7 killed in shootings at Fort Hood, Pentagon says

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by Kappamd

They shouldn't be allowed in the US PERIOD, let alone the military.

But proving somebody has concrete ties to terrorism is near impossible to do except for higher ups.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by honeychile

This is fancinating no matter how you look at it, but yes, I think you have it right. Here's a question for you, however: if someone is known to have ties with Al-Qaida or any other terrorist organization, should he or she be permitted to be in the US military?

Of course he shouldn't be allowed in the US military. That's the reason why the process should likely be put on trial. What did the Army (or FBI) know? When? What was done about it? Why/why not?

I don't think the shooter had substantive ties to al Qaeda - everything I've seen was deemed harmless/for research purposes by those "in the know" - but the very specter makes me reject the notion of "not putting the military on trial" in this case.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Why do you feel that way?

Because it makes me angry how often there have been red flags in most of these mass killings, but people just chose to sweep it under the rug or ignore it. I think in many instances, had something been done, we might not have lost so many lives. Maybe if there is a public airing of sorts and some blame starts being cast, new policies and guidelines will be put in place.

[Psi U MC Vito]

I do agree somebody screwed up big time. The man was a shrink working with other shrinks on a regular basis. How did none of them realize he wasn't completely stable. Though I think this might have been partially caused by over sensitivity to religious freedom.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

I do agree somebody screwed up big time. The man was a shrink working with other shrinks on a regular basis. How did none of them realize he wasn't completely stable. Though I think this might have been partially caused by over sensitivity to religious freedom.

I agree. However, I think there was also something else at play. Elitism doesn't seem like the right word, but basically I'm trying to say I think the fact that he was a psychiatrist also had something to do with it. I think sometimes people think that folks who are in certain positions really wouldn't do something like this...especially not a shrink.