Hale - Terrorist?

Most of you are probably aware of the recent killing of the family of a Federal judge in Chicago.  One of the suspects is Matthew Hale, a white supremacist currently in jail for hiring a hitman to kill that same judge.  Relevant story here.

So, my question:  Does this make Hale a terrorist?  He is a member of a violent hate-group with an anti-American agenda.  He has directly targeted a Federal official.

Could/should the attorney general declare Hale an "enemy combatant" and lock him up subject to military law, or take other "anti-terror" action?

Thoughts/comments?

 I wouldn't consider him a terrorist unless he killed him for the hate of America. He probaly hired the guy to kill him because he just didn't like the guy. And if he really was a terrorist then he would have just blown up all the federal jusdges when he had a chance. So no I don't think he's a terrorist. If he is then he would be the dumbest one ever.

^ I doubt it.

98c Dude13 wrote: ^ I doubt it.

Domestic Terrorism: The actions by persons seeking to persuade or dissuade the government or people of their home country using violent means that intend to frighten or coerce, ranging from threats to outright acts of violence such as kidnapping, beatings, or murder.

Still doubt it? Look at a list of them, you may be surprised or learn something...

Edited by WUNgUN

I think he might be classified as a terrorist. It sounds like he was trying to intimidate the judge. But if not. Hes just a killer.

DBibeau855 wrote: Besides, all terrorists are from the middle east...

DBibeau855 wrote: It sounds like he was just trying to kill the judge. Not a terrorist i dont think. Regardless of what the law says. I think hes just some flunky killer.

But he killed the Judges whole family.

That's a tough one.

I would say that he is a terrorist and should be treated as such. I thought about it for a while and i decided that he was using violent tactics to promote an agenda of fear. He intentionally killed innocent people with the sole purpose of scaring others. The fact that he targeted a US government official with terror doesn't make him any more or less of a terrorist.

To sum it up, he is a terrorist because he used terror to promote his agenda.

Note: All of the above is based on the assumption that he is guilty. If found not guilty, he should face no further consequences

DBibeau855 wrote: Well than so are gangs. And hate groups. So the US harbors terrorists as well because they have the freedome of speach... gg USA

If by harbor gangs you mean fight them everyday, then yes.

If you mean harbor in the more traditional sense of the word, to protect and offer shelter to, then no the US government does not harbor gangs.

And I'm not sure where freedom of speech comes in, other than yes, everybody in the US has it (or at least should)


Edit: gangs who use fear tactics are a type of terrorist.      The US government does not, however aid their fight.



Edited by phillll227

phillll227 wrote: DBibeau855 wrote: Well than so are gangs. And hate groups. So the US harbors terrorists as well because they have the freedome of speach... gg USA If by harbor gangs you mean fight them everyday, then yes. If you mean harbor in the more traditional sense of the word, to protect and offer shelter to, then no the US government does not harbor gangs. And I'm not sure where freedom of speech comes in, other than yes, everybody in the US has it (or at least should)

Well, what i mean is, we fight for the rights of hate groups every day in the courts. We fight for the right for the neo natzis to have a compound that looks exactly like the ones in afganistan.