Posted on 07/18/2011 8:05:35 PM PDT by Hunton Peck
A new filing in the Fort Hood case shows that a key White House Intelligence report on the Fort Hood Shooting in November 2009 is still being withheld from the defense. The Army also admits it does not have all of the emails exchanged between the accused shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan and the first American on the CIA’s kill or capture list, Anwar al-Awlaki.
The documents, filed on July 14 as part of the Fort Hood prosecution, state:
“Trial counsels (Army lawyers) have produced all electronic communication in their possession between the Accused and Anwar al-Awlaki. On information and belief, trials counsels do not believe they possess all electronic communications between the Accused and the individuals (al-Awlaki.)”
Hasan’s defense lawyer, John Galligan, says he was given nine emails by the military as part of the discovery process. Yet, sources who have reviewed the email exchange between Hasan and Awlaki which began in December 2008 tell Fox News there are at least 18 emails.
Characterization of the emails exchanged between the accused Fort Hood shooter and the cleric range from benign to clearly concerning in tone. In one email, Hasan reportedly asked if it was okay to kill Americans – though U.S. officials will not comment publicly on the accuracy of those reports or the contents of the emails.
Yet, some former intelligence officials say the mere contact between Hasan and Awlaki – an American citizen who leads the new breed of Digital Jihadists who spread their ideology of hate through the web – should have prompted immediate action. Fox News’ investigative unit, in its special “Secrets of 9/11,” has shown that Awlaki’s contact with three of the 9/11 hijackers was not a series of coincidences but rather evidence of a purposeful relationship.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Not true. Soldiers on “guard duty” are carrying, but they are posted at the gates.
Then they had “civilian cops” on the base as well.
Of course you and I know that the reason we carry is because a cop wont fit in our pocket
On a submarine base, the topside watch would carry a 1911 and a rem 820 shotgun.
On the pier marines would have M16s and 1911s.
But there is no one inside the sub that is armed.
Like the base, it would be considered secured
rem 870
Now the second a gunshot was heard, the master at arms would unlock the Amory and every SOB on the boat would be armed.
This can only be done due to the close proximity of the crew to the armory.
On a base, the size of Ft Hood, I am afraid there was no way to do that.
Do you or anyone else here think that the Ft Hood shootings will change the way things are done on Army bases to prevent another mass killing?
Surely someone in authority could come up with a better way to protect our troops.
Inject Helen Thomas with massive amounts of aphrodisiacs and lock him in a room with her.
Cheers!
No.
I don’t think it will change.
You have less liberty as a soldier than as a civilian.
Have you been to Ft Hood?
Its farking huge! The only way to prevent this thing was for all the troops to be armed.
What are the odds that they have an armory at the Soldier Readiness Center, where personnel receive routine medical treatment immediately prior to and on return from deployment?
its like having an armory at the nurses office
I dont know what the answer is other than to allow our soldiers to carry on base.
We take a risk if we allow soldiers to be armed at a place that is for decompressing soldiers emotions, but we also take a risk in making that place gun free.
Hassan was a shrink. He picked and chose his target.
He deserves the worst
He mocked our sympathy and concern for troops that were on the edge.
The Soldier Readiness Center was supposed to be a safe understanding place.
Yes, I have been to Ft Hood twice in my life. I don’t live too far from there, as I’m in Lakeway, which is on Lake Travis, more or less a suburb of Austin.
We own a “ranch” between Lampassas and Ft Hood. I know the area quite well, but had never known that military bases don’t let their troops keep weapons. I was very naive in that respect. You just expect soldiers to be armed—LOL!
We had soldiers in that place that took immediate action with what they had. Their body’s.
If just 6 had been armed, Hassan would not have emptied one mag.
Nidal Hassan is an evil man, who picked his target very deliberately,He picked a “safe place”, I guarantee he shot that pregnant soldier on purpose, for maximum effect.
There are megarules for having personally owned guns on base. You usually have to keep it with some master at arms and check it out when you would like to go hunting or target shooting.
It really cant be done.
So you move off base and enjoy the rights of a civilian in that regard.
I used to keep my Galil and ammo in my truck when I was at Ft. Bragg. Actually pretty lucky it wasn’t stolen.
What continues to haunt me are the final words of the pregnant soldier who was being processed out
...
"My Baby My Baby".
I'd serve on the firing squad myself. If we still did it that way. But a fat old retired reservist would be way back in the line for that duty and privilege I'm afraid.
The MPs, the civil servant DoD police and the "rent a cop" gate guards, are armed. I've seen their guns. The MPs have M9s. The gate guards have something that looks like a Glock, could be a S&W "clone". Not sure what the civil service cops have.
Hassan was shot by one of the those DoD Civilian police, a rather large gentleman, after he shot the female one who was the first to shoot at him.
I had my knee replacement surgery in the same hospital that the female cop, and others, were taken to. I even had the same physical therapist as she did.
Close. But at Ft. Hood the gates are manned by civilian rent a cops. Their are both green suit MPs and Civilian Army/DoD cops that patrol inside the post, well also the housing areas that are outside the wire. I live only about 3/4 mile, straight out my driveway, from one of those.
But the gate guards, the MPs and the DoD police are all armed, with handguns at least. Never asked what they had in their cruisers. There might be "sensitive" areas with regular soliders on guard duty, but if so, i never saw it.
Now not long after 9-11, the Guards at the gates of Tinker AFB were armed with M-16s. They were mostly Army Guard and Reserve, with at least one AF Security police on hand. Back in the day, the SAC guards had nice nickle plated revolvers, and "silver" helmets too. :) Oh, and on some bases "War Wagons". Most especially bomber and missile bases. Had a buddy that was a Sky Copy in the Air Guard. He was armed with a 1911, whether patrolling the flight line or guarding the gate, or providing initial security at a crash site. Before 9-11, Ft. Hood,and Ft Riley, that I know of, were "open" posts. With only few restricted areas. That all changed. Apparently the changes were not geared to stopping doctors wearing oak leaves and carrying military ID.
Sure there is. Unit armories close to the troops living and working areas. Not perfect, many would be away for one reason or another. But good enough.
Actually they went the other way. There was talk of allowing CHL holders to have their weapons in their vehicles. That got squashed after Hassan's murderous rampage.
Of course in Texas, anyone can have a concealed handgun in their vehicle, provided they are traveling, and that means that the vehicle is going somewhere, even just down to the mail box. That's been in effect for some time now, with no increase in road rage shooting or any of the other predicted calamities. The Army could and should learn from that.
There are people for whom that is their duty station, many of them are military. They could have access to a small armory. Their "customers" would be SOL, but at least someone could have returned fire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.