Shooting at Fort Hood

[radarwhiz]

Originally Posted by SoCal LS-L

I agree with the watchful eye on muslim soldiers, thats not discrimination just precautionary surveillance, the same type we ALL go thru in banks, malls, and the local convenience store. This guy obviously wasn't discriminated against (being a major) but they ignored some warning signs.

Is that religious profiling, sure. But on the same token what religion do the guys overseas use as a reason to kill our soldiers over there? It shouldn't be grounds for being passed over for a promotion or unduly harassed, but it should be cause for a raised eyebrow and a little more observation...... just as walking around town with a pistol on your belt would be..... its not illegal and not immoral, but it would still cause some folks to be a little suspicious of your intentions or mindset.

I've accepted the reality that we have ALL been wiretapped to some degree, recorded, analyzed, surveilled, scrutinized ( CARNIVORE or Narus) so being a religious or other minority does not preserve your right to privacy any more than being "white" or non-religious.

If they can do it to me, then they can do it to Muslims too.

+1........

[sowise]

The guy had some suspect views that's for sure. He thinks the US is at war with Islam in general. I guess it is hard for even someone who is muslim to seperate what is radicalism and what isn't. I am all for freedom of religion and I am against discrimination. However, the reason there are things like stereo types and racial profiling is because there is some truth behind them. (I know I am going to get a bit of flack for this). We make generalizations about people everyday. It is a basic numbers situation if you start investigating and watching people who are muslim there will be a percentage of those who are guilty of radicalism vs those who aren't. If you use just their religion alone. The ratio will change when you say watch non-US citizen muslims the number of radicals will be slightly higher. Then you group in muslims with prison records and prison converts to muslims and you have an overwhelming number of radical vs non-radical.
This guy was in the US military he was well educated as well. I am not certain how long it took for him to start to see things differently I am sure soldiers didn't make it easy because lets face it him being muslim probably didn't make him any friends. Him being a bitter person and having very disagreeable ideals and views probably made him have less friends and even a few enemies. This guys job was to help soldiers, ones that had seen action (since he didn't) the ones who have been in combat would have very severe views and opinions about who they were fighting and why. Being in a third world country surrounded by people of a faith that hate them and wish them and those like them dead. So I have little doubt that this Major didn't like half the stuff he was hearing from these soldiers and that is why he turned on them he despised them. I am kind of rambling and circling what my whole point started out as probably because it is late and I can't sleep. Anyway this guy was messed up I think he snapped because he had dealt with multiple kinds of racism and personal discriminations by people around him. He used that anger and twisted it into justification that was backed by his religious views.
Another thing I don't get, if someone calls in a bomb threat or threatens to kill someone now days they can be charged with a terroristic threat. This guy who is muslim and had radical views shoots over 40 people and the FBI immediately comes out and said it had nothing to do with terrorism. I think they were urged to make that statement so people would not freak out I think they are trying to handle this with kid gloves and call it any other term than what it is. I notice our current government administration likes to play word games and not use specific titles and call things something else to change public focus.
Just my opinions here guys...

[ensteele]

I agree with what they want to call it now. This administration doesn't want to call it what it is. They now have fancy names that lower the intensity of what it is.

[lhopp77]

Worth reading.

"Tragedy at Ft Hood
Lieutenant Colonel Allen B West (US Army, Ret)

This past Thursday 13 American Soldiers were killed and another 30 wounded at a horrific mass shooting at US Army installation, Ft Hood Texas. As I watched in horror and then anger I recalled my two years of final service in the Army as a Battalion Commander at Ft Hood, 2002-2004.

My wife and two daughters were stunned at the incident having lived on the post in family housing.

A military installation, whether it is Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine, or Coast Guard, is supposed to be a safe sanctuary for our Warriors and their families. It is intended to provide a home whereby our “Band of Brothers and Sisters” can find solace and bond beyond just the foxhole but as family units.

A military installation is supposed to be a place where our Warriors train for war, to serve and protect our Nation.

On Thursday, 5 November 2009 Ft Hood became a part of the battlefield in the war against Islamic totalitarianism and state sponsored terrorism.

There may be those who feel threatened by my words and would even recommend they not be uttered. To those individuals I say step aside because now is not the time for cowardice. Our Country has become so paralyzed by political correctness that we have allowed a vile and determined enemy to breach what should be the safest place in America, an Army post.

We have become so politically correct that our media is more concerned about the stress of the shooter, Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The misplaced benevolence intending to portray him as a victim is despicable. The fact that there are some who have now created an entire new classification called; “pre-virtual vicarious Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)” is unconscionable.

This is not a “man caused disaster”. It is what it is, an Islamic jihadist attack.

We have seen this before in 2003 when a SGT Hasan of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) threw hand grenades and opened fire into his Commanding Officer’s tent in Kuwait. We have seen the foiled attempt of Albanian Muslims who sought to attack Ft Dix, NJ. Recently we saw a young convert to Islam named Carlos Bledsoe travel to Yemen, receive terrorist training, and return to gun down two US Soldiers at a Little Rock, Arkansas Army recruiting station. We thwarted another Islamic terrorist plot in North Carolina which had US Marine Corps Base, Quantico as a target.

What have we done with all these prevalent trends? Nothing.

What we see are recalcitrant leaders who are refusing to confront the issue, Islamic terrorist infiltration into America, and possibly further into our Armed Services. Instead we have a multiculturalism and diversity syndrome on steroids.

Major Hasan should have never been transferred to Ft Hood, matter of fact he should have been Chaptered from the Army. His previous statements, poor evaluation reports, and the fact that the FBI had him under investigation for jihadist website posting should have been proof positive.

However, what we have is a typical liberal approach to find a victim, not the 13 and 30 Soldiers and Civilian, but rather the poor shooter. A shooter who we are told was a great American, who loved the Army and serving his Nation and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) stating that his actions had nothing to do with religious belief.

We know that Major Hasan deliberately planned this episode; he did give away his possessions. He stood atop a table in the confined space of the Soldier Readiness Center shouting “Allahu Akhbar”, same chant as the 9-11 terrorists and those we fight against overseas in the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operation.

No one in leadership seems willing to sound the alarm for the American people; they are therefore complicit in any future attacks. Our Congress should suspend the insidious action to vote on a preposterous and unconstitutional healthcare bill and resolve the issue of “protecting the American people”.

The recent incidents in Dearborn Michigan, Boston Massachusetts, Dallas Texas, and Chicago Illinois should bear witness to the fact that we have an Islamic terrorism issue in America. And don’t have CAIR call me and try to issue a vanilla press statement; they are an illegitimate terrorist associated organization which should be disbanded.

We have Saudi Arabia funding close to 80% of the mosques in the United States, one right here in South Florida, Pompano Beach. Are we building churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia? Are “Kaffirs” and “Infidels” allowed travel to Mecca?

So much for peaceful coexistence.

Saudi Arabia is sponsoring radical Imams who enter into our prisons and convert young men into a virulent Wahabbist ideology….one resulting in four individuals wanting to destroy synagogues in New York with plastic explosives. Thank God the explosives were dummy. They are sponsoring textbooks which present Islamic centric revisionist history in our schools.

We must recognize that there is an urgent need to separate the theo-political radical Islamic ideology out of our American society. We must begin to demand surveillance of suspected Imams and mosques that are spreading hate and preaching the overthrow of our Constitutional Republic……that speech is not protected under First Amendment, it is sedition and if done by an American treason.

There should not be some 30 Islamic terrorist training camps in America that has nothing to do with First Amendment, Freedom of Religion. The Saudis are not our friends and any American political figure who believes such is delusional.

When tolerance becomes a one way street it certainly leads to cultural suicide. We are on that street. Liberals cannot be trusted to defend our Republic, because their sympathies obviously lie with their perceived victim, Major Nidal Malik Hasan.

I make no apologies for these words, and anyone angered by them, please, go to Ft Hood and look into the eyes of the real victims. The tragedy at Ft Hood Texas did not have to happen. Consider now the feelings of those there and on every military installation in the world. Consider the feelings of the Warriors deployed into combat zones who now are concerned that their loved ones at home are in a combat zone.

Ft Hood suffered an Islamic jihadist attack, stop the denial, and realize a simple point.

The reality of your enemy must become your own.

Steadfast and Loyal,
Lieutenant Colonel Allen B West (US Army, Ret) "

Lee

[Wikedjuggalo]

Thanks for that article Ihopp. If someone was under observation from the FBI, posting on extremist sites and in contact with a very extremist mosque (who preached the killings of "infidels"), they sure in the hell needed to be pulled from duty. But of course they would be "discrimination". It is sad how easily this could have been prevented if only people would stop worrying so much about being tolerant of extremist activity.

[svxistentialist]

Thanks for that Lee. That in my opinion is a pretty valid right wing military viewpoint and it is hard to argue against it.

Elazar although you "missed all the fun" I'm glad you were not around to be in harm's way. A lunatic shooter is a lunatic shooter.

There is a very good movie called Bad Day at Black Rock which deals with anti Japanese racism after Pearl Harbor. No doubt in the current emotional climate Japanese have now been supplanted by Muslims as the enemy.

No doubt also like the American Japanese of WW2 there are thousands of ordinary decent Muslim people, and they will be tarred with the same brush as the jihadists. No lesson seems to have been learned there. The presumption of innocence is to be afforded to all the people, and can not be denied to any religion, race or other sector of the population.

Having said that I actually despair of all these incompetent Big Brothers we now have watching over us. No doubt every comment we make here is getting logged on various data catching systems, CIA, FBI, MI5, MI6, on and on, you name it. They will sniff out, analyse, catalogue and ponder every comment we make here, and in political terms they probably have a record of where any of us pi$$ed last, but they let a lunatic like this guy walk into a camp and shoot down a load of innocent soldiers.

How bad and how radical does one have to get before they feel the need to intervene and save some innocent lives? Or are they actually just sitting back behind their cameras and microphones busily adding all the contacts of the radicals into their systems, then holding up their hands in horror when another massacre takes place?

Who is protecting the protectors? Soldiers are entitled to the protection of the intelligence community, same as everybody else. I'm not advocating a purge of Muslims from the military, or anything like it, but these intelligence organisations are doing a very bad job of protecting your people.

Those poor souls deserve more protection than they were afforded.

[radarwhiz]

Yes, thanks Lee. You echoed my thoughts exactly. You just put them into words much better than I ever could.

[Stilor]

I wish this country's leaders had the guts to say the same things as Australian officials:

PETER COSTELLO: What I've said is that this is a country, which is founded on a democracy. According to our Constitution, we have a secular state. Our laws are made by the Australian Parliament. If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you. This is not the kind of country where you would feel comfortable if you were opposed to democracy, parliamentary law, independent courts and so I would say to people who don't feel comfortable with those values there might be other countries where they'd feel more comfortable with their own values or beliefs.
....
Now, for those who are born in Australia, I'd make the same point. This is a country which has a Constitution. Under its Constitution, the state is secular. Under its constitution, the law is made by the parliament. Under its Constitution, it's enforced by the judiciary. These are Australian values and they're not going to change and we would expect people, when they come to Australia or if they are born in Australia, to respect those values.

Prime Minister John Howard said on top of trying to promote Australian values in Islamic schools, the Government would monitor what was said in certain schools and mosques to ensure they did not foster terrorism.

Asked whether he was prepared to "get inside" mosques and schools to ensure there was no support for terrorism, Mr Howard was blunt. "Yes, to the extent necessary," Mr Howard told Southern Cross radio. "I have no desire and nor is it the Government's intention to interfere in any way with the freedom or practice of religion. We have a right to know whether there is, within any section of the Islamic community, a preaching of the virtues of terrorism, whether any comfort or harbour is given to terrorism within that community."

Sadly, those preaching tolerance towards any social group do not require same level of tolerance in return. I don't have a problem with any religion - there are probably representatives of all major religions among my co-workers. However, once somebody commits such mass murder, there should not be any leniency based on one's beliefs, ethnic origins, etc.

My sincere condolences to families of the deceased and wounded victims.

[Hondasucks]

The thing that gets me is when the news media refer to him as the "alleged" gunman or "alleged" shooter. What's with this "alleged" bull****? That is for someone who is a suspect in a crime, not someone who they KNOW committed a crime...

[radarwhiz]

Originally Posted by Hondasucks

The thing that gets me is when the news media refer to him as the "alleged" gunman or "alleged" shooter. What's with this "alleged" bull****? That is for someone who is a suspect in a crime, not someone who they KNOW committed a crime...

Agreed. But for them to be "legally correct" they have to say it like that because everyone is "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law". It's ridiculous, we know he did it let's just hang him already.

[Stilor]

Originally Posted by radarwhiz

Agreed. But for them to be "legally correct" they have to say it like that because everyone is "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law". It's ridiculous, we know he did it let's just hang him already.

No, you're wrong. He'll most probably be handed a death sentence. But then, you and me, as taxpayers, will now provide food, housing and healthcare to this "alleged shooter" for some 10 or 20 years:
- while some lawyers argue whether sufficient evidence links him to the shooting
- whether he was in a sane mind at the time of shooting
- whether executing him will constitute a discrimination against his religion or ethnic group
- whether lethal injection is too painful that would constitute cruel and unusual punishment (as if all those sentenced to death cared about their victims' sufferings!)
- whether he is physically fit to be executed (you know, being obese could make it painful!)

By then, he either dies of natural causes or you have Islamic president who grants him clemency.

[radarwhiz]

Of course we know that's what will happen. I just wrote that wishing it would be different.

[ensteele]

+1


34567

[mikecg]

Originally Posted by Wikedjuggalo

Thanks for that article Ihopp. If someone was under observation from the FBI, posting on extremist sites and in contact with a very extremist mosque (who preached the killings of "infidels"), they sure in the hell needed to be pulled from duty. But of course they would be "discrimination". It is sad how easily this could have been prevented if only people would stop worrying so much about being tolerant of extremist activity.

It maybe discrimenation, but guess what. The military has been practicing discremination since it was started. You can't serve if your handicapped. Why stop there. If your beliefs interfer with your service, you should be kicked out. Where is there the difference between physically not being able to do your duty and mentially unable.

[mikecg]

Originally Posted by Stilor

No, you're wrong. He'll most probably be handed a death sentence. But then, you and me, as taxpayers, will now provide food, housing and healthcare to this "alleged shooter" for some 10 or 20 years:
- while some lawyer argue whether sufficient evidence links him to the shooting
- whether he was in a sane mind at the time of shooting
- whether executing him will constitute a discrimination against his religion or ethnic group
- whether lethal injection is too painful that would constitute cruel and unusual punishment (as if all those sentenced to death cared about their victims' sufferings!)
- whether he is physically fit to be executing (you know, being obese could make it painful!)

By then, he either dies of natural causes or you have Islamic president who grants him clemency.

I believe Texas has a law that if there are enough credible witnesses to the murder, you get to goto the head of the line. Do not pass go, and do not collect $200.