12 Dead, 31 Wounded @ FT HOOD

[A4sForever]

Well ...what if he was a muslim fast food worker who killed folks at a McDonalds...

That bastard!!! Those Mickey-D rag-heads do that EVERY DAY !!!

I'll have another Big Mac, please ... hold the fries.

 

[A4sForever]

And to prove my point:

Originally Posted by A4sForever
We're in a war -- to the death -- w/ an Islam that can't seem to get used to the idea of 'peaceful coexistence' with the West, the Jews, or anything remotely labeled 'infidel' ... and we all might as well get used to the concept of that war -- a long war -- a war to the death.


Hasan thought the exact same thing.

Hardly, Junior ... and I guess you really might be as dumb, clueless, inexperienced, and naive as I think you are ...

I can live w/ Islam/Muslims all day long ... it's just too bad it's not a two-way street.

 

[mmx1]

This is three.

Five

This was almost number 6, but the people he ran over pulled through.

6.5, 7, whatever, I am losing count and I made my point.

Politically loaded perhaps, but killing out of revenge, hatred, or ethnic feuding is not terrorism. Terrorism is an explicitly political act to coerce a response, which is why it's still very unclear if the Hood shootings were, since aim appears to have been to kill and not coerce.

 

[Bevo16]

A bunch of pseudo-intellectual garbage.

What a bunch of mental masturbation that was.

It does not matter if the glass is half full or half empty. If it's half full of bullshit, it's still bullshit.

You have a future as a lawyer or politician.

 

[Mumbles]

Then it's more than just "bad Muslim" and "good Muslim". Let's start there for a change.

Many Iraqi Muslims that shot at and likely killed Americans switched sides and joined the Awakening - many are no doubt in the police and army. We may end up doing so with many of the Taliban in Afghanistan, where many of those allied with the Taliban do so not out of shared ideology with Al Q but merely because one band of foreigners are Muslim and hence somewhat familiar and the other, not. The distinctions and motives that define terror, insurgency, and plain murder (as well as, of course, when they overlap) are important in this war, and to write off a killer as a jihadist merely because he is Muslim, as your size 25 font indicates, is to vindicate Major Hassan's delusion that America is at war with Islam. In that respect, Hassan has much company in his delusion.

This is not a defense of Hasan, but a condemnation of the sloppy thinking that Muslim killer (of American troops, if you'd rather) = Islamofascist terrorist. Clearly we are willing to accept that not all of them are on the "same side" insofar as determining who is reconciliable. You say he "switched sides". Whose side did he choose? His personal Islam? Al Qaeda's brand of Islam? Islam as a global religion?

It's clear he chose the first. There's no indication that he subscribed to Al Qaeda ideology or even their particular brand of Islam - that is among the items under investigation.

We care that he's a Major because it's evidence he didn't hate America, as claimed earlier. He liked it enough to swear an oath and join despite the ridicule of his family. So it is of interest why and how he turned away from that, and how he came to feel he had to choose between country and god.

And to prove my point:

Hasan thought the exact same thing.

I am at a loss..
you're a self loathing Frank Murtha type....
you are soo enlightened.
I've only met one other prior Marine that was of a similiar disposition.

 

[Fog]

Politically loaded perhaps, but killing out of revenge, hatred, or ethnic feuding is not terrorism. Terrorism is an explicitly political act to coerce a response, which is why it's still very unclear if the Hood shootings were, since aim appears to have been to kill and not coerce.

OK; so it was a hate-crime - not terrorism. WTF is the big difference? It it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck & looks like a duck - it's probably a fu#$ing duck. And what we have here is a fu#$ing duck!

 

[Mos]

Every individual Muslim terrorist has a reason for when and why they decide to commit acts of murder. The time line does not really matter, and the root cause (their religion) is the same.

The most similar event happened in Afghanistan in early April. This particular murderous Muslim terrorist was an Afghan Army Soldier. He had been through all of the screening processes, he had been trained by the US Military, and then one day he decided to murder three of our officers. Luckily, two of them lived.

It took less than 12 hours to decide that this particular traitor was in fact an insurgent. It's not like they had to do any big investigation into his background or interview his friends or find out if he was a formal member of Al Qaeda (like they carry an ID or something).

This discussion is turning into nothing but basic definition arguments. If someone does not really believe that we are in a global war against radical Muslim extremists, then you are not going to believe that this guy basically switched sides and is in fact a traitor. He is just someone who "snapped".

The problem in classifying this POS is the same problem we are having in Iraq and Afghanistan. How do you tell the good Muslim from the bad ones? The ones that are shooting at you are bad? That's pretty much it. With that singular method of terrorist identification, Major Hasan made it clear which brand of Muslim he is. He is a terrorist.

Yeah, I guess you got me there on several points. I agree. Bin Laden had personal issues as well. And ultimately, an enemy is an enemy, whether he turned against us in the late 1980s or in the past 2 weeks. But there is value in understanding one's enemy, right? I don't care to understand every nuance of a terrorist's identification or motivation, just enough to fight him more effectively.

 

[Flash]

OK; so it was a hate-crime - not terrorism. WTF is the big difference? It it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck & looks like a duck - it's probably a fu#$ing duck. And what we have here is a fu#$ing duck!

He's a duck all right, just like the guys who shot up Columbine, Virginia Tech and the University of Texas. It is trying to ascertain his motives from the TV news and his religion that I think is seriously flawed.

 

[CAMike]

I tried to take the high road eariler on in the thread but....


FOG- You can't say that! This is the new age modern NAVY and the political correct way is the only (Obama) way!

Shame on you!

Have you been living under a rock? If you're against Obama you're either a racist or a hick!

SWO-out. (That's SWAT for the rest of you.)

The political BS is so so jacked up lately.

 

[HercDriver]

I tried to take the high road eariler on in the thread but....


FOG- You can't say that! This is the new age modern NAVY and the political correct way is the only (Obama) way!

Shame on you!

Have you been living under a rock? If you're against Obama you're either a racist or a hick!

SWO-out. (That's SWAT for the rest of you.)

The political BS is so so jacked up lately.

Further proof that any thread can be turned into blaming the President.:icon_roll

 

[mmx1]

OK; so it was a hate-crime - not terrorism. WTF is the big difference? It it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck & looks like a duck - it's probably a fu#$ing duck. And what we have here is a fu#$ing duck!

Because there is a universal stigma attached to criminal acts, whereas labeling a crime terrorism lends it a perverse legitimacy to some - that rather than a sociopathic aberration it was for some greater purpose, no matter how abhorrent the means. What do you think a young American Muslim facing a similar struggle to Major Hasan's (of which there are no doubt many) would make of the following scenarios:

- describing Hasan as a mentally troubled loner clinging to a paranoid and delusional view of his co-workers' slights who finally unhinged

or

- describing Hasan as a jihad terrorist in a long tradition of Muslim terrorists, out to punish America for wrongs in the Middle East.

The truth, of course, should prevail, whatever it is. But as in every case before, the angry heads are speculatively latching onto the second to prove a presumed connection to Islam, to "connect the dots", without realizing that their "connections" are strengthening, not weakening, the bonds between ambivalent Muslims and the very behavior we're trying to discourage.

 

[Bevo16]

But as in every case before, the angry heads are speculatively latching onto the second to prove a presumed connection to Islam, to "connect the dots", without realizing that their "connections" are strengthening, not weakening, the bonds between ambivalent Muslims and the very behavior we're trying to condemn.

Right. It's our fault. Blame America first.

That's some seriously fucked up shit you just posted.

 

[HercDriver]

Right. It's our fault. Blame America first.

That's some seriously fucked up shit you just posted.

It's not America that is jumping to conclusions...just a small minority.

 

[CAMike]

Further proof that any thread can be turned into blaming the President.:icon_roll

HercDriver- Please don't take this the wrong way but I'm NOT trying to blame young Obama for what happened at Ft. Hood.

I do however want to direct attention to the flawed liberal mentality that makes repeated excuses for human beings that commit terrible crimes. Dr. "J" Psychiatrist attended mosques that the 9-11 perps attended and most are too afraid to draw lines of associations due the bull shit PC new world order that we now live in.

I grew up near Berkeley CA and interned at KPFA (Pacifica Radio) so I have first hand knowledge of the political double standard the liberals wallow in every day. Man- Don't start. We as a society have dug our own hole and most of us don't even know it happened."

"Man's got to know his limitations".

 

[Brett327]

Right. It's our fault. Blame America first.

That's some seriously fucked up shit you just posted.

Why don't we address the arguments being put forth rather than dismissing them as "fucked up." There are many equally legitimate ways to interpret/perceive this event and no political pole has a monopoly on righteousness here.

@ Mike: Nobody is making excuses for the perp here. Seeking to understand his motives, whatever they may be does not equal condonation of his actions.

Brett