Not really hearing much official about this shooting that just happened in Texas, sounds like there may be more than one shooter. Hope it isn't a terror cell (not that I want it to be anything else either). http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091105/ts_nm/us_texas_shooting
possibly 2-3 shooters, so far 7 dead... one of shooters I heard is in uniform, all info is unsubstantiated but comes from within the base itself which obviously is on major lockdown right now, I'm sure more news will soon follow.
Just spoke to my niece, her and her hubby are stationed there, 12 dead 31 wounded, the shooter is dead, two other shooter suspects, all were military
A recently tranferred pyschiatrist who had gotten a poor evaluation. Certainly, his name will indeed raise eyebrows as an apparent muslim, but obviously at this point, there need not be any rush to judgement about terror cell affiliations.
True. This guy, while likely a muslim, could have been acting on his own like the muslim soldier who threw a grenade into a mess tent several years ago (believe it was in Iraq around 2002 or 2003). I think his declaration was that he didn't feel the soldiers were treating the citizens right and he acted on his own impulses. Sounds like this guy just had a grudge because his professionalism was questioned, but we all know the motives are immediately suspicious.
Now reporting that the suspected shooter is alive. His rank, his religious affiliation have little to do with the fact that this is a heinous crime.
Why so? I know of plenty of commissioned and non-commissioned officers who committed crimes. Conducted the courts martial for a few, preferred charges against a lot. Didn't make them any more special. And certainly, if anything, their choices were more reprehensible, because they failed as leaders. Yet, basically, they were slimy people who made it into positions of responsibility. Religious affiliation does not automatically enter into the equation. Does the FLDS man convicted of sexual abuse of a teenage girl make his crime any more or less reprehensible than a man of a different religious belief being convicted of the same crime? Jester mentioned not rushing to judgment. Even though I felt he intimated it by describing the man's possible religious affiliation, it was good advice.
From what I'm hearing, he had a profound objection to missions in Afghanistan and/or Iraq and was to be deployed soon.
Well, a member of the House has called for an end to our troops in Afghanistan. Now this isn't a knee jerk reaction from somone whose never worn a uniform, but a call from a 24 year veteran, who has come to the conclusion, as many have. The recent resignation by a former Marine Captain, then State Dept employee, also sounded the alarm as to the situation and the need to withdraw, not add more troops.
Why did the man that killed his family get what seemed to be a more compassionate response than this from you... you never used heinous crime... with him. just curious...seemed like sympathy for what pushed him to do it. These crimes you speak of from officers I would bet didn't involve mass murders... let alone possibly even one... I think rank is somewhat relevant in this. My opinion obviously.
Those deaths in Fayetteville were an atrocity! However the two crimes may appear the same on the surface, they are different. Apples and oranges, so to speak. Both are fruit and taste good, but are hardly interchangeable. The murder-suicide in Fayetteville, as described, suggested a different motive for the crime. In the end, though, there is tragedy, and little to nothing positive wil come out of it.
:iagree: What causes people do take others with them? That is what I do not understand. If you take yourself out, that alone is a tragedy for those left behind, but why take other innocent people with you? I will never understand what causes people to do that. So sad for the families of those killed.:cry:
