Respond to the following: Answer each discussion(X2) with a minimum of 325 words each or more with at least 2 references. Be thoughtful and insightful and it must demonstrate critical thinking and analysis. Thank You

D1: Who is a Terrorist?

Identifying and determining why one becomes a terrorist can be as problematic as defining terrorism itself. Its definition is diffuse and its application within the criminal penal code is often difficult and controversial.

However, it is just as difficult to understand the mindset or behavioral tendencies of terrorists. For example, is there any good theoretical or empirical evidence which finds that terrorists, as a group, satisfy the criteria of psychopathology any more than do other groups of people?

1. Select and research a terrorist case in which a defendant(s) was identified using the EC Library. Based upon your research and facts from the case, provide an argument for why believe that person(s) became a terrorist. As part of your argument, address whether you believe the person(s) were in whole or part motivated by a mental disorder, or some type of socialization.

D2: Are Terrorist Really Just Ordinary Criminals?

Often prosecutors and law enforcement officers, including military courts-martial officers are not sure what to charge a certain defendant or defendants in a mass killing incident.

Such was the case of Major Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, Texas on November 5, 2009. Thirteen soldiers were killed, and over 30 were wounded as Major Hasan shouted "Allahu akbar" ("God is great"). When studying terrorists and terrorist organizations, particularly with the globalization phenomenon and quickly escalating transnational terrorism, certain factors must be considered when discerning if an act is terrorist in nature.

Root-cause analysis is one tool used in identifying and understanding the significant similarities that exist between terrorists, organized crime, and ordinary low-level criminals. However, root-cause analysis has its weaknesses, as well.

2. Put yourself in the role of a criminal prosecutor. Why as a prosecutor might you have difficulty at times deciding whether to charge mass murderers with an act of terrorism or conventional murder charges? Please provide examples supported by academic citations to strengthen your argument.