At Least 7 Dead, 12 Wounded in Shooting at Ft. Hood in Texas

Can someone post a picture of this doctor? Sometimes people involved in strange stories turn out to be like ghosts. You never learn where they were born or who their parents were.There will be much more to this story if no one as far back high school has anything to say about him.

It doesn't sound quite like PTSD. Usually those guys are lone gunmen, just went off and started shooting. There were three (known) gunmen in this shooting. I suppose it's possible for three guys to get together and decide to go out in a blaze of glory (much like Columbine), but it seems unlikely.

It doesn't sound like any Islamic stuff, either. Those guys usually carry on until they're killed, so that they can be martyrs to the faith. Automatic Paradise if that happens. If they survive, then they miss that opportunity.

Having said that, I can't figure this one out, because it doesn't sound like anything I've heard of before. You've got to figure that those shooters were not expecting to just shoot their way in and out, or whatever. They were shooting up a military base filled with armed men. They had to know that they weren't going to be able to escape, or at least that the odds of that happening were minuscule. And yet, they allowed themselves to be taken alive.

It would be interesting to see whether these shooters had been part of some experiment - test the effects of new drugs, test the effects of new weapons, whatever. Of if they were under treatment for PTSD or something, and somehow that treatment set them off. You have to ask why three guys would go off at the same time - or plan a massacre together. I mean, how do you recruit someone to join you. "Say, I was thinking of shooting up the base on Thursday, want to join in?" That doesn't seem too likely.

[Edit:] OK, so much for my theory, I guess. Looks like it was Islamic after all. Still, it's interesting that this shooter was a psychiatrist. Makes me wonder...

[edit on 11/5/2009 by chiron613]

Originally posted by EMPIRE
reply to post by Helghast1

 

So when the Christian soldiers rape and kill innocent people, you know, the innocent people they're supposed to be protecting, does that mean Christianity is a violent religion or does it mean you've spent too much time eating your moms cereal?

how about we live in the present and not what happened 500 or more years ago? islam today, is where christianity was in terms of violence 500 years ago and more. nice try though bro.

Notice in the space of 48 hours the 5 british soldiers killed by the recruiting officer in Iraq to which G.Brown claimed was the Taliban (before any group claimed responsibility), and now this.

I think this is the first start of the campaign of reducing ground-troops in the Middle-East Arena in favour of UAV and other non-personnel militaristic equipment which will test out new forms of weaponsiation which EADs and other Defense contractors have been wanting to test for some time, these "false-flags" come at just the right time to introduce new technology to introduce such designs.

More on the Major Nidal Malik Hasan.

AP source: Suspected shooter got poor evaluation

[edit on 2009/11/5 by Aeons]

reply to post by Aggie Man


A fort is usually a temporary establishment (now it's just used in a nominal fashion), a post is just used for Army establishments (i.e. it's where soldiers "post" up before they deploy), and a base is used for Navy and Air Force (it's their "base" of operations where they strike out from).

Originally posted by eradown
Can someone post a picture of this doctor?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9a574f9b186f.jpg[/atsimg]

this guy was saying people should strap on bombs and go to times square.
Also that Muslims should stand up to the agressor in Iraq. How was this guy not being watched this sounds so suspect.

so you recruit impressionable young adults, brainwash them, turn them into killers.
you have to expect stuff liek this to happen once ina while.
i do feel bad for those killed, but when u sign up for the military thats a risk you take.

This topic is moving too fast for me to keep a track of. But if it has not been cleared up already, the guys were using M16s and not handguns. It is in one of the main Google news articles so it should be easy to find. I'm sorry I don't have the link as I read it about 30 minutes ago.

I'm a little confused since I thought the M4 was standard army issue. I guess they have M16s hanging around for training purposes? Anyone can fill me in on that?

I realize I will probably get the flaming of the century for saying this, but I can't help thinking it. Only a few days before Cap & Trade was voted on, Michael Jackson died, drawing all attention from the media and the populous - and many didn't even know the vote happened until the following Monday. Is it just me, or does anyone else think this MIGHT be a false flag attack to keep both the media's and the public's eyes on a devastating event instead of concentrating their attention on one of the most important votes in American history? To me, these circumstances and especially timing are very convenient in passing the bill with little public opposition or fanfare. Your thoughts PLEASE!

this is on Fox at the moment.

Originally posted by x2Strongx
Just heard about this at work... Thanks for putting up.

I can't wait to hear what kind of cover story they put up on this one!

My thinking exactly, as soon as this shooting started MSNBC quoted a military person who said that they believe it wan't terrorism but an issue of something that is crime related. They are already trying to make this out as not a terrorists attack (which it might not be, but three shooters and different locations yea right), but they may not be able to do it this time because of the names that will be associated with all three (being muslim maybe). They lilke to downplay things like this because if it was shown to be a terrorists attack, then pundits can say see we still have them attacking us but under so and so it didn't happen. This is more of a political necessity and a PC move also. If it shows that muslim extremists dressed up or was in military uniform and attacked, it would make the police and the govt. more attuned to the muslim community in the US. Watching and investigating any and all tips that come about this or that group. What gets me the most is that if this was a terrorists attack, why go after a target that they should have known they wouldn't have been able to get away from. There was a ton of soft targets they could have gone after, unless this is only the beginning.

Originally posted by MADCZAR

this guy was saying people should strap on bombs and go to times square.
Also that Muslims should stand up to the agressor in Iraq. How was this guy not being watched this sounds so suspect.

Where is your "evidence" for this?

Originally posted by dwiggen
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

A fort is usually a temporary establishment (now it's just used in a nominal fashion), a post is just used for Army establishments (i.e. it's where soldiers "post" up before they deploy), and a base is used for Navy and Air Force (it's their "base" of operations where they strike out from).

Thank you. What about Camp (i.e., Camp Lejeune)

Only a few weeks ago an al-Quada sympathizer from Jordan tried to blow up one of the buildings in downtown Dallas. I wonder if this Ft. Hood attack is in any way connected to that?

BNO Confirmed: 2 initial suspects released; 3rd person now detained.

Well it does give a new meaning to

"Remember, Remember, the 5th of November"


although the way msnbc and fox keep eluding to muslim sleeper cells infiltrating military but of course they pepper it each time with "possibility" I guess to keep them out of trouble. But yea all it's doing is stirring up hate.

Im on a ventrillo voice chat server with about 100 people atm and most all from overseas to us people on here are all in their 'hate muslim' mode.

The guy was almost 40 and a psychiatrist.

Originally posted by Helghast1

Originally posted by EMPIRE
reply to post by Helghast1

 

So when the Christian soldiers rape and kill innocent people, you know, the innocent people they're supposed to be protecting, does that mean Christianity is a violent religion or does it mean you've spent too much time eating your moms cereal?

how about we live in the present and not what happened 500 or more years ago? islam today, is where christianity was in terms of violence 500 years ago and more. nice try though bro.

He was speaking of the present. Did you miss the past 7 years of rape, torture, murder in Iraq? Majority of soldiers are "Christian", and don't give me the crap about them "not being real Christians", because the majority of Islamic extremists are not "real Muslims."

I like how they're playing the Islamic militant sleeper cell angle without even knowing who everybody is exactly.. How is that possible? FFS, is the agenda not obvious?