PDA

View Full Version : White House BLocking Investigation of Fort Hood Terrorist Attack



GrumpyOldLady
11-11-2009, 05:49 AM
Story Here (http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/hoekstra_obama_fort_hood/2009/11/10/284539.html)


Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the top Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, tells Newsmax that the White House intervened to keep him from obtaining critical information regarding the Fort Hood murders.

The Michigan legislator also warned that "homegrown jihadism" is a real threat to the U.S., and said a thorough investigation of Major Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of the Fort Hood massacre, would help authorities learn how to deal with it.

Rep. Hoekstra charged in a statement on Monday that the Obama administration was withholding information and demanded that the Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency and the Director of National Intelligence preserve documents relating to the incident for use in any future investigation


More at the site.


So Obama refuses to call this what it is .... TERRORISM.
Now he's blocking the investigation.
Gee ... wonder why.
I'm thinking that those folks who have been calling him a secret muslim are right.

malloc
11-11-2009, 06:25 AM
Story Here (http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/hoekstra_obama_fort_hood/2009/11/10/284539.html)



More at the site.


So Obama refuses to call this what it is .... TERRORISM.
Now he's blocking the investigation.
Gee ... wonder why.
I'm thinking that those folks who have been calling him a secret muslim are right.


Of course Obama isn't calling it terrorism. I wouldn't either in his shoes. If this tragedy turns out to be terrorism, that would mean that it happened on Obama's watch, and that's a big problem for the administration.

On the other hand I have a big problem with a bunch of politicians jumping into Army business in order to find an angle on each other, and develop talking points. Neither the House nor the Senate has any business pretending to know the facts at this point, and it is the job of the Commander in Chief to make sure a fair investigation is conducted without political involvement or bias. If that means blocking the congress, who aren't the investigators, than so be it. The congress isn't the FBI or CIA, they are politicians. The investigators are the Army's CID unit. The congress, however, has the power to appoint an independent investigative body, but they can't pretend to be investigators themselves.

Here's what needs to happen:

1.) Civilian government has to back off and quit speculating on 'emerging facts' and the latest buzz.
2.) The Army should move forward with it's investigation.
3.) Civilian government should convene and implement an independent investigation to collate or discount the Army's facts with civilian intelligence agencies and sources.
4.) A court martial or military tribunal should decide, based on the facts in evidence, whether or not this is terrorism.
5.) The President and Congress should stand behind the outcome.


The law is the law, and it should apply to every case and everyone. Emotionally or politically charged opinions should never be a factor.

Big Guy
11-11-2009, 07:31 AM
Of course Obama isn't calling it terrorism. I wouldn't either in his shoes. If this tragedy turns out to be terrorism, that would mean that it happened on Obama's watch, and that's a big problem for the administration.

On the other hand I have a big problem with a bunch of politicians jumping into Army business in order to find an angle on each other, and develop talking points. Neither the House nor the Senate has any business pretending to know the facts at this point, and it is the job of the Commander in Chief to make sure a fair investigation is conducted without political involvement or bias. If that means blocking the congress, who aren't the investigators, than so be it. The congress isn't the FBI or CIA, they are politicians. The investigators are the Army's CID unit. The congress, however, has the power to appoint an independent investigative body, but they can't pretend to be investigators themselves.

Here's what needs to happen:

1.) Civilian government has to back off and quit speculating on 'emerging facts' and the latest buzz.
2.) The Army should move forward with it's investigation.
3.) Civilian government should convene and implement an independent investigation to collate or discount the Army's facts with civilian intelligence agencies and sources.
4.) A court martial or military tribunal should decide, based on the facts in evidence, whether or not this is terrorism.
5.) The President and Congress should stand behind the outcome.


The law is the law, and it should apply to every case and everyone. Emotionally or politically charged opinions should never be a factor.

You are right on, the politicians need to stop trying to be cops and let the cops do what they do without butting in.

AmPat
11-11-2009, 11:49 AM
You are right on, the politicians need to stop trying to be cops and let the cops do what they do without butting in.Especially when they can't get it right in obvious cases. They screwed up the JFK investigation, twice. They butchered the 9-11 investigation and then failed to use the parts that were correct due to hyper-partisanship. They disregarded the findings of the world trade center bombings allowing the information to go public which led to the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

An investigation should have a purpose.

stsinner
11-11-2009, 11:55 AM
You are right on, the politicians need to stop trying to be cops and let the cops do what they do without butting in.

I don't think he's right on at all.. He's right that the government should butt the hell out of Army business, but only a food would say that we need to determine if this is terrorism.. It was murder done to Americans by an Islamist in Allah's name.. That's terrorism.. Hasan contacted a terrorist recruiter several time via email..

AmPat
11-11-2009, 11:57 AM
I don't think he's right on at all.. He's right that the government should butt the hell out of Army business, but only a food would say that we need to determine if this is terrorism.. It was murder done to Americans by an Islamist in Allah's name.. That's terrorism.. Hasan contacted a terrorist recruiter several time via email..

That right there is some funny stuff.:D

malloc
11-13-2009, 03:12 AM
I don't think he's right on at all.. He's right that the government should butt the hell out of Army business, but only a food would say that we need to determine if this is terrorism.. It was murder done to Americans by an Islamist in Allah's name.. That's terrorism.. Hasan contacted a terrorist recruiter several time via email..



Generally, foods don't have much to say....

However, if a food could speak in this forum, than this food would advise you to wait. The food would advise you to circle the wagons, assemble the facts, and present the facts to the American people as a complete logical block. Not a whit of sound byte here and there which only serves to confuse the independent base.

Think about this. If this Army base massacre were to become a terrorist attack, than Obama's administration just stretched their own rope and tied their own noose. Obama let this attack (as it were) happen on his watch, and he took no decisive action in the aftermath. However, if you (not me) republicans jump to the 'terrorist' angle, if you choose to call terrorism before the CID reports back, before a congressional investigation is kicked off, than you just lost the fight. (Just youtube terrorism republicans) You politicized the whole ordeal and brought the possibility of doubt for media spin.

Imagine this scenario. Imagine if Republicans call for zero interference in the U.S. Army's C.I.D. investigation. Imagine if House and Senate Republicans call for an independent investigator to "double check" the Army's findings. The democrat's can't block! They'd be rightly seen as denying justice to those who need it. Next imagine if Republicans decide to wait for facts while democrats spout off bullshit.

As conservatives, we know we should be playing chess in a world of checkers. If we hold, and gather all the facts about this single incident, and insist on the truth, I'm confident that the truth about this incident will be more than the Obama regime can handle. We don't need to suffer the losses of politicizing this. The democrats are doing that on their own. We need more republican leaders advising caution and clear rationale. We need more moderate, lawlerly voices and not so much radicalized.

We need republicans to say, "We have processes for this kind of thing, and I'll wait until these processes return before I make a decision.

That will force the democrats to try to spin the inevitable conclusion that this guy actually did have ties to terrorist cells.

I'm just saying, don't meet radicalism with radicalism, in that case only the most radical can win. Meet radicalism with level headed constitutional law. The clearest thinker wins on the common sense ground, and that's still enough to win an election.