Major Nidal Malik Hasan Terrorist or Treasonous

Major Nidal Malik HasanMajor Nidal Malik Hasan Terrorist or Treasonous

 

To be honest I was not shocked by this act of treason that occurred at Fort Hood, Texas.  I mean thousands of veterans from Iraq, Afghanistan and abroad as well as men who served stateside are committing suicide and coming home with problems unsolved.  Please tell me this was not racially or ethically motivated?  Tell me there were fallen African Americans and or Muslims included in this rampage by Major Hasan.  Or at least tell me the motivation had principles beyond the scope of American Main Stream Media.

 

It is my humble opinion that Major Hasan does not qualify as a terrorist.  I mean he is a legitimate American Soldier and born an American Citizen.  So we cannot have it both ways as Bloomberg made it clear we want immigrants because they are hungry.

 

See we have a short memory as to how dues were paid by certain people to have the right to be called American in this racist society.  The sacrifices of the African Americans are unparallel to any American to include the Caucasian.  They talk about hard workers but forget the contributions of the slaves in America and the oppression endured by the seeds and seeds of seeds, a family tree of systematical oppression, by a corrupt design.

 

Until this act they were quick to trade black folks in, but these people they are bringing in are not as loyal are they?  Probably the only thing between nuclear holocausts in America today is resident black people.  As America is so hated by most of the world people feel empathy for the oppressed black man, they feel sorry for our ignorance knowing we are not at fault of our own.  We were made ignorant loyalist?

 

When things like this happen the first to blame are black people, I heard they shot the big black man in friendly fire.  Do not get me wrong I am saddened by this mess and Major Hasan probably committed treason and probably deserves the firing squad.  But when we consider his profession and we approach this from an intelligence point of view as in CIA and FBI, we have to wonder what does he know?  We all know the government tends to diagnose people often based on secrecy.  Like guys were diagnosed as PTSD after Vietnam because they knew something or did something the government wanted plausible denial rights to, so they were called crazy.  As we can see from the huge suicide rate of veterans now PTSD is not necessarily based on the condition of the former warriors mind, but based on what does he know.

 

So now the real question is terrorist or treasonous, will they silence Major Hasan or will the world find out what he knows from the many war stories he was exposed to.  Then and only then we will know who are the guilty parties of the many fallen soldiers and veterans at war and after the wars abroad and stateside.  This is truly an economic war!

Advertisements
Published in: on November 9, 2009 at 6:49 pm  Comments (8)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://frankpaulgambino.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/major-nidal-malik-hasan-terrorist-or-treasonous/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

8 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. MAJ Hassan is a DOMESTIC TERRORIST under the definition in Sec. 802 of the U.S. Patriot Act. He is a TERRORIST under the definition of Texas state criminal law.

    You are confusing your own FEELINGS with facts.

    • Is not a military Post Federal? Are you confusing state law with the UCMJ?

      • I believe you are not knowledgeable regarding jurisdiction and have confused ownership with exclusive jurisdiction.

        (1) No, a military post is not necessarily federal jurisdiction. When I was a JAG officer, this is one of the areas of law that I practiced–jurisdiction of military reservations.
        You apparently are not aware of the history of Texas. Unlike other states, Texas was an independent republic; Texas upon admission to the Union retained all of its public lands, and exclusive jurisdiction over all its public lands. Only if jurisdiction has been ceded by the state of Texas to the federal government in connection with the federal government’s acquisition of land in Texas is there federal jurisdiction; and even then, the federal jurisdiction may not be exclusive.
        Most military posts were built on federal public lands–that’s why most are federal jurisdictions.
        (2) No, I am not confusing state law with the UCMJ. An action can constitute a crime under both the state law and the UCMJ, just as an action can constitute a crime under both federal and state law. As a JAG officer, I handled several cases where both state criminal law and the UCMJ applied. You might want to read the cases involving Captain Stephen J. Borys, who was tried in state court in South Carolina and then tried in military court under the UCMJ at Ft. Gordon, GA; there was no double jeopary because two separate jurisdictions’ laws applied.

      • P.S. To clarify further, it is possible that the Patriot Act, the UCMJ, and Texas criminal law all apply. Texas criminal law applies unless the state of Texas ceded exclusive jurisdiction to the U.S. over the portion of land on which the criminal activity occurred.

        I have not researched the question of jurisdiction of the portion of Ft. Hood where the actual killings occurred.

        My statement, “He is a terrorist under the definition of Texas state criminal law,” is accurate; his actions satisfy the definition. But Hasan may or may not be subject to the jurisdiction of the state criminal law.

  2. #1: Never claimed to be lawyer.
    #2: Paralegal by education perhaps.
    #3: A Veteran with problems perhaps unresolved.
    #4: We have no idea as to what happened or went wrong.
    #5: Thanks; however I was not really engaging in legal point of view. But fill me in on the question of jurisdiction, but I heard he will be charged by the military. I bet information will be suppressed.

    I ask your opinion:

    Considering his level of intelligence and clearance level probably top secret, can we be too quick to judgment?

    My point is has any investigation reports covered who got killed and injured? We know most were of uniform but they were being deployed to do what? What was his actual capacity, do you suggest a spy? Then what were their actual capacities? Maybe even covert? That is probably not the case but cannot be eliminated as a possibility.

    Either this was a crazy act, let us hope so, or there can be more to this than we are being told about. Why was that group chosen to be whacked?

    When we speak of terror within and spies and all the deep stuff the military undertakes, do we know what happened or will we ever know?

    I personally do not buy crazy doctor goes ballistic, because if there was no target, he could have done much more damage. Hell how many minds have he already screwed, I mean from psychotropic medications to old fashion hypnosis. My concern is what does he know? Do we reexamine all of his patients?

  3. If you think it is too early to judge, then why are you judging him not to be terrorist?

  4. Like I said I am not a lawyer and there may be an error in judgment. I was just under the assumption that a uniform soldier who turns on his own committed treason. I mean he pledged to the allegiance of the United States to defend our country. Whereby he is a part of the state I see a terrorist as an admitted enemy of the state. Trying him as a terrorist would be an honor and not a dishonor and perhaps make him a martyr. We do not want that! This could create copycats.

  5. His motivation, “what he knows from the many war stories he was exposed to,” is irrelevant. He violated a trust. A soldier in the U.S. Army shot other soldiers. An officer, responsible to care for and lead soldiers, did the opposite. It was murder.

    If it is found that he did so in behalf of some ideology (especially that which we are fighting) then it is treason.

    Unfortunately, the charge of treason doesn’t seem to have the same emotional reaction as the charge of being a terrorist. But for a American, born in the U.S., who embraces the anti-American ideology which we are fighting, for a soldier in the army fighting that very war, it is the right charge.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: