12 Dead, 31 Wounded @ FT HOOD

[Beans]

Anybody want to claim this guy still isn't a terrorist after Mumble's post?


:::chirp:::chirp:::chirp::: yea I didn't think so.

I don't see your point, or, if you think you're making a point, I think you misunderstand the so-called "lefty bleeding hearts" here in a big way. Kings and dictators pass judgement, and then appease the people with whatever findings back them up. To the chagrin of many in this thread, our judicial system, when operating the way it's supposed to operate, finds facts and then arrives at a conclusion. Obviously, if this is legit, then it's a big development (and a big f-up somewhere in the chain... sheesh).

 

[scoolbubba]

I don't see your point, or, if you think you're making a point, I think you misunderstand the so-called "lefty bleeding hearts" here in a big way. Kings and dictators pass judgement, and then appease the people with whatever findings back them up. To the chagrin of many in this thread, our judicial system, when operating the way it's supposed to operate, finds facts and then arrives at a conclusion. Obviously, if this is legit, then it's a big development (and a big f-up somewhere in the chain... sheesh).

No one's saying we shouldn't let the judicial system run its course. In fact, most of us can't wait for this guy to receive his justice. What is lamentable is the fact that so many weren't willing to look at the seemingly blatant signs and make a call, simply for fear of offending a group. As more facts about the case come out, the people who refused to look at the early signs as a clear indication of the doods motives stubbornly dig their heels in and say "wait wait, let's not be hasty to judge" and look more foolish by the minute. This is what frustrates me the most.

Calling the guy a terrorist doesn't change the fact that he killed 12 people. It does speak to his motivation, which will take the prosecution of justice down a far different track than "just some crazy who snapped."

What was your point again...I have so much trouble keeping up, I guess.

 

[Spekkio]

What is lamentable is the fact that so many weren't willing to look at the seemingly blatant signs and make a call, simply for fear of offending a group.

What "blatant signs?" That he was Muslim? That he prayed while he was being shot? That makes someone a Muslim extremist?

The above creates the possibility that he is one of "the bad guys," but it certainly isn't a "blatant sign" that he is.

I have my own theory about what's going on right now, but it's just speculation at this point. I might get lucky and be right and look smart as a result, but I could also get unlucky and look stupid.

 

[scoolbubba]

That the guy posted extremist sentiments on his blog...that the guy worshipped with an imam under investigation by the FBI who also expressed extremist sentiments, that he randomly targeted service members (this wasn't someone who had a list of people to smoke, he just wanted to shoot some servicemen).... how much more should I list?

 

[Beans]

No one's saying we shouldn't let the judicial system run its course. In fact, most of us can't wait for this guy to receive his justice. What is lamentable is the fact that so many weren't willing to look at the seemingly blatant signs and make a call, simply for fear of offending a group. As more facts about the case come out, the people who refused to look at the early signs as a clear indication of the doods motives stubbornly dig their heels in and say "wait wait, let's not be hasty to judge" and look more foolish by the minute. This is what frustrates me the most.

Calling the guy a terrorist doesn't change the fact that he killed 12 people. It does speak to his motivation, which will take the prosecution of justice down a far different track than "just some crazy who snapped."

What was your point again...I have so much trouble keeping up, I guess.

Emphasis mine.

You're right, I don't want our govt leaders to jump to conclusions so they don't offend a group. I have a photo of said "group:"

Really, that's the only group I am concerned about here. Oh yeah, and the families of the murdered... I guess they deserve clean and professional work on the part of the prosecution.

Calling the accused a terrorist, or a Muslim extremist, or a rascally hooligan, at least on the part of our govt leaders, is unprofessional and can compromise the prosecution, no matter how clear it all seems right now. Until convicted, he is the accused. My personal opinion? Please... no one cares.

 

[Spekkio]

That the guy posted extremist sentiments on his blog...

Link, please?

that the guy worshipped with an imam under investigation by the FBI who also expressed extremist sentiments,

Awlaki has been living in Yemen for the better part of the last decade. You're telling me that the fact that Hasan may have worshipped with Awlaki 8 years ago caused him to suddenly do this? Why now? I'm sure he had the opportunity to do this anytime during the past 8 years.

It would be much more compelling if the currently withheld intelligence report contained evidence that the two were still in contact and discussing anti-US sentiment, but we don't have that information right now.

FWIW, the FBI had detained, questioned, and released this man after 9/11, which is what caused him to move to Yemen in the first place.

that he randomly targeted service members

Again, this isn't definitive. Ft. Hood was a place to which Hasan had easy access, and a place which he knew most people would be unarmed. It could mean he was a terrorist, but it might not.

 

[ACowboyinTexas]

What "blatant signs?" That he was Muslim? That he prayed while he was being shot? That makes someone a Muslim extremist?

The above creates the possibility that he is one of "the bad guys," but it certainly isn't a "blatant sign" that he is.

Yes, "that he was(is) a Muslim." We may not be at war with Islam, but the people we are making war on and who are making war on us are Muslims. To me that is enough reason to hold someone in suspicion. Right now, I have trouble sponsoring a Boy Scout group coming on board, yet a Muslim that had a history of attending a controversial mosque and making statements contrary to the policy of the President and the Army is allowed to kill from the inside out? Yeah, that's pretty fouled up.

 

[scoolbubba]

Calling the accused a terrorist, or a Muslim extremist, or a rascally hooligan, at least on the part of our govt leaders, is unprofessional and can compromise the prosecution, no matter how clear it all seems right now. Until convicted, he is the accused. My personal opinion? Please... no one cares.

Would it really taint the investigation to say "we are pursuing the investigation in all areas, to include possible terrorist connections." Absolutely not. Is that the path the government is going down? It would seem to be at least one angle of the investigation, and a prominent one at that.

Does that prevent people from screaming that we ought not rush to judgment (agreed) and can't call the dude a probable terrorist (strongly disagree)...nope.

 

[Spekkio]

Does that prevent people from screaming that we ought not rush to judgment (agreed) and can't call the dude a probable terrorist (strongly disagree)...nope.

We can call him a possible terrorist, but there are people who are making the call that he definitely is a terrorist.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

I'd like to make note that there are 13 dead as the result of the shootings now.

Even if he ends up being terrorist associated I still view him as a traitor first and foremost. He betrayed his oath, his country, and his brothers in arms. They ought to hang him. There is no EXCUSE for such a betrayal. If he was linked to a terrorist group then that information is important, but ultimately the man is a traitor who shot and killed 13 people and wounded 30 more. He needs to pay for it.

 

[CUPike11]

i'd like to make note that there are 13 dead as the result of the shootings now.

Even if he ends up being terrorist associated i still view him as a traitor first and foremost. He betrayed his oath, his country, and his brothers in arms. They ought to hang him. There is no excuse for such a betrayal. If he was linked to a terrorist group then that information is important, but ultimately the man is a traitor who shot and killed 13 people and wounded 30 more. He needs to pay for it.

+1

 

[Mumbles]

The Imam, Awlaki is evidently making statements in the blogosphere....I don't have a link to corroborate this. I'm paraphrasing, but he's claiming that the only way Muslims could be in the U.S. Military is to emulate the actions of Hasan.

 

[Mumbles]

Ralph Peter's opinion piece. This echos much of what has already been said.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/fort_hood_xjP9yGrJN7gl7zdsJ31vnJ

 

[mmx1]

Ah, yes, the Ralph Peters who called Stan Mcchrystal "morally oblivious" for his ROE and thinks counterinsurgency is a croc now claims dressing in Islamic garb and proselytizing makes him an Islamist terrorist and runs out the "Islam is not a religion of peace" line. He explicitly blames the Army and the President for the casualties. So who's blaming America?

Making contact with Al Q (if those charges are borne out) would make him a terrorist. Being a kooky religious nut (as if the Air Force hasn't tolerated some outrageous Christian proselytizing) doesn't.

 

[HercDriver]

No one's saying we shouldn't let the judicial system run its course. In fact, most of us can't wait for this guy to receive his justice. What is lamentable is the fact that so many weren't willing to look at the seemingly blatant signs and make a call, simply for fear of offending a group. As more facts about the case come out, the people who refused to look at the early signs as a clear indication of the doods motives stubbornly dig their heels in and say "wait wait, let's not be hasty to judge" and look more foolish by the minute. This is what frustrates me the most.

Calling the guy a terrorist doesn't change the fact that he killed 12 people. It does speak to his motivation, which will take the prosecution of justice down a far different track than "just some crazy who snapped."

What was your point again...I have so much trouble keeping up, I guess.

What are you talking about here? Seriously.
You might have a good link on the warning signs (argumentative, poor fitreps) and what the Army did (or didn't do) each time; if so I would like to see it. I'm guessing a crummy fitrep will not get you booted out, nor will being a crummy doctor, but people want to say it is only because he was a Muslim.

Once again, he could be a terrorist. If the facts bear it out, it's obvious everyone wants justice to be served. I know it's frustrating to be patient and get the facts, however patience is a natural part of growing up and being an adult.