Why is the President, Casey, and most of the Media dancing around the Islamic Terrorist angle?
The President has to be careful about what he says, due to the fact that he's the commander in chief.
When Hasan goes to trial, his defense attorney (how'd you like that job...having to defend a guy that killed fellow soldiers) could argue that he used unlawful command influence.
__________________ I subscribe to the old adage that "The pen is mightier than the sword".....As long as I'm close enough to stab that SOB in the chest with my pen
Eco-Friendly Thought For The Day: "Conserve Water; Shower With A Friend"
I don't believe these murders were an act of terror per se. I think he was probably driven to commit this crime by the stress of serving a country that has caused his own people so much misery.
I think this was already addressed to some extent. He is a U.S. citizen, unfortunately. We have done nothing to his people that I am aware of. The U.S. has, along with the help of other nations, freed a couple countries to the point that they could, if they want to, set up governments that allow a whole host of freedoms that these countries have not experienced yet. Personally I would love to see the process moving much faster in those countries, but that is out of my control.
On the flip side, if he wasn't a U.S. citizen, I guess he would end up in Gitmo.
__________________
1997 Super Duty, PSD,6637, high idle, 50hp, & 80hp. 150cc injectors.
2002 F250 Crew Cab, 8' bed, 4X4, PSD, 6637, 4" magnaflow exhaust, high idle, 50, 75 tow, 100, 120, & 140, HPX Crossover
Kentucky Chapter Member
You were misbehaving? Not at all. You were expressing your opinions. Which is especially important today as American recognize all those who fought for our right to express ourselves. There is never anything wrong with healthy debate.
Like I said, we'll agree to disagree with some points of what we have each said.
Excuse me, but you were brushing ALL of the Islamo terrorists (including 9/11) as crazy. What that does is it de-personalizes the act into something that can just be shrugged-off as 'that person is crazy). It also takes away the deliberateness of the act, and when you do this, you are also taking some of the responsibility away from the religion or religion subsect (Islam or Radical Islam) that is TEACHING the terrorists to perpetrate the acts (terrorism) and give justification to the same terrorists.
>>>> Ummm...no. It does not de-personalize the act, at least not to me. Maybe for you. The religion, as he learned it, is to blame. Lumping all of Islam in to the same boat is wrong...it is the Islamists specifically who are commiting acts of terror.
Neither do most people. So the answer is to do everything possible NOT to point the finger where it belongs? At the religion, or religious sect that is calling it's members to perpetrate these terrorist acts?
>>>>Nope, not at all. Point it at the sect and not the whole.
What makes you think that you are better able to differentiate between the guilty and the not-guilty than the average American citizen? Average American citizens are being targeted by radical muslims....Can I be any more clear than that? It is DERELICTION OF DUTY, pure and simple, for those in charge to avoid their responsibilities in defending against those acts. Failing to take care of a commissioned officer in the Military because of concerns for 'diversity' and political correctness is criminal. Not illustrating for the American people who and what the enemy (enemies) is/are is derelict.
>>>>I'm not better able to. Never said I was. I just said I don't jump to conclusions. I also agreed that he should have been taken care of earlier.
Sorry, but your post demanded it.....
I mean, you challenged me that I wouldn't throw a 'I'm an Islamic Terrorist' t-shirt at a person who committed an act, and that person WASN'T a muslim......Well....Of COURSE I wouldn't......
>>>I guess I was kinda asking for it.
Again, that is NOT true. You said that if the person was not a Muslim, they probably wouldn't be labeled as a domestic terrorist. I showed you examples of non-Muslims who HAVE been labeled as such. Hasan's actions during the shooting and before the shooting show his motivation. People like you choose to ignore it. Regarding Wal-Mart, well....That depends......If a member of ELF walked in and started blowing away everyone wearing a Wal-Mart name tag, and that person was screaming about Wal-Mart slashing and burning and destroying the environment, then that person WOULD be labeled a domestic terrorist.
And all of the numerous examples of groups like this (non-Muslim) blowing up and burning property (research buildings, SUVs, etc.) are ALL labeled as domestic terrorism.
So WHY IS IT SO HARD to call a spade a spade when an Islamo-terrorist does what HE (or she) does?
>>>>Nope sorry, you still don't get it. This may or may not have been deemed an act of terror had it NOT been committed by a Muslim. My point was that not all mass killings are labeled as acts of terror. I'm betting it wouldn't. The ones YOU pointed out were the result of a twisted belief system, just like Hasan's, and thus were labeled terrorists. Just like the ELF example would be. But if a regular Joe shot up the Wal-Mart, Army base, whatever and there was no evidence he did it because of some belief, he WOULD NOT be called a terrorist by the general populace.
Because even though you addressed it in the post, the preponderance of your postings appear to me to be worrying more about what might happen to Muslim soldiers, than to what HAS happened to non-Muslim soldiers.
>>>We'll disagree on this, I suppose my point wasn't clear enough.
OK. In general I agree with this. But if so, then why aren't we being 'mean' to Major Hasan? Why is the President, Casey, and most of the Media dancing around the Islamic Terrorist angle? Why? He contacted al Qaeda. He articulated his disgust to other soldiers about the 'War on Islam'. He praised the Arkansas shooting......AS WELL AS justified acts like roadside bombings, homicide bombings, etc. In other words, this guy could have been one of the 19 9/11 terrorists.....only without the actual al Qaeda membership and training in Afghanistan.
So why, after all of this, is the Media referring to him simply as the 'alleged' shooter, or gunman, etc., etc. and blah-blah-blah? Why? Except for political correctness? (which also enabled him to carry out this act).
>>>> Because in America you are innocent until guilty. In order for him to get a fair trial, EVERYONE speaking publicly must be careful not to taint the jury pool. You want the trial botched because of something someone said on TV? Also as pointed out, the officers and POTUS must not do anything to appear to be influencing things.
Again, we're gonna disagree on stuff. I'm gonna let this go. People can read both our points and agree with whoever they want. I hope I've made my points clear enough for you. I understand what you're saying and agree with alot of it. Just not all of it.
Sounds like you're trying to gin up sympathy for a mass murderer to me.....
My sympathy is where it should be, with the victims and their families.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmpd1781
I'll damn Hasan right now....and I'll go ahead and damn the weak, simpering, ineffective idiots ignoring reality in the interests of political correctness who enabled this POS to do what he did......
I agree he didn't belong there. But I think you're kidding yourself if you think the Army's only fault is not recognizing that Hasan posed a danger to his fellow soldiers. In my view the defence establishment is as crooked as any other organization that takes its orders from Washington.
War is like a big stimulus program, only instead of building roads and bridges you go out and kill people. And when those guys come home sick in the head, it's like Obama's death panel, where a bureaucrat looks you in the eye and says "sure you're sick.. but what's in it for us". That's the nature of the beast.
Also Hasan is not the first soldier to mass murder his fellow soldiers. Why is the media making an issue over his Muslim/Arab ancestry when John Russell did the exact same thing. John Russell wasn't a Muslim, so the story on him is he had some trouble with the law.
I think you need to look at all these mass murder incidents as a whole, and see what they have in common to get a clear understanding of why they happen.
Again, we're gonna disagree on stuff. I'm gonna let this go. People can read both our points and agree with whoever they want. I hope I've made my points clear enough for you. I understand what you're saying and agree with alot of it. Just not all of it.
OK. Ditto.
Peace
__________________ I subscribe to the old adage that "The pen is mightier than the sword".....As long as I'm close enough to stab that SOB in the chest with my pen
Eco-Friendly Thought For The Day: "Conserve Water; Shower With A Friend"
The PC environment that we have allowed to grow out of control in the US has allowed the enemy to pass unhindered among us......................There was a time when German and Japanese Americans filled the ranks of our military, and there was NO question of their loyalty during a time of war against their ancestral homelands. PC has allowed the enemy aid and comfort right here on our own soil..............This idiocy must end!
__________________
FORCE IT!,IF IT BREAKS IT NEEDED REPLACED ANYWAY!
IF IT CANT BE FIXED WITH A HAMMER, ITS A ELECTRICAL PROBLEM!
Still bitterly clinging to guns and religion.
Dave
Oregon Assistant Chapter Leader: To join the Oregon Chapter, click HERE
You have actual killings being perpetrated by Muslims BECAUSE OF their religion......
You nailed this point....It would have been better if the phrase "killing of infidels" wouldn't have been written into the Koran. The radicals have seized on that phrase and pushed it past the limit and its meaning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmpd1781
Excuse me, but you were brushing ALL of the Islamo terrorists (including 9/11) as crazy. What that does is it de-personalizes the act into something that can just be shrugged-off as 'that person is crazy). It also takes away the deliberateness of the act, and when you do this, you are also taking some of the responsibility away from the religion or religion subsect (Islam or Radical Islam) that is TEACHING the terrorists to perpetrate the acts (terrorism) and give justification to the same terrorists.
They are not crazy. They know exactly what they are doing. They have a belief that they can work their way into paradise by killing infidels or die trying. If you are a Muslim and you do not believe the radical way they do, you're dead. Remember when Hamas invaded the Gaza strip and fought Fatah a few years back? Did Hamas take prisoners at the beginning? No, they executed Fatah members.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmpd1781
At the religion, or religious sect that is calling it's members to perpetrate these terrorist acts?
It would have to be the sect. Islam as a whole is a peace loving religion. Don't bother us and we won't bother you. They don't force their own members to participate. There are non-practicing Muslims. Sects are like cults, very controlling. As I mentioned before, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmpd1781
It is DERELICTION OF DUTY, pure and simple, for those in charge to avoid their responsibilities in defending against those acts. Failing to take care of a commissioned officer in the Military because of concerns for 'diversity' and political correctness is criminal. Not illustrating for the American people who and what the enemy (enemies) is/are is derelict.
I agree it is, especially when these members are charged to protect us. They are as guilty as the one who pulled the trigger. They knew, yet did NOTHING!! They need to be found and put on trial as accomplices.
__________________
Dan
Ignorance makes you start over!
IF IT IS MADE IN CHINA, YOU DON'T NEED IT!
Torque it down till it breaks off, then back it off 1/4 turn.
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
