Comments on: 100% of Your Weekly Dose of Terrorism Panic

By: Lalusru

Lalusru — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:30:00 +0000

The weakest evidence for the terrorism argument is who he shot. Although Hasan had a relatively high rank and a very high security clearance, his victims were random. If he was consciously trying to inflict damage, he could have used his rank to gain access to a secure area and shot a general or two.
More likely, he was just a stressed out soldier who snapped. He worked with soldiers with post-traumatic stress and probably listened to some really horrific stuff. Although he was hearing it second-hand, it might have been overwhelmed. Also, many of the vets coming back say that while they were in Iraq, anti-Arab and anti-Iraqi racist speech was very common. Certainly he heard about that, too. If it didn’t politicize him, it added to his depression.

By: Anooshirvan

Anooshirvan — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:14:23 +0000

Joe Lieberman as the chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security has done his level best to link Major Hasan’s crimes to terrorism. I am wondering if Senator/Rabi Joe Lieberman is qualified to occupy that seat continuing to misinform the American people and milk their emotions?
The following article looks into these kinds of psy-op deceptions played on the American minds.
“Was Homeland Security Created to Protect Those Who Deceived the US?”
http://www.middle-east-online.com/ENGLISH/?id=35702

By: jtfromBC

jtfromBC — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:25:41 +0000

We trained and promoted him James Muhammad enlisted in the Louisiana Army National Guard in 1978 and, after seven years of service, volunteered for active duty in 1985. In 1987 he joined the Nation of Islam. While in the Army, Muhammad was trained as a mechanic, truck driver and specialist metalworker. He qualified with the Army's standard infantry rifle the M16, earning the ***Expert Rifleman's Badge*** This rating is the Army's highest of three levels of marksmanship for a basic soldier. He was discharged from military service following the Gulf War, as a sergeant, in 1994. - wiki Did he see the Iraq's road of death while sojourning there. I'm having trouble getting http://www.youtube.com/watchv=3NCLfhmWvJ8 so please google 'Iraq's road of death' > 2 min 23 sec- 22 August 2008 to get video clip When Bush II got his war on, http://www.youtube.com/watchv=WN6z5xr7EiI Six months later James Muhammad declared war as well..

By: tinwoman

tinwoman — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 11:14:08 +0000

More to come? More of what exactly? More military men going off the deep end and turning the gun on themselves and others (not that there’s anything new there)?
Or, more scary, scary Muslims going off the deep end and attacking us here, there, and everywhere?
Methinks TIME is going for the second, to leave people with that impression. However most Muslims living in the States have not proven themselves very likely to go all “Allah Akbar” on us and commit mass slaughter in the name of the Ummah. It’s already been eight years since 2001, and it just hasn’t happened.
If they are all ticking bombs, what are they waiting for?

By: mon_oeil

mon_oeil — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 04:32:21 +0000

It appears that this week was full of news and images of “terrorists” with Muslim names:
James MUHAMMAD, the DC region, sniper is executed by lethal injection
Khalid Shaikh MOHAMMED, the accused 9/11 mastermind faces civilian trial
Nidal Malik HASAN is charged with 13 counts of murder. His name is also a variation of the US President’s middle name and George W Bush’s archenemy’s last name.

By: jtfroBC

jtfroBC — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 23:38:31 +0000

‘If war is terrorism, then the US is a terrorist state,
> Correct, it’s the best keep secret by those who choose to be wilfully uninformed or for other reasons. In the old days it was difficult to get info. It took tough digging and days of hard work to acquires knowledge which can be had in hours using the Internet.
My 1950 Zenith Short Wave Radio was a marvelous source of information. I recall quality coverage of world events from the Dutch, the Australians, Canadian Foreign service and others. Both American and Soviet Programs mostly offered a steady diet of comical relief.
I received I.F Stones Weekly, how Izzy got his breaking stories amazes me to this day. http://www.ifstone.org/
To end this ramble I’m thinking Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, only 3 million slaughtered – Operation Rolling Thunder dropping more Bombs than in WW II in Europe.
Agent orange anyone? Napalm has unique qualities ! Cluster bombs are groovy and great for removing body parts for years to come. Depleted Uranium coated munitions dust attacks friend and foe equally.
In London, The Odds Makers were giving 450 to 1 for the good guys to win in Iraqi
Tom Engelhardt @http://tomdispatch.com/ takes us to the skies with the latest goodies for the bad guys:
‘Drone Race to a Known Future’
Why Military Dreams Fail — and Why It Doesn’t Matter.

By: Ursula L

Ursula L — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:44:25 +0000

If war is terrorism, then the US is a terrorist state, US soldiers are terrorists, etc. in the context of the US-Middle Eastern conflict.
But “terrorism” in the context of the shooting at Ft. Hood is being used to differentiate what we (the US) do, versus what others do to us. It’s a label used to dehumanize those who oppose the US, and de-legitimize their actions.
And it is also used as a way to created a privileged feeling of safety within the US when the US wages war.
A frequent comment I’ve heard is that people “never expected” an attack in the US, at Ft. Hood. But it is a military base, and we’re at war. It’s preposterous to imagine that we should be immune to counterattack, or to treat a wartime attack on a military base after years of active warfare as something that is reprehensible and criminal.
This can be seen as the actions of a single US citizen. In which case it is a crime. Or it can be seen as the actions of a representative of our enemies against our military. In which case, it is war, and the captured perpetrator(s) would be POWs, and entitled to be treated as such. It might be seen as the act of a double-agent in wartime, which has its own set of rules.
But it isn’t terrorism, in the 9/11, justify Gitmo and Abu Grabe, random attack on civilians to make a political point, sense of the word.

By: jtfromBC

jtfromBC — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:12:07 +0000

your observation – ‘I think that this is probably closer to a workplace shooting and suicide-by-cops than either terrorism or war.’ – is an important part of the investigative process as far as I’m concerned.
War however, is always the best example of terrorism in my opinion.

By: Ursula L

Ursula L — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:04:35 +0000

One question that I haven’t seen being asked is whether this would count as an “act of war” rather than of “terrorism.”
Ft. Hood is, undeniably, a military target. If, as the rightwingers claim, Hasan was acting in support of the Iraqis and Afghanis whose homelands the US has invaded, a military base that the US uses to train and deploy troops into Iraq and Afghanistan would be an expected place for a counterattack, and disrupting the training and deployment of occupying troops would be an act of war, not terrorism, within international law.
Unless, of course, “terrorism” is defined by whether it is done to us or them – we wage (just) war, when we attack them, they commit terrorism when they attack us.
Mind you, I think that this is probably closer to a workplace shooting and suicide-by-cops than either terrorism or war. My point is that the arguments of those who call the act “terrorism” work better as support for “war.”

By: Blue Shark

Blue Shark — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:54:36 +0000

“Politics is a process by which groups of people make decisions”. Ref [