It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was the Fort Hood Massacre SUPPOSED to happen?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Today subpoenas for information on the mass shooting at Fort Hood were issued by two senators. The claim is that the administration is withholding evidence that Maj. Nidal Hassan (the Fort Hood jack@$$) was a documented threat known by superiors well before the shooting.


They said the committee had sent four formal requests for information to the Pentagon and two to the Justice Department, and received little response

"Our efforts have been met with delay, the production of little that was not already publicly available, and shifting reasons why the departments are withholding the documents and witnesses that we have requested," they wrote. "Unfortunately, it is impossible for us to avoid reaching the conclusion that the departments simply do not want to cooperate with our investigation."


Senate Committee Subpoenas Administration for Fort Hood Documents



So I thought, "Why would they be withholding evidence?" is it possible that this act should have been seen well in advance, but may very well have been allowed to happen.

Hassan's Lawyer came out saying that the information being hidden proves that he was designated as a threat well in advance of the shooting. Now, if this is in fact the case it certianly doesn't prove that this was set up to happen, but if I learned anything from the 9/11 incident it was that sometimes our intelligence systems allow things to happen to promote their agenda.

But why? To further villanise redical extremeism? Gun reform maybe??


Gates also has issued new regulations, including restrictions on how privately owned guns can be carried or stored at military installations. Hasan had little or no access to military firearms in his job as a psychologist, but was able to buy two handguns and bring them onto the base.


Now of course there couldn't be a connection between Nidal Hassan and 9/11 could there? Well there is, and his name is Anwar al-Awlaki.



Anwar al-Awlaki

Al-Awlaki's has reportedly met privately with at least two of the 9/11 hijackers. Due to these contacts, investigators suspect al-Awlaki may have known about the 9/11 attacks in advance. U.S. intelligence has intercepted emails between al-Awlaki and accused Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan and after the Fort Hood shooting, al-Awlaki praised Hasan's actions


But surely we didn't know about this before the shooting right? Wrong


They also want to have interviews arranged with Pentagon and FBI officials who investigated Hasan after his contact with radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.


Now I may be stretching here, so I ask you this ATS, could it be possible that this was allowed to happen???

-E-

[edit on 20-4-2010 by MysterE]




posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
"allowed" or "supposed" to happen?

2nd line



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by IandEye
"allowed" or "supposed" to happen?

2nd line


Both! But supposed gets the point across better, I tink I will change the thread title

-E-

[edit on 20-4-2010 by MysterE]



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I don't think you are reaching at all. Looks like there is enough evidence to say that they knew he was a substantial thread and for whatever reason did not act on that information. Seems to me that they allowed it to happen. I think you hit the nail on the head when you suggested to further their agenda. More likely to lend support towards an anti-radical movement. Maybe to further villify them in support of Israel and their aggression in the middle east. Or, to foster more support in regards to a possible attack on Iran.



new topics

top topics
 
2

log in

join