Viewer Response to Fort Hood "Uncut" Commentary

I've received many interesting comments regarding my "Uncut" commentary on Friday. Here are some excerpts:

• "Hasan killed people whether it is determined to be a terrorist act or not. If it is determined to be a terrorist act, what will be our (United States) response to it? Will we go and occupy another small country for years as we are doing now in Afghanistan? For what ever reason Hasan had, he is still a mass murderer and should be brought to justice. Yes, he apparently had issues against our government (remember Timothy McVey) but too much emphasis is being put on if this was terroristic act. The fact is that he killed people and he now needs to meet his fate."



• "… Another thought about this guy's actions because he did not want to be sent to fight against other Muslims is this: Why did he join the army in the first place??? There is no draft; he joined voluntarily, right?? This is not a perfect world. Even though we are supposed to treat each other with brotherly love, we don't. Having others in the army treat him with disdain should not surprise him. My gosh, the majority of the enemy are Muslims who want us dead! Of course this guy is a terrorist."



• "I saw your coverage Friday on Ft. Hood and you asked the question, will we ever know what motivated this type of person? ever since 1975, Imam Warith D. Mohammed and us have been working in every city to enlighten the people on true al-Islam and what G-d's instructions are in the Qur'an on how we are to live with our neighbors and to treat our neighbors with respect. In 1990, Imam Mohammed was asked to go to the pentagon and they asked him, if this country went to war with a Muslim country, whose side would you take. He said, the side of America, because if they bomb this country, they'll hit me and my family just like like you and your family. I am an American. ...We have been working across the country and outside this country to enlighten the world on true al-Islam and the life that Muslims have been instructed by G-d to live, and that is, people should feel safe around Muslims. When it comes to war, we have to war with another Muslim if he is a danger to society, we have to stop him. When it comes to our individual life, we're told to not let anyone break our peace. …When a soldier, born of this country, and he signs up to protect this country, that is his duty and the good book says, above all get an understanding. The soldier didn't understand that he is not fighting Islam or believing Muslims, he's fighting terrorists who call themselves Muslims who punish Muslims just like they would punish anyone else."



• "I don’t think what he did rises to the level of treason. Treason is a larger crime, one that jeopardizes the nation as a whole. Spies that give away our nuclear secrets, or how our submarines avoid detection; spies like Pollard are guilty of treason. Soldiers that overtly go to fight for the other side, as in Benedict Arnold, are treasonous. The sergeant that threw grenades into a tent in Kuwait in the first Gulf War was a murderer, but was not treasonous. Close, but not quite. Hasan was most definitely a terrorist, a mass murderer, as well as a coward. He didn’t go to the rifle range to shoot people, as they may have shot back! Instead he went to the one place there was a crowd of defenseless men and women and abruptly opened fire. That is cowardice. He had to have pre-loaded several clips of ammunition. That alone shows pre-meditation. He’s accused of thirteen, plus an unborn, counts of premeditated first-degree murder. That’s mass murder. The emotions he caused in that assembly area were nothing less than terror. That defines him as a terrorist. It is that simple. It interests me that he swore an oath “to God” ( I presume Allah to him) when he joined the Army, yet later chose to break that oath to Allah to murder in the name of Allah. There appears to be a substantial “disconnect” there."



• "Shortly after the incident at Fort Hood it was reported that Maj Hasan would be charged under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and face a Military Trial (Court Martial) due to the fact the incident occurred (sp) on a Military Post. In your uncut piece Friday your thesis was " Is Hasan a terrorist?" This may truly be the case, but not under UCMJ. There is not a specific Article for Terrorism. Knowing the Army and having worked a period of time in a Military Confinement Facility Maj Hasan will more than likely be charged with multiple Articles.
  • Art 118: Murder
  • Art 128: Assault
  • Art 133: Conduct unbecoming an Officer
  In reviewing the list of articles in the UCMJ there is not one for terrorism that i could find. Unless, as you mentioned aiding the enemy which is Art 104. By the military definition this could possibly be applicable in this case..."



• "We must face up to it, what we have at Fort Hood is not just a disgruntled soldier/doc but homeland terror. A successful one-man Al Qaeda cell infiltrating and attacking our domestic armed forces, and we better be prepared for more.
  
  What I learned from Killeen.
  
  We must stop denying it. We ARE at war with Islam. It is just too simplistic in saying it that way because there is a lot more to it. There are actually three warring factions.
  
  
  1. Most obvious is Fundamentalist Islam that wants to stamp out or subjugate all thought but theirs, even other Muslims.
  2. Next comes Fundamentalists Christians who have teamed with Fundamentalists Jews wanting the same thing (before taking on each other, of course).
  3. Finally, there are all the rest of us. The level-headed mass of rational humanity from all religions and no religions, intellectuals, progressives, people of science, who see this world as it really is. We must war too for self preservation and would be just as happy to stamp out numbers one and two.
  
  
  It is time we admitted these wars are intractable until one of these three finally triumph."



• "By all means...YES! He did a terrorist act that he obviously thought out and put a plan into action. How pathetic we are for forgetting who we are! We are suppose to be proud Americans,but sadly are becoming so neutral on everything that some view us as indecisive. Is that still considered "proud"? At least in the radical countries they all say what they mean and mean what they say. And treason?? How sad that we could even question that! He took an oath to protect and defend this country and did a terrorist act!!! How disgraceful that that the bho administration has the audacity to ask the media to not use the term! And his the very country he committed treason against will now pay for his lawyers,pathetic! And they cry foul saying he will not get a fair trial?? He should have thought about that before completing his plan of a terrorist act!"