Fort Hood shot up

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mirlyn

Well-Known Member
Shooting an abortion doctor, while reprehensible, isn't attempting to coerce or intimidate society. It's stopping one person.

Killing everybody near an abortion clinic, that is terrorism.
This story reminded me of this post.
Defiant and unapologetic, a man accused of shooting a Kansas abortion provider confessed to the slaying Monday, telling The Associated Press that he killed the doctor to protect unborn children.

...

"No, I don't have any regrets because I have been told so far at least four women have changed their minds, that I know of, and have chosen to have the baby," Roeder said. "So even if one changed her mind it would be worth it. No, I don't have any regrets."
http://www.kansas.com/news/featured/story/1047671.html
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Lets talk about the Islamo terrorist Nidal Hasan yelling Allah Akbar while striking a blow against the great Satan.

Lets discuss the largest terrorist attack on US soil since 911. Lets explore why this terrorist slipped though the cracks, who knew what and when did they know it? Lets not let the government slip this obamanation away as being an isolated incident.

Nornally, people get behind their president when something like this happens. Why didn't Obama get a a big boost of support?

site2798.jpg

I'm sorry RM, I can't allow this. Winkys old Governor & our present Homeland Security boss says we're to call them MAN MADE DISASTERS.
 

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
Yes the guy at Fort Hood was mentally ill too.

Yeah, doesn't look like he was an extremist.

I'm not defending him. Nowhere have I defended him.

Why do you keep making up shit and thinking it is real?

I guess because there's no evidence he killed for Allah. I keep it real.

Actually there's no evidence it was a terrorist attack at this point. Looks like the guy was upset about being deployed.

If he did it to coerce or intimidate society for religious or political reason it's terrorism. If he did it because he was mentally unstable and snapped over his deployment it doesn't mean he's a terrorist. That is the definition of terrorism.

Shrinks often have their own problems. Maybe because they're dealing with unstable people allt he time.

I didn't read about anyone wanting him protected.

Oh lord, your apologies and excuses trying to explain away the simple truth of the matter.
  • The terrorist psych was not markedly mentally ill.
  • He didn't suffer from PrePTSD.
  • He didn't break from reverse-transference.
  • Liberals apologetic excusers do not understand the primary criteria for PTSD is that one must live the experience to suffer from the perception.


The simplicity of the situation is quite clear. Nidal Malik Hasan was a chicken shit islamo-facist terrorist who was hell bent on killing his fellow soldiers for Islam. Allah hu Akbar!


fthood2.jpg


I hope for Nidal Malik Hasan to receive the best legal defense afforded by the USMCJ, and then may he hang.
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
You assume that one has to be marked as mentally ill before one does something drastic. If that was the case, many suicides would be avoided, many rapes, many murders etc...

Mental illness is the invisible disease, RM...you should know that.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
If he did it to coerce or intimidate society for religious or political reason it's terrorism. If he did it because he was mentally unstable and snapped over his deployment it doesn't mean he's a terrorist. That is the definition of terrorism.

But some here don't even consider trying to coerce or intimidate society for religious reasons terrorism, as we've seen with the stance over abortion doc murderers. So it gets a little fuzzy.

If he did it to coerce or intimidate society for religious or political reason it's terrorism. If he did it because he was mentally unstable and snapped over his deployment it doesn't mean he's a terrorist. That is the definition of terrorism.

The blame Obama thing is cute though.

I didn't read about anyone wanting him protected.

Blow every last one of who to hell?

So what do you think now spike...terrorist, or just mentally ill?

Should he be treated like a patient or a convict?

Do you believe in turning the other cheek, or an eye for an eye?

Should public opinion matter?
 

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
You assume that one has to be marked as mentally ill before one does something drastic. If that was the case, many suicides would be avoided, many rapes, many murders etc...

Mental illness is the invisible disease, RM...you should know that.
If someone is ill enough, to be so delusional that fear leads them to kill, it would very hard to hide in the circles he works in. You might have heard that his religious beliefs were reported a number of time to superiors. When people who are trained in diagnosis of mental illness see odd behaviors and hear odd statements they pay attention. It all builds a picture.

We are suppose to promote that exact notion to students, that you cannot see mental illness. Its a message that has been demanded by patient rights advocates to help with the stigmas attached to mental illness. Its also to help to get the hard cases to realize that mental illness can strike anyone. fact of the matter is different. Part of the diagnosis tool kit is observation of physical manifestations and body language. So the truth is: you often can see menatal illness, not always, but quite often. -- Tell me you've never seen someone and thought to yourself "that person is mentally ill".

Yeah, your not suppose say it, but mental illness can often be seen. You just may have to dig to identify what type it is your seeing.
 

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
If that was the case, many suicides would be avoided, many rapes, many murders etc...
You're assuming that person is having regular contact with a professional. If your in intensive treatment, its not very often that an unexpected suicide happens. The client can decompensate in very short time, a matter of just a few hours and end up dead as a result. Its not that we don't see it coming, its just that we don't lock people up unless the justification is extremely clear per criteria.

Duty to report, duty to warn has very specific protocols also ... with that said, potential murders and rapes are prevented everyday, often with medication. How many actual rapes and murder, who knows.

Like this dude here, there were no grounds to lock him up under mentalo health, there wasn't even any grounds to report to law enforcement (not from the private sector anyway, unless a company specifically sent him i to be evaluated for this purpose and paid for it with proper releases enforced)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top