FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The Army might have had a terrorist in its midst and not even known it. As the days pass, there are more and more signs that Army Major and psychiatrist Nidal Hasan - who slaughtered 13 people and wounded 42 others - was an Islamic extremist who was sympathetic to al Qaeda and had strong objections to U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/11/09/art.hasan.jpg caption="Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the suspect in last week's Fort Hood mass shooting."]
Independent Senator Joe Lieberman says the shootings could have been a terrorist attack; and that he'll launch an investigation into whether the military could have stopped it.
Lieberman, who chairs the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, says there's evidence Hasan was a "self-radicalized, home-grown terrorist." If that's true, last week's killings could be the worst terror attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.
Witnesses say at the time of the shootings Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" - Arabic for "God is great" - something terrorists have used as a battle cry.
Then there's this: Hasan apparently attended the same Virginia mosque as two of the 9/11 hijackers in 2001 - at a time when a radical spiritual leader preached there.
And, ABC News reports U.S. intelligence agencies knew for months that Hasan was trying to contact people associated with al Qaeda.
Finally, former classmates complained repeatedly about what they saw as Hasan's anti-American views. One says Hasan gave a presentation that justified suicide bombing and talked about how Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution.
The Army isn't ruling out terrorism - but is concerned about a possible backlash against Muslim soldiers.
Here’s my question to you: Do you think the Fort Hood shootings were an act of terrorism?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Ed from Texas writes:
It's too early to speculate and those doing so had better be right. There are 300 million Americans and 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, however less than one-percent are committing violent acts against us. Let's not get the remaining 99-percent mad at us for no reason.
Charles from Lawrence, New Jersey writes:
It was terrorism of the worst kind, from within, insidious because the Army facilitated it. How many more Islamic soldiers are wondering what side they’re on? We thank the good American Muslim soldiers but politically correct tip-toeing allowed Hasan to fester and explode. Religious tolerance could become a smokescreen that we regret providing, like the airliners we provided on 9/11.
Mode from Oregon writes:
It was obviously an act of terrorism, but I don't think there was a state sponsor for what Nidal Hasan did – so it’s not terrorism of al Qaeda caliber. I think Hasan simply went nuts when he realized he would be forced to do something he really could not justify, ethically.
Robert writes:
This question here is irrelevant, when the answer is obvious. The real question is why now are Muslims serving in the U.S. military? How can a faithful Muslim have peace of mind about what the military is doing in the Middle East? It's obvious not all do, such is the case: Army Major and psychiatrist Nidal Hasan. In my opinion, while this war wages on, no Muslim should be allowed to serve in a military against other kinds of Muslims.
Ken from Pinon Hills, California writes:
Don't know. I do know the constant re-deployment back to hell (war) over and over has turned our volunteer military into a bunch of mental cripples. This is cruel and unusual punishment for those who serve and for the families who wait. Next time we do war, get the nation on board, have a war tax and a draft and rationing, like gasoline. Maybe there would be some reluctance to gamble lives on the battlefield if we all were involved.