The facts are the anti-dote to your misinformation and lies. You try to turn your wishful thinking into reality.

You claimed something I posted was false. That was a lie. This is not the first time you have lied. It seems to be a habit for you.

Yet your response was to cut and paste the same bullshit over again…

Get a life dude.

It has clearly been established that Nidal Hasan attended the same Virginia mosque as two September 11 hijackers in 2001, a time when a radical imam preached there. At the time, Anwar Aulaqi was an imam, or spiritual leader, at the Washington-area mosque. Al-Hazmi and another hijacker, Hani Hanjour, attended the Dar al Hijrah mosque in Virginia in early April 2001. Nidal Hasan held his mother's funeral at the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia, on May 31, 2001.

The burden of proof is on you and the media

The only "burden of proof" will be on the prosecutors who are charging Hasan with 13 counts of premeditated murder.

All of your denials and excuses about certain aspects of the case are insignificant.

Merely repeating your Islamophobic assertions again and again does not make them reality

There is nothing "Islamophobic" about the fact that Hasan was a devout Muslim, that he gave some strange and inappropriate lectures at Walter Reed Hospital about Islam, that he made many statements such as he was a "Muslim first and American second" or non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire, ect.

Initial reports from real news sources – not pseudo-news like SOTT – reported that others were taken into custody for questioning… then it was revealed that they were fleeing the shooting and were innocent. That was early on.

The guy who claimed he heard the shooter shouting "Allahu Akhbar" earlier claimed he wasn't sure if he heard that or not.

Multiple soldiers reported hearing this.

The media claimed he attended a mosque lead by a radical Muslim with ties to the 9-11 suspects who called for jihad against America and was said to be on Yemen's "Most Wanted" List

The media correctly reported that he had been COMMUNICATING with Anwar al-Awlaki who was released from a Yemeni jail last year, has used his personal Web site to encourage Muslims across the world to kill U.S. troops in Iraq.

The media correctly reported that he attended a mosque when the radical imam Anwar Aulaqi, presumably the same person, preached there. You are in such a frenzy of denial that you are getting all mixed up.

There rest of your comments about "why this, and why that" are desperate and irrelevant.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/196533-Reviving…

The author clearly establishes many of the problems with the "facts" of this incident as we are being told. I can add a few others:

1. Initial reports from multiple sources clearly indicated there was more than one shooter involved. Other reports indicated that another suspect had been arrested and admitted he was "with the shooter." Still other reports indicated multiple shooters at multiple places, some using sniper rifles. What happened to these other suspects?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRXxk0coJ7Y

2. The guy who claimed he heard the shooter shouting "Allahu Akhbar" earlier claimed he wasn't sure if he heard that or not.
3. The media claimed he attended a mosque lead by a radical Muslim with ties to the 9-11 suspects who called for jihad against America and was said to be on Yemen's "Most Wanted" List. This begs the question, why wasn't he arrested or investigated? Later the media claimed that Mr Most Wanted is now in Yemen, which is why he wasn't arrested here. So why isn't he being arrested there is he is wanted?
3. The shooter was initially said to have shot 43 people in 5 minutes firing 100 rounds from a revolver. Many of the victims were shot multiple times. When people pointed out the sheer impossibility that a lone gunman could shoot and reload a revolver that fast and hit targets with that degree of accuracy in such a short time, the story then changed to that he had 2 pistols. Later, the make of the pistol in question was changed from a revolver to some high tech thing with a 20 round clip. Even then, that would be a near impossible feat of shooting.
4. Why did this "radical Muslim" put down "No Preference" as his religion on his personnel records? A person with "No Pref" on his dogtags would most typically get a Christian funeral by a military chaplain, or even a funeral by a Jewish rabbi if no chaplain were available. He would not usually receive a Muslim funeral except by chance.
5. Nidal was said to express sympathy for suicide bombers. What he actually did was to try and explain the psychology behind suicide bombers, avoiding the usual simplistic religious explanation.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/196300-Nidal-Ha… part 1

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the suspect in last weeks Fort Hood, Texas shooting spree that killed 13 people, came under scrutiny by officials beginning last year for communicating with Anwar al-Awlaki, who had been a scholar at a mosque Hasan attended when he lived in Virginia. The Virginia mosque where al-Awlaki taught had also been visited by 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Hani Hanjour.

He prayed every day at the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, a devout Muslim . He held his mother's funeral at the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia, on May 31, 2001, according to her obituary in the Roanoke Times newspaper. At the time, Anwar Aulaqi was an imam, or spiritual leader, at the Washington-area mosque.

Fellow doctors have recounted how they were repeatedly harangued by Hasan about religion and that he openly claimed to be a "Muslim first and American second." He also told colleagues at America's top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. Colleagues had expected a discussion on a medical issue but were instead given an extremist interpretation of the Koran, which Hasan appeared to believe.

A group of doctors overseeing Nidal Malik Hasan's medical training discussed concerns about his overly zealous religious views and strange behavior months before the Army major was accused of opening fire on soldiers and civilians at Fort Hood, Texas.

Doctors and staff overseeing Hasan's training viewed him at times as belligerent, defensive and argumentative in his frequent discussions of his Muslim faith, a military official familiar with several group discussions about Hasan said.

The Pentagon has found no evidence that Hasan formally sought release from the Army as a conscientious objector or for any other reason, two senior military officials told The Associated Press. Family members have said he wanted to get out of the Army and had sought legal advice, suggesting that Hasan's anxiety as a Muslim over his pending deployment overseas might have been a factor in the deadly rampage.

Hasan had complained privately to colleagues that he was harassed for his religion and that he wanted to get out of the Army. But there is no record of Hasan filing a complaint with his chain of command regarding any harassment he may have suffered for being Muslim or any record of him formally seeking release from the military, the officials told the AP.

ARAYUS

The 911 attacks were done in the name of Islam.

If someone went to some other country and flew airplanes into buildings killing thousands of people, and their group revealed that it was done in the name of Jesus Christ, and the perpetrators yelled "Praise Jesus!" as they flew into the buildings…. obviously regular Christians would come out and say that NO, this has nothing to do with Christianity.

And if there were some sort of crazed radical Christians detonating suicide bombs all over the world, with their groups releasing statements about the power of Christ… certainly regular Christian Churches would reject this and make it clear that it had nothing to do with real Christianity.

By the way, just look at how many nutjobs in this country believe that Bush, or Jews, or someone else was behind the 911 attacks (instead of radical Muslims)

Obviously those issuing condemnations see these statements as disconnecting their group identity from the crime. Maybe detaching from the crime is viewed as better than remaining silent, which could have the unintended consequence of appearing allegiant to the religiosity which is possibly responsible for the violence.

I haven't been aware of any "opportunists" taking advantage of the news for some nefarious purpose, as if there are people out there just waiting for something like this to happen so they can use it as an opportunity to take advantage of.

On talk radio I have heard some disgust with the way Obama and his administration tried to dance around the fact that the attacker was Muslim and the reason had to do with the wars. He didn't mind immediately stating that the "Cambridge police acted stupidly" before he even knew what had happened (because they arrested a black man that Obama knew)

For some reason ppl keep bringing up Timothy McVeigh – but did you notice after that attack there wasn't all this need for "understanding" and there wasn't all the excuse making? His ideology and associations were discovered, and no one tried to make excuses for it.

Yes there is other terrorism, and yes there is other violence. And no, not all Muslims are terrorists.

The 911 attacks, the train bombings in Spain, the public transit system attacks in London, the nightclub bombings, and jihad attacks all over the globe are part of this phenomenon.

This global phenomenon is unique to Islam. Obviously regular Muslims who are against this sort of activity do not want to be stigmatized by what the radicals do…. that is why they denounce it (something you seem to have a problem with, for some reason).

Where have some of these "radical Christians" latest attacks been?

its not Islam that motivates any attacks from any radical Muslims

Wrong again: listen to this (just one example)

But as long as we pretend that its "Islam" that is causing them to act this way

It is not Islam, it is the bastardization of Islam into this extremism which is about terrorism and fascism. Most people consider it to be a perversion of Islam which is responsible. You seem to be trying to say that Islam has nothing to do with it, and that is clearly wrong.