Wow, this is incredibly poorly written.And, I would suggest that IVAW meets well over half these requirements, will they finally be named a terrorist group?
This is from a newly released ALARACT message (sorry about the all caps, it's an army thing)(my comments in bold):
TEN KEY INDICATORS OF POTENTIAL TERRORIST ASSOCIATED INSIDER THREATS TO THE ARMY.
1.(U) ADVOCATING VIOLENCE, THE THREAT OF VIOLENCE, OR THE USE OF FORCE TO ACHIEVE GOALS THAT ARE POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS, OR IDEOLOGICAL IN NATURE (Like advocating violence, or the use of force be used against terrorists (political and ideological).
2.(U) ADVOCATING SUPPORT FOR INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS OR OBJECTIVES. (So, if a soldier supports the same objectives as a terrorist organization--say, the falun gong, or the IRA, or Mossad (which, according to most muslims and nazis, is a terrorist organization), they fit the bill?)
3.(U) PROVIDING FINANCIAL OR OTHER MATERIAL SUPPORT TO A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION OR TO SOMEONE SUSPECTED OF BEING A TERRORIST. (So, if someone is suspected of being a terrorist, we are to assume they are guilty? Isn't there some constitutional thingy about that? Also, if we don't actively publish lists of everyone suspected of being a terrorist, how am I supposed to know if I am supporting a suspected terrorist? (and yes, I'm thinking of you, Seavey.))
4.(U) ASSOCIATION WITH OR CONNECTIONS TO KNOWN OR SUSPECTED TERRORISTS. (Connections to known or suspected terrorists? Again, the issue with "suspected" arises, also, not a good day to be Kevin Bacon. And what, exactly is meant by "connections? Same church? Same language? Both named Hussein?)
5.(U) REPEATED EXPRESSIONS OF HATRED AND INTOLERANCE OF AMERICAN SOCIETY, CULTURE, GOVERNMENT, OR THE PRINCIPLES OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. (For the record, I usually hate 60% of American society. I am supposed to be allowed to hate it, and allowed to express my hate. (Again, that whole constitution document) I am intolerant of idiots, which comprise about 30% of our society, and 98% of our government. There are specific issues I have with our culture, too (like the idea of "fairness," "welfare" and "entitlement.")
6.(U) REPEATED BROWSING OR VISITING INTERNET WEBSITES THAT PROMOTE OR ADVOCATE VIOLENCE DIRECTED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OR U.S. FORCES, OR THAT PROMOTE INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM OR TERRORIST THEMES WITHOUT OFFICIAL SANCTION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF DUTY. (Meaning of course, that you must have "official sanction in the course of duty to study your enemy" don't do it at your leisure, or try to understand what motivates others to commit terrorist acts unless it's your job. Don't you dare go to non-approved sites (where, by the way, can I find this list of INTERNET WEBSITES THAT PROMOTE OR ADVOCATE VIOLENCE DIRECTED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OR U.S. FORCES, OR THAT PROMOTE INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM OR TERRORIST THEMES? Just go kill who we tell you.)
7.(U) EXPRESSING AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE IN VIOLENCE IN SUPPORT OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM OR INCITING OTHERS TO DO THE SAME. (Okay, this one I get, but doesn't this one piss all over free speech?)
8.(U) PURCHASING BOMB MAKING MATERIALS OR OBTAINING INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF EXPLOSIVES. (Watch out, all you re-loaders, and anyone who buys anything that can be used in bomb-making, which, in my experience, is pretty much everything in the house. For instance, tonight I actually wondered (prior to reading this) what gun cotton was made from, and how hard would it be to find directions to make it, and to make it. I found all my answers quickly, and, it's scary easy to make, but was purely a function of curiosity.)
9.(U) ACTIVE ATTEMPTS TO ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO VIOLATE LAWS, DISOBEY LAWFUL ORDERS OR REGULATIONS, OR DISRUPT MILITARY ACTIVITIES. (Agree with this one, but mostly because it falls under good order and discipline. However, a lawful, but stupid order, probably shouldn't be followed, especially if it will get soldiers killed needlessly.)
10.(U) FAMILIAL TIES TO KNOWN OR SUSPECTED INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS OR TERRORIST SUPPORTERS. (Again with the suspected? And if my 3rd cousin is a terrorist, does that make me one, too? If my Uncle thinks Patty Hearst and the SLA were CIA plants, does that make me nutso-by-proxy?)
Of course, the only active measure they are taking at Hood is to put armed guards in the SRP location and at the hospital. Now there is no way this can happen again. That is, it can't happen at the Fort Hood SRP.
They are also rewriting the Fort Hood Privately Owned Weapons policy, doing more thorough searches, and enacting other policies and attempting to take other measures to restrict access to weapons on post. Because as we all know, if there had only been a CG's policy that clearly stated you weren't allowed to go on a SSFA* at the SRP, this never would have happened.
*Shooting Spree For Allah