Page 1 of 1

Mr. Smith goes to Ft Hood

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:05 am
by Nightshade
...or rather many spewing the poison of political correctness would have rather it been a \"Smith.\"

November 08, 2009

Memo to ABC: There's a Reason He's Not Called Smith

By C. Edmund Wright

Diane Sawyer - either espousing her editorial fantasy or a quoting a third hand comment from an anonymous \"military wife\" -- was dreadfully upset that the mass murderer from Fort Hood was not named Smith. One can only imagine how thrilled she'd have been had he been named something like, oh I don't know, Palin.

From what I can deduce, had his name been Smith it would be much easier for the Diane Sawyers of the Jurassic media to cover up what they fear really went on here. (In perhaps a related story, none of the 9-11 attackers were in the Smith family either.) And what appears to have gone wrong is that a poster child for every wrong headed politically correct liberal program our great military has been forced to accept blew a gasket and took 13 un-armed American soldiers out. Predictably blew a gasket I might add.

While many facts are yet to be determined, what we do know is that a man not named Smith -- but named Hasan -- had some decidedly un-Smith like beliefs and he was rather adamant about espousing them. That is to say, this well paid U.S. Army Major held some beliefs strangely coincident with the very people that most U.S. Army Majors are fighting against. Call me old fashioned, but I prefer the idea that sympathy with the enemy is called \"treason\" rather than the modern touchy feely idea that it is simply a \"healthy diversity.\"

Such diversity wasn't too damned healthy for about 45 soldiers, now was it? According to the coroner's report, many are even beyond sensitivity training at this point. Where is George Patton to slap some sense into someone when you need him?

We also know that a major who happens to be a devout follower of Islam -- the well documented religion of peace -- strode into one of the principal gathering points at Fort Hood and shot 40 some unarmed military personnel. Among them was a pregnant woman.

We also know that Major Hasan, quite consistent with many who follow Islam -- that well documented religion of peace -- was quite taken with the idea of the Middle Eastern homicide bombers. He is known to have compared them with valiant U.S. soldiers throwing themselves on a grenade to save buddies. Now I hate to quibble, but isn't a suicide bomber actually the opposite of those diving on a grenade?

And while we're on the subject of Islam -- that well documented religion of peace -- Hasan apparently agreed with Bin Laden's PR department that what the U.S. is doing in Afghanistan and Iraq is occupation. Further, the U.S. military is just a bunch of infidels. Hasan has indicated he was in favor of our losing the wars in both theatres.

Now in a country that would not stand for the idea of Derek Jeter switching to Philly red in the middle of the World Series, what sense does it make to have Major Hasan in our military? For crying out loud, \"don't ask don't tell\" should not apply to the notion of whose side you are on!

In reality though, this was not even a case of don't ask don't tell. No one had to ask Major Hasan to get him to tell people what he believed. He was against the war in Iraq, against the war in Afghanistan and allegedly verbally pro-Allah as he was gunning down unarmed American soldiers.

Imagine in World War II if an American officer had shouted \"Heil Hitler\" as he was killing un-armed soldiers. Would there be any soul-searching debate about \"PRE-traumatic stress syndrome\" and other gobbledy goop? And if his name were Schmidt -- oddly close to Smith actually -- would Diane Sawyer be in a snit?

Of course, this would never have happened in WW2. Things are different today. Somehow our military remains the best in the world while accommodating all kinds of fast track programs for psychiatrist officers whose name sounds a lot like those on the roster at Gitmo while ignoring the detail that he might be anti-American.

And that's the real story here. He was not named Smith. He didn't act like a Smith or talk like a Smith or have allegiances like a Smith. He was so not-a-Smith that someone should have noticed. Or more to the point, our military should not be so eaten up with political correctness that the many who did notice were forced to shut up about it. This was so utterly predictable, which is to say utterly preventable.

That's not to say folks named Hasan should not be in the military. It just might be a good idea if they held onto some mudane Smith type attitudes, like perhaps being pro-American. This is not discrimination. ALL soldiers, regardless of their name, should be pro-American at a minimum. Surely this is logical.

Of course, what else is predictable is how the media is covering it. In the words of an NPR report: \"we know he took his faith seriously, but we can't say for sure that was a factor.\" Right. That's exactly what they say about anyone who bombs an abortion clinic, as we know. Finding out that Hasan is a follower of Islam is harder to discover in most reports as was the fact that Eliot Spitzer was a Democrat.

Equally predictable is our President -- who is also not named Smith by the way. Barack Hussein Obama was giving \"shout-outs\" to folks at a speech related to native Americans at the Department of the Interior shortly after the news of the Fort Hood tragedy broke. This is not George Bush rapidly finishing a two-minute story to the school kids he was already in front of after hearing the horrific news of 9-11 whispered into his ear. No. This was a President who had time to delay, cancel or at least, reprogram a very non-crucial photo op in light of the news.

The only thing missing was Jeremiah Wright hootin and hollerin about \"America's chickens\" and high fiving and so on. I mean, God bleep America, we deserved it, didn't we? At the very least, Obama's reaction can charitably be characterized as cold. And not cool at all.

Now all we can hope is that the Army and the FBI will have the courage to look into the reasons his name was not Smith, and what light that might shed on what happened. Like many, I suspect that there is a relationship there. We can only hope that the FBI will reverse their decision to not even \"discuss\" the idea that terrorism was involved.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/ ... on_he.html


Political Correctness also = treason in my view.

We must recognize what it is.

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:15 am
by Nightshade
As an aside, it seems the administration in Washington did not even think about lowering the flag to mourn the dead until badgered and shamed into doing so:

http://ramparts360.wordpress.com/2009/11/07/4726/

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 7:16 am
by woodchip
Even more interesting:

\"U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.\"

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fort-hood ... id=9030873

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 7:34 am
by Will Robinson
Looks like I was way wrong on this guys motives!
I hope he heals quickly so the army can put him in a 4x8 cement cage where he can live a long boring life waiting for his great god's reward.

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:12 pm
by AlphaDoG
Well if the thread I had started hadn't been locked, I could have told you so, but thanks to hateful people from elsewhere, I SEE it HAD to be locked.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:50 am
by Gooberman
In a previous thread, someone asked how is this different from the person who plays video games, and goes and kills people -- and then blames the video games. The columbine kids played alot of Doom and listened to Maralyn Manson, yet I dont believe any of you draw the relation there.

There was a woman in texas (name escapes me), killed all her children because Jesus told her too. Certaintly, none of you draw the connection there.

Timothy McVeigh -- was a radical conservative, thought the government was becomming to large and infringing on our gun rights. Certaintly, none of you draw the connection there.

So now discussing the case in hand, I agree that at this point it appears he was an Islamo-Crazy -- but wouldn't you agree that it is the second word that he should be characterized by, and not the first?

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:03 pm
by Krom
Yeah, in all of these cases I usually take it as \"someone goes insane and starts a murderous rampage citing excuse XYZ\", but the media and everyone else focus on the \"excuse XYZ\" rather than the \"went insane\" part.

When someone goes insane to the point where they are capable of starting a murderous rampage, any excuse can get blown up enough to start it. The point is that the excuse is largely irrelevant, the murderous rampage part of the psychology is almost entirely instinct rather than any level of higher reasoning.

I'm not out to defend Islam because it is not neutral in the matter, I'm only saying that vilifying Islam alone while ignoring other factors isn't going to prevent tragedies like this from happening again.

Now if you look at it another way, Timothy McVeigh pretty much buried the radical conservative movement with the Oklahoma City bombing. The vast majority of like minded people at the time were disgusted and immediately turned away by the incident. But if you look at Islam, there are very vocal portions that still openly support terrorism and crimes like this. Even though these voices are few and far between, they are still given a much higher volume than the rest. The majority of Islam does not do enough to drown out and shut down the voices of these extremists.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:28 pm
by Nightshade
The \"religious philosophy\" Mr. Hasan espoused has violence against the unbeliever at its base. The founding \"prophet\" advocated mass murder, rape and dehumanization of kuffar (you and me.)

This is not an \"isolated\" incident. While it was a single individual in this case, he is one of many- and one of many generations of jihadi.

Your dismissal of him as a \"crazy guy\" will lead to your demise.

Re:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:40 pm
by Lothar
Krom wrote:When someone goes insane to the point where they are capable of starting a murderous rampage, any excuse can get blown up enough to start it.
This doesn't look like a guy going insane and then latching on to an excuse. This looks like a guy whose insane outburst was caused by a couple of things:

1) day in and day out, he dealt with PTSD cases -- so his picture of what deployment does to people was skewed. He was afraid of deploying, and it was coming up.

2) he felt his religious beliefs would be violated if he had to kill Muslims. He'd given a speech asking the army to excuse Muslims from deployment for that very reason.

In other words, he had two very significant reasons to REALLY fear deployment. I think those two reasons were enough to make the guy snap. The way in which he snapped (a massacre, rather than, say, desertion) could be blamed on the particulars of his understanding of Islam, or on his military training, or on any number of other things. As a whole, I think it's fair to say his religion was a significant contributing factor, but not the only factor, and it's not fair to expect others of the same religion to have the same issues.

This is a far cry both from the "he's Muslim so of course he's a terrorist" approach some people take and the "Islam had nothing to do with it" approach others take.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:51 pm
by Nightshade
Mr. Hasan's Powerpoint Presentation:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00920.html

This is a far cry both from the \"he's Muslim so of course he's a terrorist\" approach some people take...
No Lothar, he's a holy warrior because he is muslim.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:56 pm
by Grendel
/me is wating for TB to snap..






:P

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:04 pm
by Nightshade
Being an athiest, I wouldn't have any reward Gren. :P

Re:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:10 pm
by Lothar
ThunderBunny wrote:he's a holy warrior because he is muslim.
That's not what I got out of his slideshow. At least, not in the "must shoot unarmed people in a hospital" sense.

The main conclusion I got was that Muslims should be able to claim CO status if they have religious objections to fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. Which, frankly, is a good point -- if people have religious objections to what the military requires them to do, it's in the military's best interest to have them opt out.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:44 pm
by SilverFJ
It was a set-up for distraction from the real media, and a possible implication that we can't trust our soldiers... I sure still do.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:44 pm
by Nightshade
It's in the military's (and the country's) best interest not to recruit the enemy.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:56 pm
by SilverFJ
Dude, Muslims aren't our enemy, extremist, wrong Muslims are. While most of them seem to be wrong...well..I don't know what you'd call them. Never-mind.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:28 pm
by Pandora
I am reminded of this:
Japanese American internment was the forcible relocation and internment by the United States government in 1942 of approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans and Japanese residing in the United States to camps called \"War Relocation Camps,\" in the wake of Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.[1][2] The internment of Japanese Americans was applied unequally throughout the United States. Japanese Americans residing on the West Coast of the United States were all interned, whereas in Hawaii, where more than 150,000 Japanese Americans composed nearly a third of that territory's population, only 1,200[3] to 1,800 Japanese Americans were interned.[4] Of those interned, 62 percent were United States citizens.[5][6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_A ... internment

Re:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:58 pm
by Lothar
Pandora wrote:I am reminded of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_A ... internment
Nobody here has suggested imprisoning or isolating Muslims, at least not in this thread. It has been suggested that we shouldn't recruit "the enemy", which one could take to mean "all Muslims" or "Muslims of the extremist variety" or "Muslims who aren't willing to fight against other Muslims". Not having them (whoever "them" refers to) in the army (or allowing them to be discharged) is very different from imprisoning them.

Just FYI, there were plenty of Japanese-Americans serving in the US Army during WWII.

Re:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:45 pm
by Gooberman
Krom wrote:Now if you look at it another way, Timothy McVeigh pretty much buried the radical conservative movement with the Oklahoma City bombing. The vast majority of like minded people at the time were disgusted and immediately turned away by the incident. But if you look at Islam, there are very vocal portions that still openly support terrorism and crimes like this. Even though these voices are few and far between, they are still given a much higher volume than the rest. The majority of Islam does not do enough to drown out and shut down the voices of these extremists.
To a large extent this is a culture thing and an "our media" thing, the brother of Terry Nichols did say it was a tragedy, but also kept making the point, "why was that building knocked down?"

Is it that there aren't people cheering; or that they know they can't cheer? Who here wants to bet that TB has the "tree of liberty" t-shirt? :P

To the second point, if one watches the news you would think you are in serious danger of getting murdered at any given night. But that isn't the case. The news just doesn't care to report on all the people that went home safely every night (we just know that most people do, because most of the people we know, do).

This is the same with Muslims. If you just watched the news, you would think that the majority of them are doing dangerous things. The news doesn't care to report on all the Muslims that go to work every day and contribute to our society in a positive way. Only in this scenario, most Americans don't have a large group of Muslim friends to help put things into perspective.

The news is in the business of reporting on things that happen; but by no means is what they report on "the norm," in fact by definition it is what is "new."

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:45 pm
by SilverFJ
The average American citizens are the ones who're going to be put into the FEMA camps, where they'll process you.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:01 pm
by Gooberman
Lothar wrote:This is a far cry both from the "he's Muslim so of course he's a terrorist" approach some people take and the "Islam had nothing to do with it" approach others take.
I agree to an extent.

If Timothy McVeigh was in favor of gun control, I doubt he would of done the bombings.

If the columbine boy's favorite game was hello kitty island adventure, I doubt they would of done the shooting.

If the Texas woman, was an atheist, I doubt she would of thought Jesus was telling her to kill her kids.

And I agree that if this guy did not believe in Islam, I doubt he would of done the shootings.

But could these massacres of still happened? And these personalities would have just latched onto another cause? Either way,

correlation != causation.

Re:

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:30 pm
by SilverFJ
Gooberman wrote:
Lothar wrote:This is a far cry both from the "he's Muslim so of course he's a terrorist" approach some people take and the "Islam had nothing to do with it" approach others take.
I agree to an extent.

If Timothy McVeigh was in favor of gun control, I doubt he would of done the bombings.

If the columbine boy's favorite game was hello kitty island adventure, I doubt they would of done the shooting.

If the Texas woman, was an atheist, I doubt she would of thought Jesus was telling her to kill her kids.

And I agree that if this guy did not believe in Islam, I doubt he would of done the shootings.

But could these massacres of still happened? And these personalities would have just latched onto another cause? Either way,

correlation != causation.
Tim McVeigh was himself. He would've probably done the same kind of thing if he was fighting for whale's rights. (F***'A YOU WHARE!!!!)

To my knowledge, any male who plays Hello Kitty games will get picked on and beaten up worse than just being a Marylin Manson freaks.

The woman probably would've just found something else, like aliens...If you're crazy enough to kill your kids you'll do it, I doubt Christianity drove her crazy.

His belief in Islam had nothing to do with the shootings, it was mind-control. Just like Tim McVeigh's doctor was the top mind control scientist at the time.

Yes, they would've happened anyway. If I was a mindless droid I'd probably be spreading around how the New World Order was going to be a good thing.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:35 pm
by Nightshade

Who here wants to bet that TB has the \"tree of liberty\" t-shirt?
I'm not advocating the killing or \"rounding up\" of anyone. I'm saying people should be watchful and have in mind that the \"PHILOSOPHY\" and so-called \"RELIGION\" of islam advocates the death of the unbeliever.

People are brought up with many backgrounds be it muslim or something else. Whether someone takes the next step and crosses over the line of actually harming another because his religion commands it is something entirely different.

A vegetarian should keep in mind that a hungry meat-eater may resort to eating his pet chicken if the circumstances are right- so it's probably best for the vegetarian pet lover to have another vegetarian keep his pet safe.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:39 pm
by SilverFJ
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11 ... wn-threat/

Their fear of people getting information from media other than their's is causing them to demonize people who might be home-grown radicals.

Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:13 pm
by dissent
Jeff Lord riffs on Fort Hood, the Berlin Wall and 2012
(recommend the link to the article in the WSJ by Reagan's former speechwriter)

oh, and speaking of the Berlin Wall ceremonies,
http://blogs.knoxnews.com/silence/archi ... mark.shtml