Was the Fort Hood shooting an act of terrorism?

[FluffyMcDeath]

Looks like some heads are about to roll...

You mean there will be promotions like the guys who handled the pre-911 info and didn't think it was worth acting on?

 

[Glaucus]

See. He hasn't been found guilty yet but you say he did it. The principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is completely violated. You have already found him guilty based on what the TV news said within hours of the event - and you seem to be pretty sure that he's a terrorist too (unless you are just playing devils advocate on that subject) - all on heresay.

Something along those lines...

Why Is Maj. Nidal Hasan Still the "Alleged" Fort Hood Shooter?

Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood last week, was indicted on Thursday. Most news stories covering the incident—including those on Slate—refer to Hasan as the "alleged," "accused," or "suspected" killer, even though several eyewitnesses have fingered Hasan and there are no other suspects. Why can't newspapers drop all these modifiers and just go with killer?

 

[Glaucus]

If the intention of the shooter was to further marginalize Muslims in America then he is unlikely to be a Muslim. This is something that would better benefit the Christian power structure and current ruling classes. It wouldn't be something that a sane Muslim would aspire to do. Either it is a false flag designed to smear Muslims or the guy just wasn't thinking that far ahead.

Here's a better attempt at addressing your argument above:

The Real Shock of Fort Hood

The conventional wisdom is that unlike Europe's discontented Muslims, America's Muslims are prosperous and happy, having benefited from the welcoming embrace of our "melting pot" nation. This is basically a complacent fiction. According to a Gallup poll released in March 2009, while Muslim integration in the United States has been more successful than in Europe, Muslims remain less civically engaged in American society and less inclined to view their social position positively than any other religious group.

These attitudes have hardened since the attacks of Sept. 11, with American Muslims increasingly choosing not to assimilate into American society and instead finding solace in their religious identity. For example, exclusionary Muslim students' associations on college campus have grown, as have Islamic schools and Muslim radio stations and publications.

Immediately after 9/11 Americans turned more conservative, which is kinda natural as people who've been traumatized tend to look for things they trust and they trust things they know. Conservatism appeals to those who are scared which is why Republicans put so much effort into fear mongering. However, the same effect happens amongst the Muslims as they feel the brunt end of the patriot act, being singled out in air port security and the constant threat of FBI surveillance - not to mention various random hate crimes committed by random civilians. This fear is most likely to drive them to what they know and trust; Islam. The net effect here is division between two groups, an effect that benefits not just the Republican party but Islamic terrorists as well as. A well isolated Muslim population is certainly a strength Islamic terrorists could leverage. What could terrify Americans more then the thought that the US is already infested with thousands of Islamic sleeper cells throughout the country?

Like I've said before, the right wing Americans and the Islamic terrorists they claim to hate have more in common with each other then either side would like to admit. Just because the two are enemies doesn't automatically mean they have divergent interests. The Christian power structure and current ruling classes may benefit from this kind of attack, but I see no reason to believe that Islamic terrorists could not.