Now new news, two soldiers were questioned and released. After a police lineup with eyewitnesses? No.
Now Hasan comes to life, although first reported dead, by? people who worked with him testifying they saw
him shot dead? No, he was actually taken away by an interrogator and was missing for hours and then was
taken to the hospital. And did the media ever ask what happened to the two “suspects”? The one who was obviously
fingered on the premises and the second by someone who described or named him in detail. Where are these shooters / soldiers / jihadists in stolen uniforms? In Guantanamo or rendered because we couldn’t afford to have the country paralyzed in fear?
Now the General of the base camp with a stern look on his face snaps “I have no “background” with Major Hasan”
Now other Generals take control and “I am not allowed to comment on anything relating to the investigation of
the shooting at Ft Hood” Every question is deflected EXCEPT, anything you want to know about the Major with the Muslim name who after the three hour ride into the country with the interrogator lies in a hospital and whose
speech has been affected with further paralysis. Surprise? Not really, so lets handle this like an interesting mystery,
it will be exciting watching the twists and turns, lets make something thrilling and fun out of it, because the real
truth will probably make us sick to our stomach. Or you can stay in the weeds and let Lieberman lead you to the
truth as he now promises and investigation into the Ft Hood shooting. Or as Lieberman puts it, “I want a thorough
investigation into Hasan and I want the truth to come out” Yes Joe we believe you.

http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/11/15/911-the-dog-that-doesnt-hunt/

This is what David Cheadle, the owner of the gun store wherre Nidal Hasan is alleged to have bought the murder weapon, told ABC news reporters the day after the shootings.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/tracking-source-gun-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9014618

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521

If Hasan is the only suspect, Why would investigators ask about the a gun purchase made by someone other than Hasan, and not ask about a purchase made by Hasan? Unless there is another suspect, their line of questioning makes no sense at all.

Let’s put the ol’ shoe on the OTHER foot for just a moment.

Imagine you’re living in Iraq when that country invades -for NO legitimate reason whatsoever- the USA and now there are demented, oversexed Iraqi soldiers running amuck thru the streets of YOUR old neighborhood, shooting and raping and maiming and murdering people YOU might know. Even some of your family members!

Now, if you had just ONE OUNCE of fucking HUMAN BLOOD pulsing thru your cholesterol-choked arteries (and of course I’m NOT saying you DO ..you fucksters) then the FIRST thing you would do is go out and blow the MF head off every MF Iraqi you can find before the bastards put you down.

Well THAT, my water-boarding and International Ponzi-Sheming firends is EXACTLY what this guy did.

Maybe if MORE of them did it you MF war criminals would think TWICE next time before kicking down the WRONG COUNTRY’S DOORS when you’re out playing SWAT*.

*Stupid White American Terrorists

It went from 3 shooters, to 1 dead shooter, to 1 barely alive shooter, who then miraculously is heard shouting “Allah Akbar”. All witnesses were no doubt “briefed” on the fact that they could expect the same treatment were they to deviate from the official storyline.

I must ask, in and among all the other shootings suddenly going on, what is it that we are to turn our attention away from, and onto these well-staged “freak outs”?

By the way, I don’t buy “lady cop saves the day”, if only for the fact that those rent-a-cops are supposed to stay at the front gate area.

I think this display was meant purely to get the public foment up for keeping the war (and its very expensive funding) going at any cost. The generals had already been loudly complaining about the lack of support for their just-out-of-reach victory in AfPakRaq.

He was about to be shipped out to a place where these atrocities were taking place. So he decided (1) not to go and (2) to prevent others from going there to take part in these continuing atrocities.

I doubt there aren’t Catholics, Jews, Presbyterians, Hindus or whatever who wouldn’t do the same in a similar situation.

WTF Ames; you just figuring out now that Intel folks have penetrated NPR? Fuck, we hire Marketing Majors too, you tool… check out the board of gov’s for NPR and the majority are Republicans… must be a conspiracy… dork.

Seriously, tho, the military trains 10′s of thousand of Intel types, year-in, year-out, at military schools.

And,yes, I was one of those folks…

I’m not so sure that Klebold and Harris would have converted to Islam. That’s quite an assumption. If they did, it would probably have been out of a desire to shock. A statement of their disenfranchisement and contempt for authority, rather than an actual embrace of the religion’s ideology.

Y’now, kinda’ like biker gangs using Osama bin Laden’s visage as part of their iconography. Or even the Sex Pistols wearing swastikas on their lapels.

You can create a violent framework of belief out of Islam as you can out of any religion. Especially the big three mono religions. They all carry justifications for violence in their sacred texts. Justifications that you can embrace or reject at will.

However, it appears quite probable that Hasan’s apparent interest in Islamic terrorism has more to do with the distress and sense of alienation he felt as a part of a disfunctional military culture – a culture he could not adequately assimilate with – than it does with a genuine desire to embrace some kind of religious ideology.

That would place Hasan more squarely in the category of a rage / murder spree perpetrator, than with what we would normally associate with Islamic terrorism.

Even if Hasan adopted some of the style and rhetoric of Islamic militancy – as is claimed – that doesn’t necessarily signify that this functioned as his primary motivation. His sense of alienation and frustration could have driven him to identify with some aspects of Islamic militancy, out of a sense of desperation, because he could find no other avenue to contextualise his rage.

Colby Cosh has a good take – http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/11/10/colby-cosh-taking-islam-seriously.aspx

“Non-Muslims shoot up schools, malls and post offices all the time, and it should not be surprising that when a Muslim goes looking for an external locus of blame or rage, his pathology takes a specifically Muslim form. Every week it seems like there’s some creepy family annihilator in the news who wanted to “protect” his or her children, or send them to a “better place,” by drowning them in the bath or slitting their throats. No Christian ever seems to notice that such actions are predicated on a specifically Christian notion of the afterlife, let alone express concern or shame. In an overwhelmingly Christian society, no one ever asks them to. (Maybe someone should?)”

I think Klebold and Harris would’ve converted to Islam after 9/11. It’s not that Islam is inherently violent, it’s that violent people have a guaranteed heroic place in Islam.

I love when people use this quote, as it comes from a man who did try to conquer the world (Napolean). It’s the equivalent of the “Oh shucks, I didn’t know I was supposed to do that” defense.

Ames, Why did you cut off the end of that cnn article in point 5?

“The man was surrounded for 25 to 30 minutes, until a convoy of vehicles arrived, led by a Ford Crown Victoria and carrying men in suits, and he was taken away, the senior officer said.”

Who was this suspect? Why couldn’t the officers on scene take him into custody themselves, instead of keeping him surrounded for 25 to 30 minutes?

Are the perpetrators of workplace massacres also “terrorists”?

Was Charles Whitman a “terrorist”?

John Muhammed?

Is the perpetrator of any sort of murder spree a terrorist?

Not really in the sense that the word is traditionally applied, no.

Hence, describing Hasan as a “terrorist” carries an implication that may not be accurate to his case.

By further describing Hasan as a “MUSLIM terrorist” – there are yet more implications.

It has yet to be clearly demonstrated that Hasan’s motivation was that of an “Islamic Terrorist”. That he was “striking at America” out of the same sense of motivation as a group such as Al Qaeda. That he was affiliated with traditional Islamic terrorists or inspired by them. That his motivation was “violent anti-Americanism” rather than rage and a sense of injustice about his treatment in a messed up military heirarchy.

The media seems rather keen to emphasise the link between Hasan and Islamic terrorism. However, the reasoning behind that link contains glaring holes. It all appears to be a bit of a stretch.

That’s where the apparent distortion of the situation lies.

If Hasan’s case really shares more in common with traditional American workplace massacres, then the implication that he is an “Islamic terrorist” represents a total denial of the nature and cause of Hasan’s actions.

“OMG, Ames used teh phraz ‘PSYOP’ he iz ‘moonbat’”

Come on, man, you know better. It’s almost like only paranoid nuts think the gov’t would pay people to appear on-camera to tear down Saddam statues… oh, wait, they did. Psyops? On NATIONAL PUBLIC radio? It’s almost like they let William Buckley, Pat Buchanan and a bunch of Chicago School goons have taxpayer-funded airtime on the TV or something… What do you think this game is about, anyway?

You used the term “moonbat,” I think I know what that makes you.

Research your sources, we’re being spun everyday, all day.

Actually, I followed your link, and even MfM makes clear that the man of the hour _was_ on the task force. The real stretch lies in thinking that this or any other “security task force” has ever had anything to do with Obama. BOWAFT

Oh, for you quivering Nancys out there who are just enraged at how the liberal/conservative/take your pick media is going to pull the wool over your eyes, remember, we CAN say something definitively:

1) this shitbird is Muslim
2) this shitbird is a terrorist

Ergo, this shitbird is a Muslim terrorist.

You make a good case, MonkeyMuffins.

> Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.

OTOH, if THEY didn’t know what they were doing, they would occasionally make a mistake in your favour.

It takes tremendous fortitude to hold off on the paranoia and decide that the humiliation experienced in the workplace is mere happenstance. Certainly there is a dividend of contentment to be enjoyed from being so generous-minded in ascribing seeming malice to general tomfoolery. Take pity on your fellow colleagues: most of them are dumb conformists; they know not what they do.

But Joseph Berke’s The Tyranny of Malice, once you get past the Freudian melodrama, leaves no doubt in the mind that malice rules the workplace. Think about it: you’re a rational guy, right? Your relationship with your employer is a business agreement, right? A bit of a one-sided agreement, to be sure, but still a business agreement.

Except, haven’t you noticed that when you start working for a place it’s a bit like being abducted into a cult, sort of like being drafted into a totalitarian army? And I’m talking about civvie street, not the army.

Now think about what it must have been like for a guy like Hasan.

Your points are good, but you haven’t said WHY so much energy is being directed to distracting the public from a simple human resources fuck-up.