Accused Fort Hood gunman cannot use defending Taliban defense

[Roverron]

[Army psychiatrist Major Nidal Hasan cannot argue at trial that he was defending the Afghan Taliban when he opened fire in a 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, that killed 13 people, a military judge ruled on Friday...]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...95D0WW20130614
--------------------
And the reason he can't use that is because the administration does not want this incident to be labeled a terrorist attack.
It is currently labeled a work place violence incident. No matter that he was screaming "Aloha Snackbar" all the time he was killing and wounding American Soldiers. This trial is not about justice. Its about politics, and protecting the villiage idiot.
4 years later and this homegrown turd is still on trial. What a waste of taxpayer money.

[ronpaul50]

And he's still getting paid! Isn't this system great?

[ColMike]

And the victim's lives are in limbo. What ever happened to a speedy trial.

[DrHenley]

What kind of defense is that? Giving aid and comfort to the enemy? I thought that was called treason.

[Snipersnest]

I read that because it was deemed a workplace violence, that the injured soldiers are not eligible for VA benefits.

[ColMike]

Trial moved to begin 6 August.

[Riverpigusmc]

Originally Posted by Snipersnest

I read that because it was deemed a workplace violence, that the injured soldiers are not eligible for VA benefits.

If that turns out to be true, I will want to cheerfully choke the living s**t out of some office dweeb

[deputybpfife]

IMHO, there is no defense for doing what he did. He was caught red-handed and should be shot in front of a firing squad.

[dw1911]

Originally Posted by deputybpfife

imho, there is no defense for doing what he did. He was caught red-handed and should be shot in front of a firing squad.

ditto