Shooting at the Washington Naval Yard

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]timbofirstblood wrote:
No one should have to die at work. [/quote]

They were military personnel, and we are at war. Dying at work is not entirely unheard of for military personnel during a war. They just weren’t expecting enemy fire from somebody who looked like them.

The only thing clear about this situation so far is that not all is as it seems. [/quote]

Most were civilians…the same ones that took a 20% paycut from furloughs for part of this year because Congress doesn’t think they do the same job at military guys that work right beside them…[/quote]

Military contractors doing the same job as military personnel, alongside military personnel on a military base.

The result is the same. [/quote]

You are certainly entitled to your wrong opinion

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Unreal. it seems nobody is safe anymore. I feel for the families of those killed…you’re never supposed to die, but if people absolutely had to go, at least it could have been in combat instead of on the homefront, to give some sort of meaning to the families left behind :(.[/quote]

It was combat. Just kind of one-sided because nobody was able to return fire.

The entire point of guerrilla warfare is to bring the battle to the enemy on his own ground: “hit the other fellow as quick as you can, as quick as you can, where it hurts him the most, when he ain’t lookin’.”

That is precisely what this operative did. We don’t know who he was, what his motives were, or who he was working for. Now that he’s dead, we aren’t likely to find out much that resembles the truth. But something tells me he accomplished his objective. Guess we’ll find out in the coming days what the ramifications of his having accomplished his objective might be.
[/quote]

Uhh…“combat?” “Operative?” “Guerilla warfare?” Where are you getting this stuff?
Are you channeling the same “microwave” transmissions that he was?
[i]
"Officials investigating Monday’s shooting painted a portrait of a troubled assailant who said he was hearing voices and believed as recently as last month that adversaries were using a “microwave machine” to prevent him from getting sleep.

Aaron Alexis, the 34-year-old former Navy reservist killed by officers responding to the attack, had sought treatment earlier this year from the Department of Veterans Affairs for paranoia and other complaints, according to officials familiar with the investigation."
[/i]
–WSJ, today.

So we have a paranoid schizophrenic, with a medical history and a police report separately reporting his delusions–a schizophrenic who nevertheless had a security clearance. (And it is paranoid to say all this was “set-up” and a convenient cover-up.) Isn’t this shocking enough? Why make him into some “Operative” in the “People’s Guerilla War?”

Now, shame!–for recklessly romanticizing and politicizing this man and the sorry event. Why choose to exercise this “operative” fantasy when the facts of the story are despicable enough? Why is our sorry excuse for a government so adept at infringing on public rights and so poor at ensuring its own security–even to the point to allowing a schiz to pass, armed, into “secured” navy yard?

On the other hand, at least you had more facts at your disposal than VTBalla, who chose to flap his gums without a single fact at his disposal.

/chide

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

On the other hand, at least you had more facts at your disposal than VTBalla, who chose to flap his gums without a single fact at his disposal.

/chide
[/quote]

What in the fuck are you talking about?

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

On the other hand, at least you had more facts at your disposal than VTBalla, who chose to flap his gums without a single fact at his disposal.

/chide
[/quote]

What in the fuck are you talking about?[/quote]

Use your immense Mensa powers and read what the fuck you wrote up there. ^

I was asking a question “up there”. And went and found my own answer. Do you you read any words with a ‘?’ after them as ‘flapping gums’? How does that pan out for you in your day to day life?

Not to go all AC and internet tough guy on you, but you need to keep my name out of your mother fucking mouth. I was not addressing you, but you chose to chime in with your dumbass opinion anyway. I need more facts at my disposal? I know more about the workings of the Navy Yard than anyone else on this fucking website (which is a weightlifting website, btw…if it matters to you).

Does a man hear voices because he is a paranoid schizophrenic, or is he diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia on the basis that he hears voices?

Having not seen the results of the man’s neurological examinations I really couldn’t say one way or the other.

Duly chided by my friend and better, I will desist in any further gum-flapping until more facts emerge.

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
I was asking a question “up there”. And went and found my own answer. Do you you read any words with a ‘?’ after them as ‘flapping gums’? How does that pan out for you in your day to day life?

Not to go all AC and internet tough guy on you, but you need to keep my name out of your mother fucking mouth. I was not addressing you, but you chose to chime in with your dumbass opinion anyway. I need more facts at my disposal? I know more about the workings of the Navy Yard than anyone else on this fucking website (which is a weightlifting website, btw…if it matters to you). [/quote]

Really, now. You would do so much better if you were either clever or credible.

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
I was asking a question “up there”. And went and found my own answer. Do you you read any words with a ‘?’ after them as ‘flapping gums’? How does that pan out for you in your day to day life?

Not to go all AC and internet tough guy on you, but you need to keep my name out of your mother fucking mouth. I was not addressing you, but you chose to chime in with your dumbass opinion anyway. I need more facts at my disposal? I know more about the workings of the Navy Yard than anyone else on this fucking website (which is a weightlifting website, btw…if it matters to you). [/quote]

Really, now. You would do so much better if you were either clever or credible.[/quote]

Good point…I must be all out of idiotic conspiracy theories and mindless rants…

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Does a man hear voices because he is a paranoid schizophrenic, or is he diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia on the basis that he hears voices?

Having not seen the results of the man’s neurological examinations I really couldn’t say one way or the other.

Duly chided by my friend and better, I will desist in any further gum-flapping until more facts emerge. [/quote]

A true story about the irony of psychiatric diagnosis:

When I was but a lad and learning the craft, I was sent to interview a paranoid schizophrenic, an exercise in “physical diagnosis.”
Well, I knew there were 14 features of paranoid schizophrenia, and the patient didn’t have ideas of reference, auditory (but “never” visual) hallucinations, delusions of plots, body and mind control, etc.
When I pointed out the lack of any of the classic findings to the Chief of Psychiatry, he exclaimed, “Exactly!! That is what made my diagnosis of it all the more brilliant!!”
I never took psychiatry again.
It was my highest score on the National Boards.


Always a friend and never a better,
We honor the fact, down to the letter.

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

On the other hand, at least you had more facts at your disposal than VTBalla, who chose to flap his gums without a single fact at his disposal.

/chide
[/quote]

What in the fuck are you talking about?[/quote]

Use your immense Mensa powers and read what the fuck you wrote up there. [1]
LOL Mensa sucks, man. You can do better than that.


  1. /quote ↩︎

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
I was asking a question “up there”. And went and found my own answer. Do you you read any words with a ‘?’ after them as ‘flapping gums’? How does that pan out for you in your day to day life?

Not to go all AC and internet tough guy on you, but you need to keep my name out of your mother fucking mouth. I was not addressing you, but you chose to chime in with your dumbass opinion anyway. I need more facts at my disposal? I know more about the workings of the Navy Yard than anyone else on this fucking website (which is a weightlifting website, btw…if it matters to you). [/quote]

Really, now. You would do so much better if you were either clever or credible.[/quote]

Good point…I must be all out of idiotic conspiracy theories and mindless rants…

[/quote]

Point, game and match, the restless mind rants,
Without the facts, the powerless cants.
A gentler word is what is expected,
No harm meant. (Apology accepted?)

13 people are dead. Can we keep the PWI bull shit out of this thread?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
13 people are dead. Can we keep the PWI bull shit out of this thread?[/quote]

Point taken.

I could have been clearer in my initial post.
Here we have enough facts within a day to wonder: How can we have a “security” apparatus which so freely infringes on the privacy of free people, and yet cannot screen out schizophrenics from keeping their security clearance?

This is gross negligence when it comes to 13 dead, and intended malice toward 300 million of us.

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:
Yeah, he was clearly a dude who had no business being hired by the government, and having any sort of base access int he first place. As cold as it sounds, I can’t say I’m surprised this terrible judgment bit them in the ass so badly. I feel for the families that have suffered because of that indiscretion. [/quote]

Where are you getting that he is a government employee? And up until a couple months ago, you could access the washington navy yard freely with a drivers license. It is not a secure compound, like a nuclear silo. Civilians can still enter it, throught he pass and id office. There is a museum inside the Yard that civilians are welcome to visit.[/quote]

Contractors are hired to do background checks on civilian contractors hired to work on base, specially ones with secret security clearances. Having said that, I have discovered that despite his two prior issues with firearms, and a history of problems while in the Navy reserves, he was never actually charged with anything. THAT is the biggest problem.

When you shoot out someone’s tires because you feel they disrespected you, or shoot into your neighbor’s apartment because they are being loud…you have fucking problems, and shouldn’t be allowed to own weapons due to blatant disrespect for firearms and human life. So I take back the part about the system failing him through background checks. It failed him before that when he wasn’t charged for crimes he committed.

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:
Yeah, he was clearly a dude who had no business being hired by the government, and having any sort of base access int he first place. As cold as it sounds, I can’t say I’m surprised this terrible judgment bit them in the ass so badly. I feel for the families that have suffered because of that indiscretion. [/quote]

Where are you getting that he is a government employee? And up until a couple months ago, you could access the washington navy yard freely with a drivers license. It is not a secure compound, like a nuclear silo. Civilians can still enter it, throught he pass and id office. There is a museum inside the Yard that civilians are welcome to visit.[/quote]

Contractors are hired to do background checks on civilian contractors hired to work on base, specially ones with secret security clearances. Having said that, I have discovered that despite his two prior issues with firearms, and a history of problems while in the Navy reserves, he was never actually charged with anything. THAT is the biggest problem.

When you shoot out someone’s tires because you feel they disrespected you, or shoot into your neighbor’s apartment because they are being loud…you have fucking problems, and shouldn’t be allowed to own weapons due to blatant disrespect for firearms and human life. So I take back the part about the system failing him through background checks. It failed him before that when he wasn’t charged for crimes he committed. [/quote]

It seems ridiculous that he was never charged for any of that. I don’t understand how that could happen under any circumstance. As far as I have ever known “guy with a gun” or shots fired gets police swarming.

If that is the case, then this system didn’t fail him, it failed everybody.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:
Yeah, he was clearly a dude who had no business being hired by the government, and having any sort of base access int he first place. As cold as it sounds, I can’t say I’m surprised this terrible judgment bit them in the ass so badly. I feel for the families that have suffered because of that indiscretion. [/quote]

Where are you getting that he is a government employee? And up until a couple months ago, you could access the washington navy yard freely with a drivers license. It is not a secure compound, like a nuclear silo. Civilians can still enter it, throught he pass and id office. There is a museum inside the Yard that civilians are welcome to visit.[/quote]

Contractors are hired to do background checks on civilian contractors hired to work on base, specially ones with secret security clearances. Having said that, I have discovered that despite his two prior issues with firearms, and a history of problems while in the Navy reserves, he was never actually charged with anything. THAT is the biggest problem.

When you shoot out someone’s tires because you feel they disrespected you, or shoot into your neighbor’s apartment because they are being loud…you have fucking problems, and shouldn’t be allowed to own weapons due to blatant disrespect for firearms and human life. So I take back the part about the system failing him through background checks. It failed him before that when he wasn’t charged for crimes he committed. [/quote]

It seems ridiculous that he was never charged for any of that. I don’t understand how that could happen under any circumstance. As far as I have ever known “guy with a gun” or shots fired gets police swarming.

If that is the case, then this system didn’t fail him, it failed everybody.
[/quote]

In a nutshell this. X1000