Liveleak.com - Redefining the Media

Terror Attack at Ft Hood - Why Won't Govt Call It Terror?

In the aftermath of the tragic attack at Ft Hood, reportedly committed by a group of at least three servicemen, one of whom has been identified as a Muslim officer, Major Maliki Hasan, government anti-terror forces are hesitating to call it terrorism. Unless the other two arrested for it turn out to be Methodists, I think it's pretty clear what's going on here.

Download Video Now
Liveleak requires flash. If you see this message, make sure you have the latest flash player installed. To install the latest version, click HERE

Record This Video

Video Issues? Turbocharge you PC: Scan for Errors Now. FREE!



Added: Nov 5 2009   In: other

By: nysuperdoodle Premium  United States

  • Views: 648 |
  • Votes: 0 |
  • Recommendations: 0 |
  • Comments: 37

Comments - sort by newest to oldest

  • Perhaps waiting until all the facts are gathered before posting "conspiracy" vids. This only breeds fear and loathing before knowledge is affirmed.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "Proud Texan" (R)

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (6)
  • That depends. Was the shooting done to further a political or religious agenda? Or was it the crazed act of someone who just flipped out?

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "gregory_peckory" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (3)
  • A muslim convert. Islam= the religion of death.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "Stage-Right" (R)

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (4)
  • It's only terror when a muslim kills?

    moron.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "PH-DEE" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (1)
  • Quoted comment by Stage-Right: A muslim convert. Islam= the religion of death.

    Not a convert.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "too_much_noise" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (2)
  • Quoted comment by too_much_noise:
    Quoted comment by Stage-Right: A muslim convert. Islam= the religion of death.

    Not a convert.

    sorry..... A muslim. Islam= the religion of death.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "Stage-Right" (R)

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (0)
  • Quoted comment by PH-DEE: It's only terror when a muslim kills?

    moron.

    my oh my..... arent we politically correct. Pat yourself on the back.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "Stage-Right" (R)

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (2)
  • Quoted comment by gregory_peckory: That depends. Was the shooting done to further a political or religious agenda? Or was it the crazed act of someone who just flipped out?

    From what I've read about him, he had some problems for a while. He had issues dealing with his psychiatry patients, and needed extra supervision/intervention because of it.

    While the fact that he was a Muslim may have been a factor, it seems that the fact that he was an unstable person was just as big, or more, of a factor.

    I wouldn't call it a "terror attack" either. His motives seem more personal. I'm wondering if the other two people who were detained will actually turn out to be involved at all.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "too_much_noise" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (1)
  • The Terrorist Code

    US CODE: Title 18,2331. Definitions skip navigation Search Law SchoolSearch
    CornellLII / Legal Information Institute home search find a lawyer donate

    U.S. Code collection main page faq index search

    TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > Definitions
    How Current is This? As used in this chapter-
    (1) the term "international terrorism" means activities that-
    (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of
    the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a
    criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or
    of any State;
    (B) appear to be intended-
    (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
    (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
    (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination,
    or kidnapping; and
    (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States,
    or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are
    accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the
    locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
    (2) the term "national of the United States" has the meaning given such term in
    section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act;
    (3) the term "person" means any individual or entity capable of holding a legal
    or beneficial interest in property;
    (4) the term "act of war" means any act occurring in the course of-
    (A) declared war;
    (B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more
    nations; or
    (C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin; and
    (5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that-
    (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal
    laws of the United States or of any State;
    (B) appear to be intended-
    (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
    (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
    (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination,
    or kidnapping; and
    (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "whatduh" (R) Canada

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (0)
  • Quoted comment by too_much_noise:
    Quoted comment by gregory_peckory: That depends. Was the shooting done to further a political or religious agenda? Or was it the crazed act of someone who just flipped out?

    From what I've read about him, he had some problems for a while. He had issues dealing with his psychiatry patients, and needed extra supervision/intervention because of it.

    While the fact that he was a Muslim may have been a factor, it seems that the fact that he was an unstable person was just as big, or more, of a factor.

    I wouldn't call it a "terror attack" either. His motives seem more personal. I'm wondering if the other two people who were detained will actually turn out to be involved at all.

    Apparently not,this is the most informative clip I've seen so far,just facts,no speculation,or opinion.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0c4_1257474645

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "CoolQcumber" (R) Canada

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (0)
  • <<Unless the other two arrested for it turn out to be Methodists, I think it's pretty clear what's going on here.<<

    No one else was arrested. Three other people were questioned and released. Such things often happen in the confusion following and incident like this.

    That's why it's good to wait more than a few hours before deciding that you know "what's going on here".

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "too_much_noise" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (1)
  • Your conspiracy theory is based on fails information...

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "32oz" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (2)
  • Only 1 person carried out this "terror" attack..

    gets your facts straight before posting crap


    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "LittleBloke" (R) Australia

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (4)
  • Quoted comment by Stage-Right:
    Quoted comment by PH-DEE: It's only terror when a muslim kills?

    moron.

    my oh my..... arent we politically correct. Pat yourself on the back.

    Conservative fuks news simple minded zombie excrements like you harrassed this good american for being a muslim. They made him snap. This is the consequence of abuse.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "CapedieMan" (R) United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (-2)
  • Quoted comment by 32oz: Your conspiracy theory is based on fails information...

    Fuks news style spycho-whores do that all the time on LL.

    Posted Nov-6-2009 by "CapedieMan" United States

    Good comment!  Bad comment! (-2)
« Previous  1  2  3  Next »
You need a registered account to make comments!

Advertisers