BREAKING NEWS FROM FOX !! MASS Shooting at Ft.Hood in Killeen Texas !!

[1861]

Watch yourself there, 'ol 1861. You may be surrounded and not know it!








... and I only linked that one because the KoC stuff just wasn't as funny.

Well I admit that was funny . Relevance ?

[King 5.45]

Well I admit that was funny . Relevance ?

None. I was just checking to see if you had a sense of humor. Otherwise, I was seriously thinking about sending out a search party.

[TaePo]

We do have a little hindsight bias going on, here. Namely, knowing all or most of the facts as they are now known and what has transpired, we can say with certainty, that this is rife with a possible shooter or actor as a 'homegrown' terrorist.

However, the government was probably looking at this from an intelligence perspective. What info does he have, did they turn him or are they planning a major attack/threat?

What wound up happening was an individual conducted an attack. It was not thought out too well, but it was effective to a point. What really seems to be demonstrated was someone who was or became defective went off the deep end. He made contact with the other side probably to do something greater. But he had no patience left and decided to act immediately.

The government is not geared for going after defectives or people who have lost their rational thinking. The FBI is geared for counter-espionage among other jobs. They are the equivalent to M.I.5 in the U.K. CIA and M.I.6 would be the external intelligence agencies, respectively.

Recall also that it is usually not an officer who goes crazy. Especially field grade officers. They have less physical stresses and demands than full on combat troops. Stresses still exist, though. And they get better pay. But a field grade officer would be good as a target for turning by an outside agency.

If this were truly a purely politically motivated attack, it would have involved more planning and equipping and so forth. In such a target rich environ as Ft. Hood, I could think of several ways a better / worse plan could have been executed. It's just how I see it.

But it does bring up ethical questions, if you are at war with XYZ, is it ok to give more scrutiny to XYZ peoples until the war is over? Now, the rounding up of Japanese citizens and immigrants during WWII would be going too far in my opinion. But where do you draw the lines, if any are to be drawn at all? Perhaps some secret investigations for suspects supplying info or what? Or should we not put XYZ peoples in critical positions until the war is over?

And what if the war is defined by your enemy as never being over? (Which is pretty much the corner you back everyone into when you invoke Jihad, no matter which religion.)

[headcase]

In as much, the klan hid behind the church, the extremists proclaim themselves, seems it would be easier to find an extremist than someone using the whole religion to hide. But wouldnt investigating the "extremist" religion claiming to want to kill and having killed, be as viable

I am just wondering who put it out there that you couldn't investigate terrorist suspects just because they are Islamic? That is not the message, and if that is what everyone is getting, there are some huge comprehension issues here.

Political correctness is bullshit. There should be no good reason that you can not say what is on your mind for fear of offending someone.

What is not acceptable, is blaming an entire religion for the actions of individuals, anymore than blaming an entire race, nationality, or gender is acceptable in a free society.

I have no problem peeling the skin off one of these jerkoffs who has used, or actively planned to use, violence against innocent bystanders in the name of their religion or any other damn thing. I have a huge problem with peeling the skin off of them, a group at a time, hoping to find the ones who committed the crimes, or of anyone else, just because they happen to even resemble the ones who committed the crimes.

While some may claim that it is a good way to get them all, or that it is a good way to help ensure our safety, what it actually does is make us less free and just puts yet another nail in the coffin of liberty.

Someone once said something to the effect of, "I would rather suffer the inconveniences associated with too much liberty, than suffer those associated with too little.", as well as, "Those who would trade a little liberty for a little security, deserve neither.". If you look, I am sure you can find the exact quotes, as many of the ones on the other side of the fence in this thread, use these same quotes copiously in relation to things they feel deserve to be associated with freedom....

[ChamberedRound]

IMHO the problem with this whole incident isn't that a Muslim went nuts and shot up a bunch of the people. The problem is that none of the servicemen or women, trained in the use of weapons, are allowed to carry a sidearm on base. WTF? Where's the logic? And once again, such rules only hurt those who are willing to follow them, because the shooter obviously wasn't worried about the rules.

Here's a little light reading for those interested (note this is an editorial of sorts):
Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

I don't know about anyone else, but when I picture being on a military base in my mind, I picture walking past hundreds of ARMED soldiers. That's just me, I guess I'm the crazy one.

One gun, just one gun in their capable hands could have ended the entire thing before so many were killed and injured.

[rodder]

Borrowed from another posted article.
(http://forum.pafoa.org/national-11/7...arbara-ca.html)
I thought some of the points made here fit in perfectly with the current discussion in this thread:

Another realization coming out of the Fort Hood incident is that twisted minds often wrap themselves around fixed ideologies. That, however, does not prove a cause and effect relationship between a particular ideology and the detrimental behavior of those with twisted minds.

The murdering major at Fort Hood was a devout Muslim who was heard to shout “God is Great” as he mercilessly and methodically shot his victims. Not unexpectedly, after the shootings there soon followed threats against mosques and condemnations of Muslims.

If murder and savagery can be eliminated by eradicating a religion, then not one but nearly all religions, and many political ideologies, must be eliminated as well. Damaged psyches, weak minds, and evil souls embrace and employ ideologies to justify their heinous actions and to salve their psychological pain. These disordered minds can be found within the Christian, Muslim, and Jewish faiths. There are also practicing paranoids preaching hyper-patriotic versions of political ideologies who can become mass murders for the cause. Recall Timothy McVeigh.

Eliminating entire categories of people based on their religious or political beliefs will be ineffective in riding society of senseless violence. Savagery and mayhem lurk under even the thickest veneer of civilization. Wackos will simply blend in to what ever social milieu is available and pervert any ideology to validate their homicidal violence.

Unless and until science can develop a flawless wacko-meter that detects these aberrant personalities, they will always be moving unidentified among us. Ironically, the perpetrator of the Fort Hood massacre was a psychiatrist, the closest thing we have to a wacko-meter. So, maybe we should round up all the shrinks.

There are no ready remedies to prevent further incidents as occurred at Fort Hood, but there is awareness, for those with open minds, that police state restrictions or targeted pogroms would not only be ineffective, they would undermine the very essence of freedom and justice upon which this nation was founded, and eventually make victims of us all.

[MostlyHarmless]

I do not lie .

No, you don't. But EVERY murderer claiming to be Christian OR Muslim does. No?


Jan

[1861]

No, you don't. But EVERY murderer claiming to be Christian OR Muslim does. No?


Jan

I don't know , haven't known too many of them personally >

[MostlyHarmless]

I don't know , haven't known too many of them personally >

The point is that both religions (in some of their scriptures) condemn murder. So neither a true Christian nor a true Muslim can be a murderer. Can they?


Jan

[larrymeyer]

All who keep bring up the KKK forget after the war of northern aggression. In the south an African-American was not considered human. So he didn't have a soul and was nothing more then property that could be destroyed.

Islam feels the same way about anyone who doesn't worship Allah.


Someone said if we stayed out of the middle east we wouldn't have this problem. Maybe your right however if we'd have sided with the Arabs in the six day war we wouldn't have these problem's, If we're there or we're not there the problem still exist. If we pull out maybe Israel ceases to exist which is what the Islamic countries want.

For the Arabs on the board WHY don't you come out and say that's what you want Israel out of the Middle East and America to stop helping them. So Islam can destroy them. You have a devout follower in Ahmadinejad who keeps saying the Holocaust didn't exist.

And no I'm not Jewish.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://story.afghanistansun.com/inde...d/564179/cs/1/


Taliban message promises Fort Hood massacre repeat
Afghanistan Sun
Wednesday 11th November, 2009
(ANI)



Fort Hood (Texas, US), Nov.11 : The Taliban has claimed there would be more attacks like the Fort Hood shootings unless Washington ends its policies in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a report.

It also described the US army psychiatrist who carried out the massacre in Texas as a "hero".

The SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist websites, said it had picked up a Taliban message praising the attack.ccording to The Telegraph, the message said: "The recent attack on the military base in Texas warns that if the occupation policy of the American rulers continues in this way, without them folding the carpets of occupation and transgression in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is natural then that incidents and attacks similar to Texas will spread to the Pentagon and other American military centres."

A Muslim psychiatrist and a major in the American army, Nidal Malik Hasan, killed 13 people and wounded 29 in the attack last Thursday at America's largest military base. He was due to be deployed to Afghanistan later this month.

Law enforcement agencies have said he acted alone and was not directed by al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

Hasan has emerged from a coma after being shot four times by two civilian police officers. He has invoked his right to a lawyer and investigators are still waiting to interview him.