[Brenda]

martin14 martin14:

Brenda Brenda:

I find it funny that "all muslims" are to blame here, but no one questions his collegues, higher in rank officers, or even his promotion. It was not "just" from last week, was it...

He should have been reported months ago.

and yet you yourself quoted from the article an hour ago:

Brenda Brenda:

Danquah assumed the military’s chain of command knew about Hasan’s doubts, which had been known for more than a year to classmates at the Maryland graduate military medical program. His fellow students complained to the faculty about Hasan’s “anti-American propaganda,” but said a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal complaint.

He wasn't cause it wasn't PC

EXACTLY!
Where is the outrage over that???
I hear nobody attack them! All I hear is people (other than blaming the guy, and rightfully) blame a whole religion.

I am VERY pissed off that he wasn't reported because it was not PC. That killed 13 people. Fuck PC. Fuck that moron that didn't report him.

[Brenda]

IMO, it is pretty simple. YOU CANNOT HAVE ONE WITH A DIFFERENT VIEW THAN THE NATIONS VIEW, IN THE MILITARY.

I don't care if it is a muslim, a catholic or an Atheist, someone who is against the war in whatever way, shape or form, should not be in the army.

[BartSimpson]

Brenda Brenda:

I hear nobody attack them! All I hear is people (other than blaming the guy, and rightfully) blame a whole religion.

I am VERY pissed off that he wasn't reported because it was not PC. That killed 13 people. F*** PC. F*** that moron that didn't report him.

I know you're saying F PC here, but in prior posts in this very thread you've evidenced the exact brand of PC that people worry about when dealing with Muslims.

The conundrum you face is that Muslims themselves say that jihad is inseparable from Islam and that Islam without jihad is not Islam.

You're looking everywhere to find a motivation for what this man did but you are deliberately excluding the one source of motivation he has in common with so many other Muslims who have done similar things: his faith.

It's like trying to say that someone robbed a bank for a motivation that had nothing to do with money.

Political correctness is the very heart of liberal hubris in that it is assumed that those who are the beneficiaries of PC are just like us. Yet their motivations stem from their nature of NOT being just like us.

[Akhenaten]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Brenda Brenda:

I hear nobody attack them! All I hear is people (other than blaming the guy, and rightfully) blame a whole religion.

I am VERY pissed off that he wasn't reported because it was not PC. That killed 13 people. F*** PC. F*** that moron that didn't report him.

I know you're saying F PC here, but in prior posts in this very thread you've evidenced the exact brand of PC that people worry about when dealing with Muslims.

The conundrum you face is that Muslims themselves say that jihad is inseparable from Islam and that Islam without jihad is not Islam.

You're looking everywhere to find a motivation for what this man did but you are deliberately excluding the one source of motivation he has in common with so many other Muslims who have done similar things: his faith.

It's like trying to say that someone robbed a bank for a motivation that had nothing to do with money.

Political correctness is the very heart of liberal hubris in that it is assumed that those who are the beneficiaries of PC are just like us. Yet their motivations stem from their nature of NOT being just like us.

I would assume then that you're making the athiests' arguement here.

Your logic states that if a crime is done in the name of a faith, then there is a problem with the faith.
If presented with a Christian motivated crime you would abandon this and return to
"who does more crimes (...lately)",
in order to justify one faith and demonize another. That argument doesn't really work either.

Either way you have to choose between condemning extremists or simply condemning all religion.

[N_Fiddledog]

At one time the mosque Hassan attended was the same one 3 of the 9/11 hijackers attended. The preacher (Iman?) there was Anwar al-Awlaki. Here's what Anwar al-Awlaki had to say concerning Hassan's murder rampage...

$1:

Nidal Hassan [sic] is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people. This is a contradiction that many Muslims brush aside and just pretend that it doesn’t exist. Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.

Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.

The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=10066

[BartSimpson]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

I would assume then that you're making the athiests' arguement here.

No, because plenty of Christians and Jews are afflicted with political correctness. It is not an 'atheist' argument and that's why I am not saying it is so.

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Your logic states that if a crime is done in the name of a faith, then there is a problem with the faith.
If presented with a Christian motivated crime you would abandon this and return to
"who does more crimes (...lately)",
in order to justify one faith and demonize another. That argument doesn't really work either.

Either way you have to choose between condemning extremists or simply condemning all religion.

The difference is that a Christian or a Jew who does such a thing is aberrant. As we see from the statement of Hasan's imam, in the context of Islam Hasan's actions were admirable.

[Brenda]

So are the actions of people who give other people AIDS, because you cannot use a condom, according to the Pope.

[commanderkai]

Brenda Brenda:

So are the actions of people who give other people AIDS, because you cannot use a condom, according to the Pope.

Eh...where did the Pope say this?

[Brenda]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Brenda Brenda:

So are the actions of people who give other people AIDS, because you cannot use a condom, according to the Pope.

Eh...where did the Pope say this?

Are you serious???

Read this article.
http://www.reuters.com/article/homepage ... ._CH_.2400

$1:

"It (AIDS) cannot be overcome by the distribution of condoms. On the contrary, they increase the problem," he said in response to a question about the Church's widely contested position against the use of condoms.

I thought it was common knowledge the Pope does not want people to use condoms.

[Akhenaten]

Bart Simpson Bart Simpson:

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Your logic states that if a crime is done in the name of a faith, then there is a problem with the faith.
If presented with a Christian motivated crime you would abandon this and return to
"who does more crimes (...lately)",
in order to justify one faith and demonize another. That argument doesn't really work either.

Either way you have to choose between condemning extremists or simply condemning all religion.

The difference is that a Christian or a Jew who does such a thing is aberrant. As we see from the statement of Hasan's imam, in the context of Islam Hasan's actions were admirable.

Mn, no I disagree. Here I believe you chose what you want to see and decide what to be blind to. You are blind to the kind of violence that can be done by anyone in all history (and therefore future) who firmly believed the act was sanctioned by God. Torture. Gruesome executions. Killing many innocents just to make sure you were able to kill a few - "Kill them all God will know his own".
Now you may make the argument that there has been some great strides, some evolution if you will, of these religions and I would agree, they aren't the way they used to be, but they've also lost power. So that you don't see many Christians or Jews killing in this way anymore (and that could be argued) this doesn't really change what any person is capable of doing if they believe they are doing the work of God.

Then you also are willfully blind to the Imams and Mulims speaking out against these acts to also express that this act was abhorent to them and to Islam. I can't really blame people for that: a bomb will always ring louder than the calm voice of reason.

I have no hang up personally in saying that Islam needs to 'grow up' but then that's easy for me as I'm an athiest. I can look at this in a straightforward definition: Fanatical, extreme faith and devotion to a religion is danger to others.

A person of faith however (Chrisitan, Islam, Jewish) often can't do this. They can't implicate Islam in that way without implicating themselves. Thusly they must demonize Islam (perhaps exaggurrate) and call it a predictable fault of an 'untrue' faith. Those people are the enemy of reason because they turn this in to a religious conflict rather than the more open and human conflict between reason and fanaticism that it is.

[Brenda]

$1:

Fanatical, extreme faith and devotion to a religion is danger to others.

[BartSimpson]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Thusly they (Christians and Jews) must demonize Islam (perhaps exaggurrate) and call it a predictable fault of an 'untrue' faith.

Muslims do a far more capable job of demonizing Islam than any Christian or Jew ever could.

[SprCForr]

Brenda Brenda:

I find it funny that "all muslims" are to blame here, but no one questions his collegues, higher in rank officers, or even his promotion. It was not "just" from last week, was it...

He should have been reported months ago.

I agree. If he was being as disruptive as it was reported, he should have been on the mat.

ABC is reporting that there was another aspect to this guy.

Ft Hood shooter tried to contact Al-Quada

[Brenda]

SprCForr SprCForr:

Brenda Brenda:

I find it funny that "all muslims" are to blame here, but no one questions his collegues, higher in rank officers, or even his promotion. It was not "just" from last week, was it...

He should have been reported months ago.

I agree. If he was being as disruptive as it was reported, he should have been on the mat.

ABC is reporting that there was another aspect to this guy.

Ft Hood shooter tried to contact Al-Quada

No shit Hoekstra was pissed!