Fort Hood Shooting - 13 dead 30 injured

Apparently Hasan had some kind of mental health related job on the base.

11-5-2009 6:41 PM

Antara

PSYCHIATRIST!

11-5-2009 7:32 PM

So, he is automatically a terrorist because he is Muslim. Rich!

11-5-2009 8:04 PM

freedom12

We know that not all muslims are terrorist But all
terrorist are muslims...

11-6-2009 1:00 AM

And those who kill the spirit but not the body are called what?

11-6-2009 2:11 AM

Liberals

11-6-2009 6:44 AM

tabsey

A stupid clip to argue at, but not all terrorists are Muslims. Some wish to be seen as freedom fighters, such as the defunct IRA, groups in the exUSSR bloc, and so on.
A very sad event.

11-6-2009 6:47 AM

gramehick

shoot them to all criminal..........

http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=2159637

11-6-2009 6:49 AM

blueridge

Suspicious--Nov. 5th, Guy Fawkes Day, psychiatrist and Virginia Tech graduate? The controversy has already begun, 1 shooter or many?

11-6-2009 8:36 AM

There are reports now that Hasan opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and that he sympathized with suicide bombers.

Col. Terry Lee:

"He said maybe the Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor, at first, we thought he was talking about how Muslims should stand up and help the armed forces in Iraq and in Afghanistan, but apparently that wasn't the case."

Before being sent to Texas, Hasan, 39, lived in Silver Spring, Md., where a former imam at the Muslim Community Center described him as devout:

"He attended daily services and signed up for the mosque's matchmaking service. He wanted a wife more religious than him," Faizul Khan told the Daily
News. "...
read more»

11-6-2009 2:39 PM

He opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan???

Oh ...My ...God!!!! This guy is totally WHACKED!!!

11-6-2009 5:08 PM

Freedom12, this must win the prize as the top piece of drivel on Clipmarks this year. 'All terrorists are Muslims'

Fort Hood has been a training ground for paid killers for decades. From here they were sent to invade foreign countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians in the process.

If Hasan went on to Iraq and killed a thousand Iraqis would you or anyone of your right wing brothers have batted an eyelid? Your 'generals' would simply have called it collateral damage.

Why not call what he did now collateral damage as well? Or is selective morality your strong point?

11-6-2009 5:40 PM

sahara

A stupid clip to argue at, but not all terrorists are Muslims. Some wish to be seen as freedom fighters, such as the defunct IRA, groups in the exUSSR bloc, and so on.

Yesteryears "freedomfighters" are today's terrorists. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvFj1QIn1EA&NR=1

Who knows who will be considered terrorists in the future, it could even be...nah, that could never happen!

11-6-2009 5:54 PM

Who will be considered the terrorists of the future, Sahara? Why not the American invaders who plundered a sovereign country like Iraq, caused the death of more than 100 000 of its civilians and raped their daughters?

11-6-2009 6:54 PM

Estimates run up to a million.

11-6-2009 7:48 PM

It's absolutely incredible how US right wingers are still trying to sell the "war on terror" to the world - when they are behind the biggest acts of terror the modern world has seen.

Compared to the number of civilians that have been killed by US "soldiers" Al Qaeda is nothing but a small-town gang.

11-6-2009 7:56 PM

Where are you guys getting this garbage from? If I didn't know any better, I'd think you all thought the terrorists are actually the good guys and that the US had it coming.
WHERE are you getting all these statistics from?? Please tell me where I can read about the hundreds of thousands, or the million innocent people that the US killed.

11-6-2009 8:55 PM

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/1-over-one-million-iraqi-deaths-caused-by-us-occupation/

http://www.iraqanalysis.org/mortality/

11-6-2009 9:06 PM

katsteevns: You might as well have provided us with links pointing to your own blog. I think that would be about as credible as these resources. Can you not provide any credible source?
Please don't waste our time with conspiracy theories suggesting that the "truth" is being suppressed by the mainstream media.

11-6-2009 9:10 PM

blueridge

Here is the latest NBC video on the shooter, giving insights into his mental state of mind

11-6-2009 9:10 PM

The Lancet study is not good enough for you? 'Credible' meaning in this sense, approved by G.W. Bush.

11-6-2009 9:23 PM

blueridge

Tonight, NBC interview: Col. Jack Jacobs offers perspective

"numbers don't add up", more than one shooter

11-6-2009 10:13 PM

katsteevns: Actually, the Lancet study has been thoroughly discredited by credible sources.

1. The London TimesOnline revealed that the anti-war activist George Soros funded the Lancet Study. This is an obvious conflict of interest. Read about it here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3177653.ece

2. ABC News reports that the author of the Lancet study refused to provide details on how he came up with the numbers in his report. This makes the report entirely useless since none of the results can be verified. Read all about it here:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/story?id=6799754&page=1

Was this report from Lancet your most credible resource?

11-6-2009 10:33 PM

Bferman, why don't you try to peddle your pro-military stance to high school kids in poor neighborhoods - where the military normally get their cannon fodder?

More than 100 000 civilians in Iraq are dead today because of the lies and warmongering of George W Bush.

Their killers were all trained in places like Fort Hood.

Do you want me to publish a list of the countries that the US invaded unilaterally since WW2?

Get off your high horse. Your "brave soldiers" are nothing but pawns in the biggest terror regime to hit the world since WW2

11-7-2009 1:05 AM

Your sources are credible? Ok then. Keep up the good work.

11-7-2009 10:09 AM

aperiozar: LOL!!! That was awesome!
Thank you for taking the time to write that. It was immensely entertaining for a lot of people here when I read it aloud (of course I did use a funny liberal voice, but who knows, you might really speak that way as well).
You dovetail so perfectly with the liberal stereotype, you have us arguing over whether you're a real person, or someone's idea of a joke, like a characiture of a liberal.
If you have the time, could you check out some of my other clips and comment on them as well? I would be eternally grateful. Thanks!

11-7-2009 2:41 PM

It's a daycare center.

11-7-2009 5:22 PM

Who did you read my comments to? The local KKK meeting?

You are a typical example of the pathetic, closed-minded type of creature one finds in the American Right.

In the rest of work you are seen for what you are: Right wing nutcases.

Nothing will lead to a faster end to any leadership role America could ever hope to play in the world again than another couple of right wing presidents.

As things stand, few people outside America have any respect for the US. George W Bush made sure of that.

11-7-2009 6:35 PM

aperiozar, I'm sorry to break this news to you, but the KKK are socialists. Socialism is a far left-wing system. I wouldn't be caught dead with a racist lefty group of people such as that.

Since you brought up the KKK, did you catch any of the clips regarding Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood founder and darling of the left) and her KKK rallys? You can read all about them here: http://bit.ly/1nXiNg

I think it was your precious Senator Robert Byrd who filibustered civil rights legislation for 14 hours in 1964. It was among the longest in Senate history! The civil rights bills that later passed assuring blacks their equal rights could not have passed were it not for the strong support of the Republican Party.

11-7-2009 11:04 PM

I have no particular preferences for any American political party. All I am concerned with is to rid the world of American warmongering.

Just look at this long list of countries that have been invaded unilaterally by the US since WW2. http://bit.ly/34rMUt

Then have a moment's silence for the countless civilians that were killed in all these attacks. Attacks that were nothing but organised gangsterism - state funded terror.

11-8-2009 11:14 AM

aperiozar, it seems that your best source for evidence of US warmongering is someone's blog. Surely you can do better than that, or are you prone to believing whatever you find on the internet?

11-8-2009 5:19 PM

That information can be verified one by one. If you have doubts about any particular country on that list, that according to you was never invaded by the US, then let us see your facts.

11-8-2009 5:20 PM

And no, I am not prone to believe anything I find on the Internet. I don't believe you, do I?

11-8-2009 8:12 PM

aperiozar, if you want to be taken seriously, you'll provide reputable sources for the things you claim to be fact. You can't expect everyone else to prove that everything you say is wrong (that's lazy and a little pathetic), it's up to you to prove your claims are true.

If you decide to ramble on with more unsourced claims, go for it. I won't delete your comments, but I'll likely not read because I've grown tired of responding to you.

11-8-2009 8:19 PM