All due respect, there is no proof this man turned on the other soldiers because of religion. I think you are jumping to conclusions. It seems this guy snapped about being sent to combat after dealing with so many post traumatic syndrome patients. But to say this was all about religion is going too far.

What would he have to do to make you think it WAS because of religion, as saying suicide bombing by Muslims is justified (internet postings), that infidels that do not believe in the Koran should be beheaded and have salt poured down their necks (at a professional conference of psychiatrists!), and screaming “Allah Akhbar” while killing everyone near him isn't enough?

Perhaps he should have had his “Islamic Jihad' tee-shirt on, and screamed instead, '[Just to make sure there is no confusion over my motivations, I am doing this in the name of Islam”.

However, I fear you, and the appologist like you, would still say, 'Let's not jump to conclusions now.”

Jeesh.

This post was mentioned on Twitter by pa5fn: Details Emerging About Accused Fort Hood Massacre Shooter Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan: Investigators and journalists are … http://bit.ly/2rfck6...

Yes, it's all nit-picking. Yes, there is no need to speak up. No, you aren't welcome here if you disagree.

One fish, two fish… Red fish, blue fish… Nick nack paddy wack, give a dog a bone…. This old man came rolling home… YAHTZEE!

I absolutely ADORE a silly game. And regarding being cowardly, try this for size: the title “Possible Terrorist Attack at Ft. Hood TX (UPDATES)” stays. And if you don't like it, don't read it. And if that isn't good enough for you, don't come to this web site. And if that isn't good enough, have a coke and smile!

WTF? Forcing anyone to read anything? Honestly, isn't that just a cowardly way to tell me to get the hell out of here? Why not simply be a man about it and say it outright? Oh, I supposed that's nit-picking, too. Yes, wanting people to speak honestly and openly about things is a nasty little habit I picked up. How silly of me to believe it might be important to you as well.

As one of the moderators on this site, we don't go back any re-edit post titles. I did add “UPDATES” to the end of the post in question. The post says “Possible”. And that word speaks for itself.

In the meantime, consider past events, including not only the hand-grenade incident at the start of the Iraq war but also the shooting in Arkansas, and look for similarities as well as differences, for what they both are worth.

My point was that this incident seems to provide fodder for anyone to believe it supports whatever theory they want it to There is no need to jump to a new conclusion when the incident can be spun to support a long held one. Which is what the early commentators seem to be doing. (I have to say though, not so much here)

The past history of these kinds of incidents show that it is hard to find rational reasons for irrational acts.

The message here is “we should hate and distrust all muslims once again”.

Which leads to balling up the herd into the “stay in AF/Pak” corral and “let's renew our presence in the Middle East” corral.

I say that's a huge mistake, to think like a dumb cow. I don't recall after massacres by those raised christian or another western religion that we are encouraged to hate all christians and justify bombing churchs and so on..

Remember your head. Don't lose it in the fury dear readers..

No? Why is the title of this piece still about terrorism and the tag “war”?

It is a singular mark of disgrace to this website that it continues to hawk fear and hatred rather than rational discourse. If I wanted that kind of crap, I'd go to Red State or DKos. Grow a pair of balls, admit there was a mistake, and change it.

There is enough here to satisfy and support anyone's pet theories of the root causes of mass violence.