Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 137

Thread: Gunmen attack Fort Hood, Texas

  1. #41
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SWJED View Post
    Hasanís Officer Record Brief was posted at This ain't hell, but you can see it from here.
    Under Religion it states no religious preferance.

  2. #42
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    africa
    Posts
    1

    Default ford base

    Quote Originally Posted by reed11b View Post
    I am not sure why, but part of me really hopes these guys were not soldiers.
    we hope too but it happens that they are members of the army. but i think that their mentality is not good

  3. #43
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SWJED View Post
    Hasanís Officer Record Brief was posted at This ain't hell, but you can see it from here.
    Can anyone's ORB be obtained and placed into the public domain legally (assuming the individual is in a coma and not in a position to give his approval)?

    175 months of dwell time. Never seen that before.

  4. #44
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    The simplest explanation is that the man was quite sane, spent time and meditation in developing the concept of defensive jihad (preventing non-Muslim troops from setting foot in Muslim lands) ala the extreme Salafists (e.g., AQ), and put that developed concept into practice.
    Slap and JMM got me thinking. I was wrong on the irrational part. I'll update my initial thoughts, blend in their observations, and we can see how it pans out. Like JMM suggested, this theory may be hard for some to accept.


    1. Actor was Rational.

    2. Actor had perceived grievances, or motive, or emotions.

    3. Actor justified his actions through rational thought, decision making, and in belief that means justified the ends.

    Actor could be this clown at Ft. Hood or a suicide bomber in Iraq.

    Mike

  5. #45
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    The simplest explanation is this guy wanted out of the Army and he apparently had some legitimate claim to this, up to and including hiring an attorney to support his claim. When that failed and he was sent to Ft. Hood to be deployed somewhere......the path to murder became what he perceived as his only way to solve his problem. The 5 Rings of violence don't miss.

  6. #46
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,457

    Default

    Col. Patrick Lang has the best analysis I've seen yet.

    It is sadly amusing how much people do not want this to be about the man's religion or his Palestinian ancestry.

    His relatives understandably want other Americans to believe that he was traumatized by listening to soldiers' stories about the wars. They certainly don't want people to think that there was anything about the atmosphere in his father's house that caused this man to reject the land of his birth and the obligations of his oath.

    The media flacks have now been conditioned into political correctness to such an extent that they can't bring themselves to suggest that his Islam or his sense of grievance about American wars in the Islamic World had anything to do with what he did.
    Read the whole thing.

  7. #47
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
    I did and did you see the part about wearing strange clothes and being caught on a surveillance camera.

  8. #48
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
    Actor could be this clown at Ft. Hood or a suicide bomber in Iraq.

    Mike
    Absolutely, their is little difference except for the location.

  9. #49
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    Can anyone's ORB be obtained and placed into the public domain legally (assuming the individual is in a coma and not in a position to give his approval)?

    175 months of dwell time. Never seen that before.
    Good question for which I don't know. I think someone with access probably sent it to the blog or to someone else who did. It has a SSN (the blogger blacked it out after a few people requested such in the comments). I'd like to think such records are not in the public domain but with FOIA and people seeking 15 minutes of fame when a big story breaks I think we will see more of this rather than less.

  10. #50
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SWJED View Post
    Good question for which I don't know. I think someone with access probably sent it to the blog or to someone else who did. It has a SSN (the blogger blacked it out after a few people requested such in the comments). I'd like to think such records are not in the public domain but with FOIA and people seeking 15 minutes of fame when a big story breaks I think we will see more of this rather than less.
    It is clear violation of the privacy act.

  11. #51
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
    Slap and JMM got me thinking. I was wrong on the irrational part.
    I think state of mind and intent will be the big issues. How those are defined will be determined by what jurisdiction he is tried in, assuming he emerges from his coma.

  12. #52
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default First of the heroes

    Don't ever mess with girls from Carolina with guns. You'll lose. Hopefully, she'll recover from her wounds soon. My mom told me that Hoggard High School is recognizing her tonight at the varsity football game.

    Officer who shot suspect is a firearms expert

    The police officer who brought down a gunman after he went on a shooting rampage at the Fort Hood Army base was on the way to have her car repaired when she heard a report over a police radio that someone was shooting people in a center where soldiers are processed before they are deployed abroad, authorities said on Friday.

    As she pulled up to the center, the officer, Kimberly Munley, spotted the gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, brandishing a pistol and chasing a wounded soldier outside the building, said Chuck Medley, the director of emergency services at the base.

    Sergeant Munley bolted from her car and shot at Major Hasan. He turned toward her and began to fire. She ran toward him, continuing to fire, and both she and the gunmen went down with several bullet wounds, Mr. Medley said...

    Sergeant Munley comes from North Carolina, where her father owns a hardware store in Carolina Beach and is a former mayor. She attended Hoggard County High School.

  13. #53
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Just caught the tail end of a tv report and Col. Jack Jacobs was talking about how the number of wounds and bullets don't seem to add up? He then remarked some injuries may have been due to friendly fire? Anybody else heard anything like this?
    Last edited by slapout9; 11-07-2009 at 01:08 AM. Reason: fix stuff

  14. #54
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    I heard the term "friendly fire" used on the radio. I think it was referring to the possibility that the police officer's hail of bullets could have struck individuals other than the shooter. Unfortunate, if true, but excusable.

  15. #55
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,020

    Default MAJ Hasan's course of action ...

    if he wanted out of the Army, was simply to refuse the deployment order; at which point he would be charged under the UCMJ for refusal of a lawful order and the process would have gone from there - probably ending up in some sort of compromise plea bargain[*]. In any event, no killings.

    No, much more than that was involved here. You don't take down the equivalent of 1-1/2 platoons without very strong convictions about your "right" to do so. In the abstract, that "right" could be irrational or rational. In the fact, it was either one or the other.

    Perhaps, we have a problem with the concept that a native-born American (a field grade officer at that) can rationally reject loyalty to the US for what that person considers a higher loyalty ? So, the impetus to find the "real underlying motive", with MAJ Hasan using religion as an external justification as cover for that "motive" ?

    In listening to that argument, I think of the SovComs finding that executions and gulagings were not the best way to handle dissidents. They eventually felt that mental hospitals were the better way - given the wonders of the Soviet system, anyone rejecting those wonders had to be insane. That in the end did not change the reality that their dissidents were not nutjobs.

    We have had much higher ranking traitors than MAJ Hasan - e.g., Alger Hiss in the US; Kim Philby in the UK. Between them, they killed more people (albeit indirectly) than did MAJ Hasan.

    Maybe the CID and FBI investigations will prove that he was a nutjob. If so, then we will be looking at the UCMJ provisions governing mental capacity. BTW: UCMJ has exclusive jurisdiction.

    Let's see where the facts lead us.

    And, another BTW: no legal justification should exist for the murders - except for classic legal insanity (e.g., he thought he was shooting Martian invaders).

    ---------------------------
    [*] This exact situation came up at K.I. Sawyer during the Vietnam War - refusal by an INCONUS officer to deploy to Vietnam.

  16. #56
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    I heard the term "friendly fire" used on the radio. I think it was referring to the possibility that the police officer's hail of bullets could have struck individuals other than the shooter. Unfortunate, if true, but excusable.
    Must be very difficult to tell who is who with everyone, including the shooter, in the same uniform.

  17. #57
    Council Member Greyhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Caption: A first responder to a lone gunman's attack at Fort Hood Nov. 5 renders honors at retreat after aiding his fellow soldiers. U.S. Army photo.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  18. #58
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
    Must be very difficult to tell who is who with everyone, including the shooter, in the same uniform.
    Maybe a lot more to this. I just watched Anderson Cooper do a telephone interview with a Sgt. Todd of the Ft. Hood PD who also responded with Sgt. Munley, he also stated he engaged the suspect with his service weapon and saw the suspect go down and then advanced to the suspect and made sure he was no longer a threat. Who's bullets from who's weapon actually hit the suspect is still to be determined.


    Also saw a press conference at FT. Hood where an Army Colonel reported that the suspect fired over 100 rounds.
    Last edited by slapout9; 11-07-2009 at 04:19 AM. Reason: stuff

  19. #59
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    if he wanted out of the Army, was simply to refuse the deployment order; at which point he would be charged under the UCMJ for refusal of a lawful order and the process would have gone from there - probably ending up in some sort of compromise plea bargain[*]. In any event, no killings.
    Why didn't the attorney he hired to advise him tell him that? jmm call some of your lawyer buddies and find out what happened. This part of the case really interest me, although details are sketchy from that point on a lot of the major events started happening.

  20. #60
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    if he wanted out of the Army, was simply to refuse the deployment order; at which point he would be charged under the UCMJ for refusal of a lawful order and the process would have gone from there - probably ending up in some sort of compromise plea bargain[*]. In any event, no killings.
    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Why didn't the attorney he hired to advise him tell him that? jmm call some of your lawyer buddies and find out what happened. This part of the case really interest me, although details are sketchy from that point on a lot of the major events started happening.
    I don't think that a lawyer can advise his client to deliberately break the law.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •