Comments on: More On Hasan, The Fort Hood Shooter http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045 "The hobgoblin of little blogs." "A knack for taking the already disturbing and turning it into the abjectly ghastly." Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:10:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Bloodthirsty Liberal http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91223 Bloodthirsty Liberal Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:10:39 +0000 http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91223 To Carol: But then, when the non-jihadi terrorist appears in our midst, and it certainly happens (see Tim McVeigh), we need to have language to describe that too. Tim McVeigh was a terrorist. Most horrific jihadi acts are both - jihad plus terrorism. In my heart, I consider the attack on Fort Hood terrorism, but labeling it that way makes it easier for politically minded leftists to throw out the entire category, claiming that terrorism is really just warfare. So I guess I think we need both terms. I agree with BTL, but think that if we're going to have useful descriptive categories, we need to define terrorism. Almost everyone who attempts this uses a reference to civilians. So, technically, I think it wasn't terrorism, but, like I said, the victims wouldn't be able to tell the difference. That is why the term Jihad is so useful. - Aggie To Carol: But then, when the non-jihadi terrorist appears in our midst, and it certainly happens (see Tim McVeigh), we need to have language to describe that too. Tim McVeigh was a terrorist. Most horrific jihadi acts are both - jihad plus terrorism. In my heart, I consider the attack on Fort Hood terrorism, but labeling it that way makes it easier for politically minded leftists to throw out the entire category, claiming that terrorism is really just warfare. So I guess I think we need both terms.

I agree with BTL, but think that if we’re going to have useful descriptive categories, we need to define terrorism. Almost everyone who attempts this uses a reference to civilians. So, technically, I think it wasn’t terrorism, but, like I said, the victims wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. That is why the term Jihad is so useful.

- Aggie

]]> By: Bloodthirsty Liberal http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91222 Bloodthirsty Liberal Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:08:22 +0000 http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91222 We're splitting (facial) hairs, but I'd say yes to terrorism. His victims were unarmed, as he knew they would be. He lived in this community, worked with and ate with his victims, and gunned them down like animals. Why, if he weren't Palestinian already, they'd grant him honorary citizenship! BTL We’re splitting (facial) hairs, but I’d say yes to terrorism. His victims were unarmed, as he knew they would be. He lived in this community, worked with and ate with his victims, and gunned them down like animals. Why, if he weren’t Palestinian already, they’d grant him honorary citizenship!

BTL

]]> By: judi http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91221 judi Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:59:33 +0000 http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91221 ....all jihadis are muslim... Excellent point! Judi ….all jihadis are muslim… Excellent point! Judi

]]> By: Carol http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91220 Carol Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:06:20 +0000 http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=11045#comment-91220 Interesting question, Aggie. Although I hate to have anything in common with the Obama administration, perhaps it would be best to drop the term "terrorism." When I first heard the story on the radio yesterday, I said, "Oh no, a jihadi. We would be smart to call a jihad a jihad. It would be better if we would all recognize the nature of the enemy, and stop giving them any ammunition at all, like the ability to say "not all terrorists are muslim" and other such foolishness, because all jihadis are muslim, no ifs, no ands, no buts. Interesting question, Aggie. Although I hate to have anything in common with the Obama administration, perhaps it would be best to drop the term “terrorism.” When I first heard the story on the radio yesterday, I said, “Oh no, a jihadi. We would be smart to call a jihad a jihad. It would be better if we would all recognize the nature of the enemy, and stop giving them any ammunition at all, like the ability to say “not all terrorists are muslim” and other such foolishness, because all jihadis are muslim, no ifs, no ands, no buts.

]]>