Fort Hood shootings-- the official story stinks to high heaven

[spooked911]

There are multiple reports of more than one shooter. The improbability of the attacks. The whole story has the makings of a media psy-op with a classic patsy.

http://www.legitgov.org/attack_on_fort_hood_051109.html


CLG Exclusive: Fort Hood: 'This story stinks to high heaven.' SFC, who spent ten years at Fort Hood, comments on Ft. Hood events 09 Nov 2009 I spent 10 years at Ft Hood. There is no way this 'official' story is legitimate. No way would a room full of combat vets allow this one shooter to get off over 100 rounds! And, it is not normal for the outside security guards to be there. They are at the MP station, and at the main gates. This means the room full of soldiers processing must have been pinned down; multiple shooters is the only plausible scenario. this sounds like MAJ Hasan has been used, and perhaps is a patsy. --SFC Donald Buswell (Retired)

-----------
Now we find out Nidal was being monitored by the Feds:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us/10inquire.html

[Ohio Joe]

1. OMG!!!!

Inaccurate initial reporting! Speculation by the media before facts are known! It must mean that... that... SOMETHING! heh :D

[Bolo Boffin]

5. Butbutbut

reporters tend to get it right on the first day!!!! AE911Truth said so!!

[thepeopleunited]

2. Inconvenient truth teller gets the shaft.

Thanks for saying it spooked. It's an old story. Former lord chancellor of England Thomas More was arrested, tried and executed for treason in 1535 for refusing to sign a loyalty oath. He was sentenced to be drawn and quartered but his friends talked the king into beheading him. This being Texas, Major Hasan didn't even get that much respect. He may have lived but I doubt if we'll even hear his story.

[Bolo Boffin]

6. Is this the same Thomas More that sent people to be burned alive for owning a Bible in English? n/t

[thepeopleunited]

17. As a matter of fact, More came down hard in FAVOR of an English Bible.

From the 1984 Richard Marius biography:

"More points out {in his "Dialogue Concerning Heresies," which appeared in June 1529} that Greek, Hebrew, and Latin were languages of the common people at one time or another, and if the Bible came in these languages, it should be available in English." (Marius p. 347)

So it looks like the answer is no.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. Tell that to Richard Bayfield.

Oh, you can't. More had him burned for distributing copies of Tyndale's English translation of the Bible. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

[thepeopleunited]

19. Wikipedia. I should have known.

Bayfield was a monk who was executed for bigamy. Trust Wiki to twist that into a reichwing smear of Thomas More.

[Bolo Boffin]

20. Not too impressed with your police work there, thepeopleunited.

Oops, found some more people More had burned alive for heresy, etc...

http://reformation.org/sir-thomas-more.html

You really need to support your assertion of bigamy on Bayfield. He was a bookseller accused of distributing Tyndale's translation. Please stop repeating factual inaccuracies.

[thepeopleunited]

21. I'm sorry, but that is DEFINITELY a bigoted hate site.

Aren't those kinds of links against the rules?

[SDuderstadt]

22. WTF?

While I'm hardly endorsing it, how in the world do you reason that it's a "bigoted hate site"???

[thepeopleunited]

23. For one thing, it's full of gross inaccuracies.

That's a polite way of saying it's a pack of lies. Blatant example: More didn't burn Tyndale, Henry VIII did. More was DEAD when Tyndale was executed.

[Bolo Boffin]

26. The crazy person is getting his quotes from here:

http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Bestseller-Bible-Martyrdom-Betrayal/dp/0312314868

And you still haven't sourced your claim of bigamy yet.

[thepeopleunited]

27. Except you posted that link to support your point.

Which makes me wonder about your judgment.

[Bolo Boffin]

28. The dude, crazy though he be, is quoting another source.

Can you poison the well of THAT source as easily as you have that of the crazy dude?

[thepeopleunited]

30. "Saint Martin Luther's Birthday"?

When did the Vatican canonize Martin Luther?

That's from the homepage. Sorry Bolo, your entire site is wacko, and that's putting it politely.

[Bolo Boffin]

31. Hey, you're getting distracted. The website quotes a book not written by the website's author.

Refute the book. Any other comment about the website is just you stalling.

And you STILL STILL STILL have not provided the slightest scrap of evidence that Bayfield was executed because of bigamy. SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.

[thepeopleunited]

32. The Bayfield info is from Marius p.403.

Didn't anyone ever tell you that the web is a crappy place to do research?

[Bolo Boffin]

33. What the fuck is Marius p.403? That's not a proper citation. More information. n/t

[thepeopleunited]

34. See reply #6.

You can take it from there if you're really interested.

[Bolo Boffin]

35. Excellent. Now one more thing.

If you would be so good as to provide an actual quote with relevant context from page 403 of Richard Marius' book "Thomas More: A Biography" on the subject of Richard Bayfield. A scan of the page would be MOST HELPFUL. Thanks.

[thepeopleunited]

36. Try Google books.

Sorry, I'm not a scribe. :)

[Bolo Boffin]

38. I'm sorry. This is YOUR assertion. The burden of proof is on you.

You see, I think you've engaged in a little factual inaccuracy here. Perhaps indeed one of the charges against Bayfield was bigamy (which would be overachieving for a Catholic monk, wouldn't it!). But everything I can find says that Bayfield was distributing Tyndale's bibles, and it was for that crime of heresy that Thomas More had him burned alive.

What I'm wondering if you've selectively quoted your source. Perhaps Marius does indeed list that reason for Bayfield's immolation, but I'm curious to see if he lists other charges. Because you've offered this citiation in a Either/Or manner. You've said, no, Bayfield wasn't executed for distributing English Bibles. Bayfield was executed for Bigamy, you say, and you cite Marius. But if Marius cites BOTH reasons, then you've handled your source inappropriately. And if Marius is quite certain that More burned several other people at the stake for crimes like heresy and the distribution of Tyndale's bibles, then whether he did so with Bayfield becomes a moot point -- if your own source provides evidence that refutes your assertion.

And here we sit, myself without a copy of your source, and you presumably with, and the question remains: have you dealt with your source and with us in an accurate manner, in good faith?

So the choice is clear: you can provide a fuller quote, either with simple transcription or by scanning, of page 403 where Marius treats the lamentable death of Richard Bayfield, or I can trot down to the Preston/Royal branch of the Dallas Public Library tomorrow, secure a copy of "Thomas More: A Biography" by Richard Marius (which as of this moment is available on the shelf), and check out page 403 and its surrounding pages for myself.

And we shall know just how you treat sources and your fellow discussion partners.

Welcome to DU, thepeopleunited.

PS: You know, being burned alive for bigamy hardly seems a nice thing for the patron saint of politicians to have done. Your defense of More is rather like the lawyer of the man who murdered his mother and father pleading for mercy on the basis that his client is now an orphan.

[OnTheOtherHand]

45. there's another odd quirk of tpu's defense

well, maybe more than one. But the one that struck me was the conclusion (or insinuation?) that More wouldn't have had someone burnt at the stake for distributing Tyndale's English translation because More favored the availability of some English translation. That's fallacious on its face.

I followed tpu's thoughtful suggestion to look for Marius on Google Books, but p. 347 isn't there. However, page 348 doesn't bode at all well for tpu's interpretation. (ETA: According to Marius, it isn't even clear that More actually favored the availability of an English translation. Funny thing for tpu to omit.) Similarly, the page that tpu cites on Bayfield is missing, yet the very next page refers to "Bayfield and other heretics." Hmmmm.

You probably found Foxe's Book of Martyrs on Bayfield. Hmmmmmmm. This isn't looking good at all.

[Bolo Boffin]

46. Yes, I didn't make it to the library today.

But I've got the day off tomorrow, and there that copy sits.

And the night air is settling in around this subthread. Almost time to hear crickets...

[thepeopleunited]

50. You'll find it well worth your while

to borrow or buy it. It's a good bio and a timeless subject. Incidentally Marius is a Tennessee Baptist who goes out of his way to present the unvarnished truth.

[Bolo Boffin]

51. Again, you don't provide the quote or the scan. n/t

[thepeopleunited]

52. Knowledge awaits you.

And if you haven't seen "A Man for All Seasons" you owe it to yourself to find a copy and watch it.

[Bolo Boffin]

54. Oy, gevalt. n/t

[Bolo Boffin]

61. Pray tell, thepeopleunited, what does the word "colporteur" mean?

Hint: it ain't a famous American song composer of the 20th century.

ETA: For the edification of all:

http://books.google.com/books?id=tOPxpNo6mdUC&lpg=PA259&dq=%22Richard%20Bayfield%22&lr=&pg=PA259#v=onepage&q=%22Richard%20Bayfield%22&f=false

That's a quote from "God's Bestseller," the book being quoted at the crazy website I linked to. I do now have beside me a copy of pages 402-403 and 538 of Marius' "Thomas More."

Now that we are on equal footing, thepeopleunited, shall we discuss just how you have misunderstood what Marius wrote?

[Bolo Boffin]

67. Well, getting tombstoned to avoid answering a question seems extreme to me.

And a colporteur is a peddler of religious books. That's the first thing Richard Marius calls Richard Bayfield. He was burned alive because he kept distributing Tyndale's bibles, as the quote from More's own hand shows from the "God's Bestseller" link. The bigamy was More's example of how Bayfield's depravity manifested itself, not the reason he was being burned.

[SDuderstadt]

37. Even of true, that hardly makes it a "bigoted hate site"....

dude.

[Bolo Boffin]

39. Well, the crazy webmaster is not very enamored with the Catholic Church.

And some of his other stuff comes off in a bigoted and hateful way, so point taken there.

Regardless, the crazy person is quoting someone a little less crazy and a little less bigoted and hateful, and thepeopleunited's getting hung up on the crazy person's website sounds like he or she is doing it because it's something he or she would rather be talking about than defending his or her assertion that Bayfield was burned for bigamy by Thomas More.

[Bolo Boffin]

24. LMAO

Actually the way you refute that website (although the guy is quoting another book, so the facts remain) is to post a link to THIS page:

http://www.reformation.org/stationary-earth.html

Where everybody can be all impressed at MY police work!

[thepeopleunited]

25. What on earth are you talking about?

On second thought, never mind. I think I've seen enough, thanks.

[Bolo Boffin]

29. I possess the ability to LMAO at myself.

It's called a sense of humor.

[KDLarsen]

3. Reaching a new low

Who would have thought it was possible :eyes:

[HannibalCards]

4. Just wait

It will get kookier. I'm waiting for the first CT to make the 'November 5th' connection, coming in 5,4,3,2 ...

[LARED]

14. You mean the Guy Fawkes connection

Yes, there is a clear and strong connection to be found somewhere in the CT space time continuum.

[jakeXT]

7. You must be one of those Hasans ;-)

Commentary: Hasan's conspiracy mentors

WASHINGTON, Nov. 9 (UPI) -- Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is the proverbial canary in the mine. Gunning down 12 soldiers and one civilian, and wounding 31 was not a random act of violence by an army psychiatrist who was slated to deploy to Afghanistan, an evil war in his mind, where American infidels are killing good Muslims. As the Virginia-born major told a female neighbor in his apartment complex, "I'm going to do good work for God." Hasan wanted, in his mind, to die a martyr, killing American soldiers who had been killing Muslim soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan, or would soon be doing so.

There are tens of thousands of Hasans all over the Western world -- from Brussels to Berlin and from Burgos, Spain, to Birmingham, U.K. For them, Sept. 11, 2001, was a conspiracy cooked up by the CIA and Mossad, Israel's external intelligence service. Even though al-Qaida's Osama bin Laden and his No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri have both taken credit for Sept. 11, countless millions are convinced they had nothing to do with the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

..
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/2009/11/09/Commentary-Hasans-conspiracy-mentors/UPI-35781257771600/

[BeFree]

8. Simple facts are

...throughout the whole 9-11 thing, we have been lied to and obstructed by the bush people.

And, the fact is, if those Muslim soldiers weren't living on top of "our" oil
they would never have a reason to be pissed at us.

So the question is: who struck the first blow? Who started the fight?

Which begs the question: where is the fight being waged and who has the most dead?

And a follow up: who will win? And what will a win look like?

Now, realizing that these are complex issues, I expect no real answers,
SO DON'T WORRY 'BOUT IT. IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT.

[SDuderstadt]

9. Congratulations on submitting....

the most incoherent post so far this year.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

12. Interesting that you would be forced to ignore me....

but not the other way around. Hmmm.

[rollingrock]

13. Same here

Sdude has to be one of the most annoying and ignored posters of all time. I think he's going for a new record.

[SDuderstadt]

15. Yet you guys keep addressing me....

what a hoot. I am proud to be ignored by the more ignorant "truthers".

[undeterred]

48. He's a pain in the ass

and I told him so.

[SDuderstadt]

49. Maybe the three of you...

could start a little club or something. I've got it! How about a support group?

It'd be nice if you guys would stay focused on the actual debate. That is, if you're up to it.

[undeterred]

60. ...

:hi:

[SDuderstadt]

69. I'm guessing the support group idea is a...

non-starter.

[Algorem]

76. Turkey Day's coming up,dude!You're gonna get yourself some dark meat for sure.

Mmmm.Dark meat for Duderstadt!AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

[SDuderstadt]

77. WTF are you babbling about now...

dude?

[Algorem]

86. covering up?

[SDuderstadt]

10. Jesus, Spooked....

I ask once again: is there ANY conspiracy theory so goofy even YOU won't embrace it?

[LARED]

16. If history is any indication the answer is no - nt

[zappaman]

88. Why I read these threads

Just to hear you ask SPOOKED this question.
Makes me laugh everytime, dude.
Congrats!

[SDuderstadt]

94. Thanks, dude...

unfortunately it just seems to egg him on. I'm waiting for him to expose the suspicious circumstances of Soupy Sales' death.

[Neily]

40. O.K back on topic...

I did read a report from the U.K. Telegraph that Hasan attended the same Mosque as two of the 9/11 hijackers...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html

I don't think this connection should be ignored.

[spooked911]

41. So no one has a problem that one guy with hand guns took out half a company

of trained soldiers? I mean, really?

DO you people even think about these things or just reflexively say bullshit to whatever I write?

[Bolo Boffin]

43. of unarmed people? n/t

[jberryhill]

44. Are they trained to dodge bullets?

This may come as a surprise, but on a US military base, the troops don't carry around weapons and ammunition for the purpose of fighting with one another.

Early conflicting news reports during a chaotic event - IMPOSSIBLE!

[cherokeeprogressive]

53. 15 rounds in the clip and one in the chamber.

How many rounds do you think I could put downrange with 32 rounds at my disposal without reloading, and 15 per weapon afterward?

As fast as I could pull the trigger.

Would you just think about that for ONE SECOND? By the way, in ONE SECOND, I could pull the trigger four times.

How long does it take to expel one clip and shove another one home? 2 seconds max?

I'll bet you your next paycheck that in the space of four minutes or 240 seconds, I could, using two semi-automatic Beretta M-9's, fire no less than 300 rounds.

I could fit three clips in each front pocket of my slacks, two in each back pocket, and two in my shirt pocket. That's 12 clips x 15 rounds, not counting what I had in my weapon when I decided to start firing.

Are you THAT much of a dufus?

[spooked911]

57. that is not the issue

1) it takes time to aim
2) the targets were soldiers
3) we don't know the range he supposedly shot from

If he was shooting at short range, then he could have shot several people quickly but the soldiers could have gotten on him quickly, limiting how many he could shoot.

If he was shooting at longer range, it is harder to hit people with handguns-- he would need more time to aim, there would be less accuracy, there was more time for people to scramble and find cover.

Either way, hard to see how he shot so many alone. And lots of people agree with me.

[spooked911]

65. No response?

You really think soldiers just line up to be shot like that?

[Bolo Boffin]

66. Yes, I do.

I think soldiers line up to be shot all the time. I think they opened up for volunteers on who the terrorist would shoot and these are the ones that stepped forward.

You have NO FREAKING IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

[SDuderstadt]

68. If Spooked had "no freaking idea what he is talking about"...

how would anyone know?

[spooked911]

72. do you think the 42 victims were shot at close range or from a distance?

since you know so much about this

[Bolo Boffin]

73. Spooked, you are generating your plan of JAQing off before you have the slightest bit of info

what these shootings were like. How silly is it to question whether these shootings could be accomplished when you haven't the foggiest notion how they went down at all?

Grow up.

[spooked911]

74. I don't know what "JAQing off" is

though I suppose you know about it pretty well.

In any case, it is beyond reasonable-- it is essential-- that we question what happened in this story when it is presented in a psy-op manner and politicized the way it has been.

It is absurd to think that 42 SOLDIERS, many of them veterans, are going to be mowed down by ONE GUY with HANDGUNS.

[Bolo Boffin]

75. Just Asking Questions. n/t

[spooked911]

80. Um, you are?

I was sort of hoping you had the answers you seemed to be promoting.

[Bolo Boffin]

83. JAQing off = Just Asking Questions - what you are doing. n/t

[spooked911]

89. thanks for the clarification

but I wouldn't say I am just asking questions.

[SDuderstadt]

95. I agree....

it's more like you're just asking goofy questions, dude.

[aldo]

62. Ha, ha, ha, you so funny!

I was going to call you something back, but then I read your sig line. To all truthseekers, when the Borg drones resort to emotional name calling you know they are trying to shift the argument from logic to emotionality.

[LARED]

55. The truth of the matter is you post

so much nonsense, people do automatically think upon seeing a fresh Spoooked911 post "what wild idea has gripped Spooked today"

If you did post something sensible it would take people some time to adjust. Having said that this post is just as wacky as the first hundred or so you've deemed worthy to present to the world.

[spooked911]

56. I am not the only one

Oddly enough, it's only at the DU conspiracy forum where we get people predominately against the Official story.

[vincent_vega_lives]

71. The latter...with good reason. (n/t)

[spooked911]

42. good essay here

Fort Hood Mystery

By Michael Gaddy
LewRockwell.com
11-10-09

The facts as presented by the Army and the media reference the shooting at Fort Hood just don't compute. While I routinely dismiss any "facts" disseminated by the Army and the state's propaganda wing, sometimes referred to as the mainstream media, (MSM) there are some glaring inconsistencies in what has been reported about this tragedy.

First is the report the perpetrator was dead and then hours later the revelation that he was still alive. Exactly how long does it take to determine if a person is dead or alive? Could it be no one knew whom the shooter or shooters were and a story had to be concocted for public consumption? What happened to the two other "suspects" that were detained? What did they do to qualify as suspects and more importantly, what information surfaced that led to their release? One of the suspects reportedly stated he "was with the shooter."

Second is the number of victims from a single shooter. Let us not forget this shooting did not occur at the mall, it occurred on a military installation where the victims had been trained in military tactics and some were combat veterans. We are to believe they did nothing to stop a single shooter and he was allowed to reload several times and continue shooting and the only thing that stopped him was the arrival of a police officer after the gunman had gunned down over 40 people?

And how so very convenient for the state, a perpetrator who was both anti-war and a Muslim; just doesn't get any better than that. Could this be an example of following the philosophy of Rahm Emanuel on dealing with a crisis?

Third was the shutting down of communications in and around Ft. Hood for hours. While the Army and the media will explain this in various scenarios, it also provided the Army with a chance to create whatever story it was they wanted to provide the public on the terrible tragedy. Of course we all know the Army would never distort or lie about the facts involving the deaths of innocents. Well, there is that My Lai thing. People on the ground have told me cell phone towers were jammed to prevent unauthorized dissemination of information after the shooting. Again, the Army would not want any information contrary to the company line emerging from this disaster.

All too convenient for the Army was the rapid release of negative information related to the alleged shooter. It was said he received a negative evaluation report and that he had caused "red flags" to be raised some months ago concerning emails. Do we know anything this detailed about the "suspects" who were released? The caveat was added that it was unclear as to whether the suspect was the author of those emails. So, months ago, alarms were raised about emails the suspect might have sent, yet, in all those months the Army has been unable to determine who wrote them. Yeah, right. If red flags were in fact raised months ago, why did the Army do nothing? Going back to the 9/11 paradigm, we see the same evidence exhibited: the state had prior warnings but did not act on them. This proves unequivocally the government is either incompetent or complicit in both events. Yet, the state would have us all unarmed and depending on them for protection.

President Obama pledged, "to get answers to every single question about this event" but he also promised an end to signing statements, a transparent government, no more torture of detainees, and many more lies.

There has been speculation on the Internet that the shooting could have been a revolt against the Army from soldiers faced with stop-loss and multiple combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan. While there is no evidence to support this theory, there is also no evidence to support the official Army version of events. Suicides among military personnel and veterans are at alarming levels, yet the Department of Defense does more to hide these facts than it does to deal with them.

The last thing the state can let happen is an awakening by its enforcement arm (military and LE) that they are nothing but tools of oppression and in fact, slaves to the monster they serve. While the military is trained and encouraged to kill and bomb in the name of the state, they are forbidden the means of protection for themselves and their loved ones once they are outside the killing zones designated by the state.

All is not normal inside the military community. This is not just seen in our military, instruments of oppression in other countries are revolting as well.

While it is doubtful we will ever learn the truth of exactly what happened at Fort Hood, we know with a degree of certainty the truth will never be revealed by the Army or the media. Could this have been a false flag event to divert the attention of the American public from the debates and planned demonstrations against the health care fiasco? Could it have simply been another MK Ultra event to further demonize the anti-war element in this country and to lay another crime at the current villain du jour: Muslims? Could there be a connection between this alleged shooter and his fellow Virginia Tech shooter Seung Hui Cho, other than an oblique reference to Cho having a Muslim influence?

One must always ask this question when faced with a story that is issued and controlled by the State: Cui Bono? Wonderful is it not the state is empowered with the unique ability to investigate its own lies and the power of the media and academia to demonize any who would question its veracity, and the support of Boobus, whose livelihood depends on the state's power to redistribute the wealth of the nation from producers to parasites.

November 9, 2009

Michael Gaddy an Army veteran of Vietnam, Grenada, and Beirut, lives in the Four Corners area of the American Southwest.

[LARED]

47. The found the sentence that convinced Spooked this

was a good essay

While there is no evidence to support this theory,

[spooked911]

58. official story already being changed and stil no full account of the events

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/us/12hood.html

"The witness, who asked not to be identified, said Major Hasan wheeled on Sergeant Munley as she rounded the corner of a building and shot her, putting her on the ground. Then Major Hasan turned his back on her and started putting another magazine into his semiautomatic pistol.

It was at that moment that Senior Sgt. Mark Todd, a veteran police officer, rounded another corner of the building, found Major Hasan fumbling with his weapon and shot him.

How the authorities came to issue the original version of the story, which made Sergeant Munley a national hero for several days and obscured Sergeant Todd’s role, remains unclear. (Military officials also said for several hours after the shooting that Major Hasan had been killed, although he had survived.)

Six days after the deadly shooting rampage at a center where soldiers were preparing for deployment, the military has yet to put out a full account of what happened."

[MinM]

59. BradBlog: ABC News' Brian Ross' Hasan story debunked...

Network's 'investigative correspondent' used 'electronic means' to connect with terrorists...

How many times does he have to get these stories wrong before ABC News cans their hapless and constantly wrong "investigative correspondent" Brian Ross? We suspect he'll be allowed to keep screwing up, again and again and again, so long as his screw-ups result in lots of media attention. Little wonder Ross is one of the only broadcast network news stooges invited on Bill O'Reilly's show, again and again and again.

Gawker's John Cook takes apart Ross' big "scoop" yesterday, which swept both the wingnut and non-wingnut media alike --- cooking up the alleged Fort Hood shooter Army Major Nidal Malik "Hasan's Contacts with al Qaeda".

Those "contacts with al Qaeda"? Um, not so much, as Cook details. Turns out that Hasan's "attempt to reach out to al Qaeda" were, in actuality, three emails sent to the imam of the mosque that Hasan attended in Virginia in 2001, back when two of the 9/11 hijackers, reportedly, also attended the same mosque. The cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki, has since moved to Yemen where he has reportedly spoken out in favor of al-Qaeda.

The emails sent to him by Hasan? Whatever they were about, Ross doesn't know, and the FBI, who reportedly did know, apparently didn't find they warranted any action be taken...

Reminds me of this story...

Gerald Posner speed-dials the bros Karzai to air their side of the story

[spooked911]

64. Ross is pure propaganda/disinfo

a piece of shit

[Mist]

81. Thanks for posting, Spooked. I also have a problem believing that one shooter, with

a handgun! could do so much damage in the time stated.

ETA: weirdest hijacking in a thread ever. Thomas More, for chrissake??!!

[Bolo Boffin]

82. The tombstoned disrupter brought up More, making him and Hasan out to be saints. n/t

[aldo]

63. I see all the borg drones came out for this one

I was trying to read the thread, when I realized that it would take too long skipping through the Borg drone drivel to find the truth seeking comments. The Borg must really be threatened by this line of thought, they (it) called out all their drones.

[defendandprotect]

70. k

[Spoonman]

78. Complete horse shit

My nephew was there and somehow managed to come out of it unharmed.
Several people around him were not as fortunate.
I've spoken with him several times, and the guy was alone.
Seriously seek MEDICATION if you think otherwise!

[icee2]

79. Reports of multiple shooters...

would seem to contradict what you said. The lone nutter theory simply isn't plausible. Maybe we'll learn the truth soon.

[Bolo Boffin]

84. Confusing events are confusing. n/t

[vincent_vega_lives]

115. and who pray tell

gave you the the final say on plause?

[chrisa]

85. What a ridiculous theory.

Not to say that stranger things haven't happened, but the "multiple shooters" theory came from eye-witness accounts, which are not reliable.

The "100 Veterans could have stopped him!" theory does not follow common sense. Almost none of them were armed. A room with so many people would become chaotic, and is the worst environment possible for return fire.

Victims would have had different types of gunshot wounds from different bullets, unless if they all used the same type of guns and ammo.

[icee2]

87. eye-witness accounts reliable? depends.

The ones that claim they saw planes crashing into WTC & Pentagon are reliable, aren't they?

[OnTheOtherHand]

90. in themselves? of course not

Eyewitness testimony is inherently unreliable. We should expect eyewitness accounts of 9/11 sometimes to be inconsistent, and they are.

Was that too subtle?

[icee2]

91. Eyewitness accounts are VERY reliable if they are being used

in support of the OCT. They are totally UNRELIABLE if they contradict the OCT.

[OnTheOtherHand]

92. I don't know anyone who actually believes that

unless you really do, in which case you might want to rethink your bizarre use of the acronym "OCT."

ETA: That was almost certainly too subtle, so I will add: I don't know of anyone other than you who pretends to believe that, either.

[icee2]

96. Fact, my friend. Not belief.

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the historical record of 9/11 research, as published on Internet forums.

[OnTheOtherHand]

98. this reminds me of a friend's story

She was in an outdoor market in India looking at some product (I've forgotten what), out of curiosity more than any intention to buy. The vendor said, "What do you say to fifty rupees, my friend?" She responded, "I am not your friend, and I will not pay you fifty rupees."

(edit to correct bizarre typo)

[icee2]

99. Hilarious

There are many ways to avoid a point, and you just gave an example of one. Did you make it up or did you just read it somewhere?

[OnTheOtherHand]

100. no -- and I think you're the one avoiding the point n/t

[icee2]

101. Wrong again, but your "story" was a riot. n/t

[OnTheOtherHand]

103. yeah, and so was your baseless insinuation that I lied about it n/t

[icee2]

105. Are you an OCTer? n/t

[chrisa]

102. What a load of crap.

Eyewitness accounts are not fully reliable anywhere. However, the irony is that this CT is based on eyewitness accounts only: show me one other piece of evidence that there were multiple shooters?

That's a little different than a plane hitting a building, and having airplane wreckage everywhere.

[icee2]

104. Maybe Hasan has four hands

That would certainly make the Gov't version a lttle more plausible.

You're asking ME for evidence that would contradict the Government's version? THEY control the evidence and as with
other events (JFK, 911, Waco, Ruby Ridge, O. City, WTC '93 etc.) the Gov't will decide what evidence will be released,
suppressed, manufactured, planted, and destroyed.

[Bolo Boffin]

106. What's your opinion of Thomas More? n/t

[icee2]

107. Good, decent family man. Probably voted Republican.

Probably didn't use "blue" words in public or even in private.

[Bolo Boffin]

108. Interesting ideas on the salvation found in being burned alive for heresy.

Don't you think?

[icee2]

109. What did it profit him to keep his beard but lose his head? n/t

[icee2]

110. He is probably most famous for having coined the phrase...

"In the Pope we hope"

[vincent_vega_lives]

93. Only ones armed besides the attacker

was the two DOD cops that showed up.

[icee2]

97. AttackerS. n/t

[vincent_vega_lives]

112. Attack---errrrr.

Only 0ne1.

[icee2]

113. Keep dreamin' ... unless you are obliged to be a pretender. n/t

[vincent_vega_lives]

114. No I am not Chrissie Hynde

but I do so like to dream.

You sire are spouting refuse from nether regions.

[icee2]

111. Found this elsewhere. Interesting how history repeats.

Brasscheck via Treefrog:


It seems like in the years leading up
to whatever it was that happened
at Fort Hood on November 5, Maj.
Nidal Malik Hasan was one busy guy.

He made it a point to attend a mosque
run by a notorious, high profile imam
with an overly anti-American philosophy.

He encouraged soldiers to desert.

He was loud and outspoken about his
opposition to the war.

We're not some obscure immigrant
just off the boat working at a gas
station in Bayonne. NJ.

This was a freakin' major in the US army...
in wartime...who was given the job of providing
psychological counseling to troops.

Did the Army have a problem with any this?

No, not at all.

The Army is a liberal institution in the
best sense of that word and encourages
a wide diversity of opinion on its policies.

Live and let live. Every man is
entitled to his own opinion, right?

Any readers ever been in the armed forces?

How long do you think you'd have lasted
if you carried on this way?

For example, can you imagine a Marine
walking around base, spouting Marxism
and quoting Lenin at the height of the
Cold War being given a top security
clearance? Ridicu...

Ooops. I just described Lee Harvey
Oswald.

(Pay no attention to the foot high
stacks of documents the CIA *still*
refuses to release about him.)

But hey, that's all "conspiracy" stuff
and that's for kooks.

The US military has better things to
do while it protects the country than
keep tabs on a very publicly unbalanced
officer who is very publicly against the war.

...On the other hand, if you're a *civilian*
and not some nut in the making and
you're interested in peace, watch out.

The resources for keeping track of you
are boundless.