FORT HOOD (July 28, 2011)—A tip from a Killeen gun dealer led to the arrest of an AWOL Muslim soldier who had firearms and bomb-making components in his hotel room and planned an attack on Fort Hood personnel, authorities confirmed Thursday.

Killeen police arrested Army Pvt. Naser Jason Abdo, 21, who was AWOL from Fort Campbell, Ky., Wednesday at America's Best Value Inn on South Fort Hood Street in Killeen on an outstanding child pornography warrant.

The arrest came after an investigation that started with a tip from a local gun shop on Tuesday.

Abdo was assigned to the 101st Airborne Division’s Company E, 1st Brigade Combat Team (Rear Provisional) at the time of his arrest.

U.S. Rep. John Carter. R-Round Rock, who’s been briefed on the arrest, told News 10 Thursday afternoon that the soldier planned to detonate two bombs at an unnamed restaurant near the post that Fort Hood personnel frequent and then planned to open fire on the diners.

“He was planning on going into a restaurant someplace that was heavily traveled by soldiers, set off the two bombs then come back in and finish everybody off with his gun,” Carter said.

Carter said Abdo had broken into an adjoining hotel room and was in the process of "cooking" the bombs at the time of his arrest.

During a news conference Thursday afternoon, Killeen Police Chief Dennis Baldwin confirmed that “military personnel were the target of this suspect,” but declined to provide further details.

Abdo was held in an isolation cell in the Killeen City Jail Thursday afternoon.

FBI spokesman Erik Vasys said Thursday that firearms and "items that could be identified as bomb-making components, including gunpowder" were removed from his hotel room.

CNN reported that authorities also recovered pressure cookers, 18 pounds of sugar that could have been used to enhance an explosive, Christmas lights that could have been used as a timer for a bomb, and Jihadist literature.

Sources told CNN enough material was recovered to have made two bombs.

An alert issued by the Army said Abdo admitted he planned an attack on Fort Hood.

The Associated Press obtained the e-mail alert that was sent to all Army units Thursday.

It said Abdo had a large quantity of ammunition, weapons and a bomb inside a backpack.

It said he admitted under questioning that he planned an attack on Fort Hood.

Unconfirmed reports suggested that two other soldiers have also been arrested, but Baldwin said Thursday, "As far as we know, he did act alone."

Authorities at Fort Campbell interrogated two of Abdo’s friends, Carter said, but there was no evidence either was involved.

“Thanks to quick action by a Texas gun dealer in alerting local police to a suspicious character and vigorous response by the Killeen Police Department, we may well have averted a repeat of the tragic 2009 radical Islamic attack on our nation’s largest military installation,” Carter said.

Carter’s office said it received information that Guns Galore in Killeen, which is the same store at which accused Fort Hood gunman Maj. Nidal Hasan purchased weapons used in the November 2009 attack at the post’s Soldier Readiness Center, called Killeen police to report that a man had purchased gunpowder, shotgun ammunition and a magazine for a semi-automatic handgun.

Carter’s office said the man also purchased uniforms with Fort Hood unit patches from a local surplus store.

“On questioning, the suspect reportedly admitted planning an attack on Fort Hood,” Carter said.

Abdo, who’s from Garland, joined the Army in March 2009.

He went AWOL on July 4, on the eve of his first deployment to Afghanistan.

Greg Ebert of the gun shop Guns Galore said the man authorities identified as Abdo asked about smokeless gunpowder, what it could be used for and how it worked Tuesday.

Ebert said the man purchased six 1-pound canisters of the smokeless powder, three boxes of .12 gauge shotgun shells and a handgun magazine.

He paid in cash and left in a hurry, leaving his change behind. Ebert said.

Ebert, who retired from the Killeen Police Department last year after 17 years on the force, said the purchase came to about $250.

Police reviewed surveillance video from the store, which showed the man arrived and departed in a cab.

Fort Hood Thursday acknowledged the arrest, but referred questions to the Killeen Police Department.

“At this time, there has been no incident at Fort Hood,” the statement said.

“We continue our diligence in keeping our force protection at appropriate levels,” the post said.

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, praised authorities for their handling of the situation.

“Yesterday’s incident is yet another reminder that we must stay vigilant against those who wish to attack innocent Americans,” he said.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, praised residents and police for their vigilance.

“His arrest is a perfect example of how alert citizens and dedicated law enforcement personnel can work together to prevent a potential terrorist attack in our own backyard,” she said.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry called the arrest “a sobering reminder of the importance of remaining vigilant in the ongoing efforts to protect our communities from those that would do us harm.”

“Quick and diligent efforts like these save lives, and we are reminded to be thankful for our peace officers, and their continued dedication to keeping our communities and families safe,” Perry said.

“This incident also underscores the importance of citizens reporting something that doesn’t seem quite right immediately to law enforcement,” he said.

Abdo was the subject of an Al-Jazeera report in August 2010 in which he told an interviewer he didn’t think he could “take part in any way in the killing of a Muslim.

According to the website CouragetoResist.com, Abdo sought conscientious objector status in June 2010.

An article on the website says Abdo “experienced a great deal of harassment and discrimination” because of his beliefs.

"Early in basic training… one soldier repeatedly insulted me and Islam saying, 'Go pray to your god that doesn't exist or your pedophile prophet,'” the article quoted Abdo as saying.

“The climax of this harassment occurred when my comrades all made a concerted effort to get me an unwanted discharge because I was not welcome in their ranks,” Abdo said.

Army spokesman Troy Roland said Thursday the application for conscientious objector status was approved and that Abdo was about to be discharged when the child pornography allegations surfaced.

After a hearing on June 15, Roland said, an investigating officer recommended that Abdo be referred for court-martial.

Abdo has said he thought he was charged with a crime because he sought to leave the Army as a conscientious objector.

A website was created to raise funds for his defense, but it appeared to have been taken down Thursday morning.

Free Nasser Abdo Website

Read The Article

James Branum, the lawyer who represents Abdo in both his conscientious objector application and the child pornography case, posted a statement on his Facebook page Thursday.

“I represented him on two prior cases (his C.O. claim and the charges against him for possession of child pornography, but I am not representing him on the new charges that are being reported in the press and have no comments to make to the press about these new charges,” he said.

In November 2009, Fort Hood was the scene of the worst mass shooting on a U.S. military installation in history.

Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan is charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder in the deadly Nov. 5, 2009 rampage.

He’s scheduled to stand trial next March and will face the death penalty.

He remains in custody in the Bell County Jail.

He was left paralyzed in an exchange of gunfire with two Fort Hood police officers.

.12 gauge

Abdo sought conscientious objector status in June 2010.

I think this has more to do with the clerk figuring out this dude was suspect though more I reread it, the change thing and then bolting out the door. And I imagine plenty of other signs he wasn't right in the head, good on that gun store dude though

Sounds like they might want to consider having personnel carry sidearms at all times on and off post...

SOFDC wrote:It's Texas. Last I heard hey can go and march their happy little butt down to the local DPS office and begin the process for a concealed handgun license like any other joe blow unless the base commanders orders run contrary to that. Off-base carry after that point should be a non-issue.

chaos0xomega wrote:From what I understand, its actually pretty common (at least for the insurgents in Afghanistan, though it could also be the result of an effective PsyOp campaign...)

Though Texas handgun laws are a total pain in the ass.

How is this any different?

SOFDC wrote:

Sounds like they might want to consider having personnel carry sidearms at all times on and off post...

It's Texas. Last I heard hey can go and march their happy little butt down to the local DPS office and begin the process for a concealed handgun license like any other joe blow unless the base commanders orders run contrary to that. Off-base carry after that point should be a non-issue.

Da Boss wrote:Don't we have guys like that too though? Guys that infiltrate enemy organisations and bring them down? I'm pretty damn sure we do.

Not saying that terrorists are the same as soldiers- they are not. But just saying that any argument can cut both ways.

Da Boss wrote:Don't we have guys like that too though? Guys that infiltrate enemy organisations and bring them down? I'm pretty damn sure we do.

Not saying that terrorists are the same as soldiers- they are not. But just saying that any argument can cut both ways.

Ahtman wrote:You want to know if there is a difference between a religiously motivated terrorist traitor child porn advocate and your own allied professional soldiers? I suppose if you remove all context, the ability to differentiate motives, use a broad moral relativism, and only ask if they both blow things up then you could say they are the same thing.

feeder wrote:

Ahtman wrote:You want to know if there is a difference between a religiously motivated terrorist traitor child porn advocate and your own allied professional soldiers? I suppose if you remove all context, the ability to differentiate motives, use a broad moral relativism, and only ask if they both blow things up then you could say they are the same thing.

Sorry, I'll clarify. I am questioning the sense of outrage that those interviewed expressed. The attack, had it been successfully carried out, would have been a low-tech version of what our side does every day. I understand feeling relief, elation, triumph. But not outrage or surprise. We're at war, remember?

feeder wrote:

Ahtman wrote:You want to know if there is a difference between a religiously motivated terrorist traitor child porn advocate and your own allied professional soldiers? I suppose if you remove all context, the ability to differentiate motives, use a broad moral relativism, and only ask if they both blow things up then you could say they are the same thing.

Sorry, I'll clarify. I am questioning the sense of outrage that those interviewed expressed. The attack, had it been successfully carried out, would have been a low-tech version of what our side does every day. I understand feeling relief, elation, triumph. But not outrage or surprise. We're at war, remember?

And on every installation I've ever been on for anything length of time (these were all Air Force mind you) you could keep your gun in the Armory, and transport to and from your home only. Well, except for the Reserve base, everyone kept on in their car there. But ever since the Ft. Hood shooting, from what I've heard from my buddies in the Army, Ft. Hood has become very gun shy of private weapons. Which is ironic when you think about it in a way, but fact of the matter is, very few people in the military know how to really use a firearm, sure they shoot once a year or so, but only certain jobs got even close to the training they should have, hell I was a cop and I worked with people who were still sorta freaked out by guns...

unless the base commanders orders run contrary to that

Da Boss wrote:Don't we have guys like that too though? Guys that infiltrate enemy organisations and bring them down? I'm pretty damn sure we do.

Not saying that terrorists are the same as soldiers- they are not. But just saying that any argument can cut both ways.

Ahtman wrote:

feeder wrote:

Ahtman wrote:You want to know if there is a difference between a religiously motivated terrorist traitor child porn advocate and your own allied professional soldiers? I suppose if you remove all context, the ability to differentiate motives, use a broad moral relativism, and only ask if they both blow things up then you could say they are the same thing.

Sorry, I'll clarify. I am questioning the sense of outrage that those interviewed expressed. The attack, had it been successfully carried out, would have been a low-tech version of what our side does every day. I understand feeling relief, elation, triumph. But not outrage or surprise. We're at war, remember?

So you don't see a difference between 9/11, the London Bus bombings, the Spanish train bombings, and the military actions by governments to curtail such things? As long as there is an explosion everything is the same? Why people use violence doesn't matter at all? They want the world to kneel before a new caliphate (with them in control of course) and different governments of the world are trying to fight this problem, and not just militarily, and you see them as essentially equivalent somehow? By your reasoning law enforcement shooting a guy on a murder spree are just as monstrous as the man going around spraying random people with gunfire.

feeder wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

feeder wrote:

Ahtman wrote:You want to know if there is a difference between a religiously motivated terrorist traitor child porn advocate and your own allied professional soldiers? I suppose if you remove all context, the ability to differentiate motives, use a broad moral relativism, and only ask if they both blow things up then you could say they are the same thing.

Sorry, I'll clarify. I am questioning the sense of outrage that those interviewed expressed. The attack, had it been successfully carried out, would have been a low-tech version of what our side does every day. I understand feeling relief, elation, triumph. But not outrage or surprise. We're at war, remember?

So you don't see a difference between 9/11, the London Bus bombings, the Spanish train bombings, and the military actions by governments to curtail such things? As long as there is an explosion everything is the same? Why people use violence doesn't matter at all? They want the world to kneel before a new caliphate (with them in control of course) and different governments of the world are trying to fight this problem, and not just militarily, and you see them as essentially equivalent somehow? By your reasoning law enforcement shooting a guy on a murder spree are just as monstrous as the man going around spraying random people with gunfire.

Pretty much, yeah. I do not draw a major distinction between government and popular front. The difference is who won the war. Just because I don't agree with another group's goals doesn't mean I can't empathize with their desire to have their goals met. Of course, your last example is flawed. One man does not equal a popular movement.

Still, I don't understand. Why so outraged when the other side does essentially the same thing ours does day in day out? Is it because the war is supposed to be in their backyard?They are somehow cheating by bringing the war home?

feeder wrote:Pretty much, yeah. I do not draw a major distinction between government and popular front. The difference is who won the war. Just because I don't agree with another group's goals doesn't mean I can't empathize with their desire to have their goals met. Of course, your last example is flawed. One man does not equal a popular movement.

Still, I don't understand. Why so outraged when the other side does essentially the same thing ours does day in day out? Is it because the war is supposed to be in their backyard?They are somehow cheating by bringing the war home?

Ahtman wrote:So you are applying moral and political relativism, as I stated before. They are only doing the same thing if you remove all context, the ability to differentiate motives, and use a broad moral relativism.

Understanding another persons perspective doesn't mean you have to agree with them. I understand why a KKK member doesn't like non-Whites, that doesn't mean we should be ok with that kind of thinking or the actions it promotes.

Considering that "popular fronts' are made up of individual actions you can't easily say that when an individual does it doesn't count. If the guy in the above situation was part of anarcho-primativist group that wanted to wipe out all government then suddenly the police would be just as wrong as him, but if he is just one guy then the police are justified? That makes no sense at all.

feeder wrote:I'm using "outrage" to mean "angry surprise". We have been at war with a shadowy, nebulous ideology for about ten years now. We have cruise missile'd weddings, strafed funerals, and bombed homes, schools and hospitals. That's fine, we are at war. Just don't act all outraged when the other side does the same. That's what war is.