of terror. Why?


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/11/13/decide-terrorist-suspect-fort-hood-massacre/

[Stormlover]

These idiots(Obama and administration) won't call it a war on terror either. It's an "oversees contingency operation". Politically correct dumbasses.

[kobayashi]

The SOA on his calling card wasn't another new IBM acronym - it stood for "Soldiers of Allah"

From http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/09/nidal-hasans-calling-card-explained/

Nidal Hasan’s calling card explained
By Michelle Malkin • November 9, 2009 12:50 PM
http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/card2.jpg
“SOA” stands for Soldiers of Allah. “SWT” is a related Muslim acronym: Pamela Geller explains another red flag ignored. (http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/11/major-muslims-calling-card-soa-soldier-of-allah.html)






From http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/13/the-million-muslim-march-by-jamie-glazov/

The Million Muslim March? – by Jamie Glazov
Posted By Jamie Glazov On November 13, 2009 @ 12:30 am In FrontPage | 20 Comments (http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/13/the-million-muslim-march-by-jamie-glazov/print/#comments_controls)


http://frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/march.jpg
On yesterday’s O’Reilly Factor, O’Reilly had a profound discussion about the Fort Hood massacre with Bernie Goldberg, author of the new book, A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media (http://www.amazon.com/dp/1596980907?tag=bernardgoldbe-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1596980907&adid=0HPSYBEZHA2PMFAPKXE5&) [1]. Goldberg is always superb and this time he narrowed in wisely on the pathologies that the Fort Hood massacre has exposed: the political correctness nurtured by the Left in our society and the disinclination of so-called “moderate” Muslims to stand up in mass numbers and denounce the likes of Nidal Malik Hasan.
In making his point, Goldberg shrewdly asked when we are going to see a Million Muslim March take place in Washington – in which a million Muslims gather to denounce terror and declare that what Nidal Malik Hasan did was un-Islamic.
Goldberg’s point is crucial, but we need to add to it. The key that is often missed in our nation’s discussion on Islamic terrorism is that this is not necessarily about Muslims themselves. As the scholar Robert Spencer (http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/07/the-complete-infidels-guide-to-the-koran-by-jamie-glazov/)[2]has stressed over and over again, the problem is not Muslims, the problem is Islam – in the sense that the problem is what Islam teaches. So the crucial issue in all of this is not what this Muslim may think or that Muslim may think. It’s not about these empty arguments about whether the majority or minority of Muslims are peaceful or not.The issue is what Islamic theology mandates.
And so the crux of the issue is this: if Islam is really a Religion of Peace and if the majority of Muslims really do support peace and reject violence, then when are they going to rise up in majority numbers and denounce the teachings within Islam that inspire and sanction the terrorism that Islamic terrorists engage in? When will they renounce the verses and teachings that Islamic terrorists point to and quote in justifying and explaining their violence?
So here is an idea. Thank you Bernie Goldberg, there does need to be a Million Muslim March. And if Islam is a Religion of Peace, then in this Million Muslim March the million Muslims who gather can demonstrate it by categorically doing the following:

[1] Repudiate Sura 9:29 of the Qur’an, which commands Muslims to fight Jews and Christians (“the People of the Book”) until they “pay the jizya [a non-Muslim poll tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

The teaching is that, if they refuse to pay the jizya, Jews and Christians should be killed. Are Muslims ready to join the Million Muslim March and reject this as un-Islamic? Are they ready to completely negate Islamic law when it comes to the teaching of the necessity to subjugate Jews and Christians?

[2] Collectively agree that a woman has a right to engage in a love life she chooses without having to fear for her life.

In other words, to accept that women have the right to self-determination, including in the sexual realm, and that their lives must not be at stake in this matter. This reality is in many respects, and on many realms, at the heart of our terror war, as jihad is very much inspired by the impulse to keep women enslaved (http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=852) [3] under a system of gender apartheid. As Wafa Sultan, Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Brigitte Gabriel, Phyllis Chesler and others can tell you, jihadists are infuriated by women’s freedom in the West and see this as a grave threat to their misogynistic systems of totalitarian Puritanism.
If Muslims at the Million Muslim March cannot agree on this principle of women having the right to be free, then they are in the end legitimizing violence against women and declaring Islamic ideology to be incompatible with the democratic system in which they live. And this reality, of course, explains why honor killings are perpetrated by Muslims throughout the world and why they are on a skyrocketing increase in America and in the West.
[3] Reject the Islamic doctrine on apostasy, which holds that a Muslim has to be killed if he changes his religion.

[4] Reject the Islamic doctrine that Muslims are obligated to turn the whole world into committed Muslims, by force and jihad if necessary.

In other words, the Muslims who arrive at the Million Muslim March can prove their religion is one of peace by repudiating all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence that teach that it is part of the responsibility of the umma to subjugate the non-Muslim world through jihad.

[5] State that Christians and other non-Muslim religions can freely proselytize in a Muslim land or community and remain unharmed.
[6] Reject the Qur’an’s description of Jews being apes and pigs. (Suras 2: 62-65, 5:59-60, 7:166)
These are the first six ideas for the Million Muslim March. There are, of course, many more. Perhaps various scholars of Islam, like Robert Spencer, will be invited to contribute more ideas by the organizers of the Million Muslim March. But I have a feeling all of this will not happen, just as I have a feeling that the six suggestions I have made, and the facts that are contained within them, will not be ingredients for discussion in our media, especially among those who are vehemently denying that the Fort Hood massacre has anything to do with Islam, jihad or Islamic terror.

[Deinonychus]

ISLAM go to hell...........

[kobayashi]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz111109dAPR20091111021053.jpg

[Wounded Bird]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. It must be a duck.

[kobayashi]

http://www.tobytoons.com/td/files/toons/2009/color_hood.jpg

[kobayashi]

Pamela Gellar at http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/12/public-school-second-graders-sing-about-allah.html

[Windwatcher]

Definition of Terrorism under U.S. Law
.United States Law Code – the law that governs the entire country – contains a definition of terrorism embedded 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
As used in this section—
(1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;
(3) the term “terrorist group” means any group, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism;
(4) the terms “territory” and “territory of the country” mean the land, waters, and airspace of the country; and
(5) the terms “terrorist sanctuary” and “sanctuary” mean an area in the territory of the country—
(A) that is used by a terrorist or terrorist organization—
(i) to carry out terrorist activities, including training, fundraising, financing, and recruitment; or
(ii) as a transit point; and
(B) the government of which expressly consents to, or with knowledge, allows, tolerates, or disregards such use of its territory and is not subject to a determination under—
(i) section 2405(j)(1)(A) of the Appendix to title 50;
(ii) section 2371 (a) of this title; or
(iii) section 2780 (d) of this title.
Prev
1
The Many Definitions of Terrorism
2
League of Nations Convention Definition of Terrorism, 1937
3
Terrorism Defined through Multilateral Conventions
4
U.S. Department of Defense Definition of Terrorism