“If Bush failed as you’re saying, then you never truly supported Bush. You’re just another libfucktroll playing at being a conservative.”

First, pull you collective heads in. President Bush and his administration did a lot to keep this country safe. However, this does not detract from the fact that there was a politically correct approach taken to Islam in the USA.

Just a couple of instances:

Remember when the FBI went on record to say it would not put people into mosques undercover?

Most instances of Muslim attacks in the USA since 9/11, and there have been a number, are automatically determined not to be a terrorist attack. Before any investigation. I read a definition that stated if it was just one prson it was not a terrorist attack. If it was not linked to anyone else (Leaving out of course any links to Islam and what the perpretrator was taught) it was not a terrorist attack.

CAIR, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, and now an unindicted co-conspirator in case regarding supporting terrorism, was used to advise government departments, including the FBI, on how to interact with Muslims.

Military Chaplains (Muslims) were recommended from a group which taught a more radical form of Islam. This group also controlled which Imans could be appointed to many prisons.

You should not automatically assume that General Casey’s remarks and, for that matter, Secretary Napolotano’s remarks would be any different under the Bush administration. I attended a meeting some time ago (during BushII) where the DHS guy was a little perturbed that one of the speakers (an expert in Arab linguistics) suggested we should call Jihadists Jihadists because the Muslim street agred that they were. The DHS guy said his research with Muslim university students in the USA indicated they didn’t like Jihadist being used because they were more likely to become Jihadists if it was used (Yes, I know they are university students, but the DHS guy was serious).

The radicalization that occurs in our masjids…shameful that we import our imams for this.

Major Hasan’s Business Card…What hidden clues to the Fort Hood Attack were right before our eyes?
……

My response last night was to the couple of pages before this that were very troubling in the call for deportation, interment camps and even violence.

At least that is what it seemed to me in the middle of the night.

There has to be a reasonable response to this.

Things need to change but the retoric on this side doesn’t help.

petunia on November 9, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Understood, and agreed that mere rhetoric is unhelpful.

On the other hand, pretending that if we just give it a little more time we are all going to get along swimmingly well is suicidal folly. The track record of Islam is plainly seen across the globe.

Furthermore any attempt to have a reasonable debate with Islam is pointless because Islam in an inherently unreasonable ideology and can only be adopted by a mind that ignores evidence and logical contradictions.

Moreover Islam has a built in resistance to persuasion, as explained in this Islam meme article.

Islam will only become reasonable when it is forced to become reasonable, and when it becomes reasonable it will stop being Islam.

ReagansRight on November 9, 2009 at 4:57 AM

No argument but where do you see that happening with the current civilian leadership of the military? Even Bush bent over backwards to cater to Muslims though he didn’t overtly bow to them like our jug-eared Muslim-a$$ kisser. It will take leadership with integrity, courage and intelligence to deal properly with this issue. I know a leader like that but she’s too “limited and polarizing” to be considered by the GOP elites or media Obama-fellators.

At least that is what it seemed to me in the middle of the night.

There has to be a reasonable response to this.

Things need to change but the retoric on this side doesn’t help.

“He was a typical fundamentalist Muslim.”

A teachable moment for Obama….

I believe most Muslims in America are true blue Americans. We have more in common with them than we have differences.
petunia on November 9, 2009 at 12:57 AM

This ‘argument’ is spurious fluff.

A watermelon and a human baby are similar in mass and volume and have more similarities than differences in their chemical composition, but only a nincompoop would try to substitute one for the other.

A man holding a loaded gun and the man about to receive the bullet in the head have many things in commmon, but that doesn’t mean that they can live together in harmony. Indeed, the man about to be killed will die, in part, because he fails to take drastic action concerning the extremely small differences between him and the man about to kill him.

A car properly constructed and a car missing only the 50 grammes of metal that form the tips of its spark plugs will be 99.99999% identical in composition, appearance and mass; but their usefulness and performance will be incomparably different. One will move forward and provide service while the other will, at best, do nothing at all.

Merely counting similarities, real or imagined, gives no insight whatsoever concerning compatibility of purpose or function. Any attempt to draw such insight is deluded, as the aforegoing examples amply illustrate.

Major Hasan was a mass murderer. The army should have been more aware. There was too much deference given to his religion… of course! But that is not the fault of Muslims who have done nothing wrong. That is the fault of those whose job it was to watch out for exteremists!

petunia on November 9, 2009 at 12:57 AM

‘Extremist’ is another unhelpful word. Every point on a circle is ‘extreme’ to the point diametrically opposite it. In philosophy / politics ‘extreme’ means little more than the opposing view to whatever is considered ‘normal’.

Scapegoating innocent people is as bad as too much PC.
The situation needs handled with the facts as they exist.
There are lessons to be learned. And we will learn them I hope.

Yes, and one of those lessons is that ‘innocent’ is not the same as ‘harmless’. What a person believes determines how that person will behave and it would be foolish for us to act as if all beliefs and ideologies are equally amenable to happy and wholesome outcomes.

Your argument seems to be that we can all rub along happily with most of the Muslims because, for the most part, we are like them. What such an argument ignores is the important question of ‘what works?’.

There are approximately 50 nations in the world where 50% or more of the population assert allegiance to the Arabian Barbarian. None of those nations is a notable success story and those that have ‘more’ Islam are worse than those that have ‘less’. Of course no society is perfect, no ideology has ever been perfectly implemented, no person follows their own beliefs perfectly and every ideology has idiotic or evil adherents. However:

The worst of the nominally Atheist societies was better than the best of the nominally Islamic societies.
The worst of the nominally Buddhist societies is better than the best of the nominally Islamic societies.
The worst of the nominally Catholic societies is better than the best of the nominally Islamic societies.
… and so on through the ideological alphabet …
Nothing degrades human life and society as badly as Islam does.

Islam is not wholly bad, but for every one good thing that Islam offers, it destroys a dozen others, meanwhile Islam also encourages several bad habits for each one that it opposes. It is suicidally arrogant to presume that ‘Western’ ideas and technological accomplishments are sufficient of themselves to overcome the intellectual and moral corruption of Islam and its physical brutality. Hence the need for separation.

If western Muslims are so confident that Islam is the cure to society’s malaise let them leave the comforts and safety afforded by the Kuffar nations and demonstrate Islam’s efficacy and superiority by healing one or two countries in the ‘Islamic’ world.

S**T FOR BRAINS.

GrannyDee on November 9, 2009 at 12:04 AM

He’s a muslim sympathizer. In his book he said he would side with the Muslims.

Army Brat, they bent over backwards for Hasan because he’s muslim. Thats the PC way.

Hasan is a terrorist who deliberately planned this attack and carried it out.

Major Hasan was not normal. His brain was broken.
petunia on November 9, 2009 at 12:57 AM

What is ‘normal’, to who and under what circumstances? From what I have read his attitudes and beliefs are perfectly ‘normal’ amongst the Muslims I read about and those I have conversed with. What is a ‘broken brain’? Anybody who attempts to force their minds to accept nonsense (such as the teachings of Islam) is going to be mentally unbalanced in some way because the claims of Islam run contrary to reason and to experience.

Furthermore, Mr Hasan’s family apparently they saw nothing about his character or conduct or beliefs that was unusual. What is ‘normal’ for the admirers of the Arabian Barbarian is not ‘normal’ for most of the rest of the world’s people.

Can these two ‘normalities’ co-exist peacefully? The evidence of the past 1400 or so years suggests they cannot.

What happened last Thursday was terrorism. And the terrorist was the enemy within.
petunia on November 9, 2009 at 12:57 AM

The word terrorism is thrown around too carelessly. So far I have seen nothing to suggest that this man had ‘terrorism’ or any clear political agenda on his mind. A terrorist aims to create terror in his/her opponents in order to further the terrorist’s ambitions. Merely being inspired by Islam to kill does not of itself make the killer a terrorist. It seems far more likely to me that this man was motivated by little more than the prospect of the heavenly rewards promised to Muslims for killing the opponents of Islam.

Today it is Islam, but they are a few centuries behind. Our ancestors were like that once.

Saying they are ‘behind’ implies they are walking the same road, but they are not. People describing themselves as Christians became increasingly brutal as they strayed from the teachings of Jesus. People describing themselves as Muslims become increasingly brutal as they follow more closely the teachings of the Islamic texts.

Obama is a liar and Truth is
killing his Marxist agenda.

But deportation and interment camps for innocent American citzens? Really?

How about just calling for some racial profiling. That would probably be enough to catch these guys before they did anything.

petunia on November 9, 2009 at 2:27 AM

With all due respect, please consider the follow troubling signs related to a barbaric murderer. Signs that were recognizable by Hasan’s Army colleagues at Walter Reed and Ft. Hood over a span of several months. One of the most disturbing revelations dates back to 2001:

Now the 39-year-old Muslim-American, who authorities say killed 13 people and wounded 38 others in Thursday’s rampage at Fort Hood in Texas, is at the center of a riddle investigators have only begun to probe: How could a military psychiatrist, surrounded by other mental health experts sensitized to signs of combat stress, suddenly snap without any apparent warning?

It also emerged that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had consistently expressed opposition to the Iraq and Afghan wars since his early days at Walter Reed. One of his fellow students recalled Hasan arguing that suicide bombers were comparable to soldiers who fell on grenades to protect their colleagues. “I really questioned his loyalty,” Dr. Val Finnell said.

Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.

The preacher at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organisations. Hasan’s eyes “lit up” when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki’s teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base

The article further states:

Fellow Muslims in the US armed forces have also been quick to denounce Hasan’s actions and insist that they were the product of a lone individual rather than of Islamic teachings.

I’m not buying the statement discrediting the persuasiveness of Islamic teaching with respect to Mr. Hasan’s actions towards his victims – especially when weighed against the other allegations mentioned previously.

Look, Hasan is a perpetrator and he should face a trial as one. He certainly does not meet the qualifications of being a victim. Perhaps this tragedy could have been prevented with proper vigilance during a time of war.

Political correctness has a tendency to allow intelligent people to become paralyzed and non-committal with respect to proper responsible reporting of questionable beliefs and behavior. In my opinion political correctness allowed the F.B.I., and especially some members of the U.S. Army, to ignore signs displayed by a potential – and now – mass murderer of young men and women.

My primary emphasis is focused on due diligence with regards to personal safety and the prevention of mayhem perpetrated by followers of a radical cult-based ideology. Security is of the utmost importance and all reasonable measures should be fully executed in order to achieve it.

But deportation and interment camps for innocent American citzens? Really?

Your words, petunia; not mine.

How about just calling for some racial profiling. That would probably be enough to catch these guys before they did anything.

Again, your words. However, if we strip away political correctness and judicially apply common sense to troubling and obvious evidence displayed by a member of the military, then a troubling profile will be revealed. And unnecessary violence would be prevented as a consequence.