Ft. Hood

[Blue]

Originally Posted by Nass

It'll be interesting to hear what he says once his statements on the matter come out. Until then, seems to me it's pretty pointless speculating about what his motive might or might not be and what this might or might not represent.

There's enough information to speculate. What he says may or may not clear up the speculation.

I'm not going to buy the "As a psychiatrist, I couldn't handle hearing about carnage of war, so I decided to create more death" line of defense.

[Ratmagiclady]

Originally Posted by Nass

It'll be interesting to hear what he says once his statements on the matter come out. Until then, seems to me it's pretty pointless speculating about what his motive might or might not be and what this might or might not represent.

I do wonder what may come out of that if he recovers. People who perpetrate these kinds of shootings rarely survive, it seems. Odds are we may not hear much from him for some time while the legal thing gets resolved.

And, no, by the way, Blue, there *is* no defense. There may be better things to learn about the *cause* than to pretend it's just about him being Muslim, is all.

[flippedgazelle]

Originally Posted by Blue

There's enough information to speculate. What he says may or may not clear up the speculation.

I'm not going to buy the "As a psychiatrist, I couldn't handle hearing about carnage of war, so I decided to create more death" line of defense.

I agree.

As I said earlier, it seems there are essentially 2 possibilities:

1. Hasan decided that because of the war he hated Americans and had to kill 'em.
2. Hasan couldn't handle his internal conflict of fighting against his Muslim "brothers" and had to go out in a blaze of gory.

There's a whole bunch of info being reported by the AP, CNN, etc. that would support either of these statements. Either way you look at it, his religious belief is the epicenter.

[Parallax]

Originally Posted by Ratmagiclady

Well, yeah, Parallax, but I've heard myself called just about all those things Mickey quoted by Christians, too, and we all hear what Muslims can get called. That's no more comfortable for others than it is for you when the shoe's on the other foot, and it hardly matters who's 'worse' according to one point of view or the other. Saying 'they're worse!' doesn't actually justify anything.

Like anyone else with a 'holy book' thing going on, people still have to choose what they believe out of it and act on. (It's one of the reasons I couldn't believe in that kind of book that way, even if I didn't have my own thing going on. They seem to do more to sanctify what'd otherwise be *wrong* than actually promoting, never mind guaranteeing, any kind of especial goodness,) Neither religion exactly has the greatest track record, there, but we still all have to share a world.

Maybe we should embrace the best in each other, rather than encourage the worst. Maybe if we want people to be loyal to America, we should be trying to give them a *stake* in our Liberty rather than alienating them from it.

I agree with you about the people. Jackasses are like jellybeans; the come in many flavors and colors. It is my contention though that, unlike the Quran, neither the New or Old Testaments say, in essence, that anyone that doesn't think a particular way should be killed, or made to suffer, or are less than human.

[mickeyobe]

Originally Posted by flippedgazelle

I agree.

As I said earlier, it seems there are essentially 2 possibilities:

1. Hasan decided that because of the war he hated Americans and had to kill 'em.
2. Hasan couldn't handle his internal conflict of fighting against his Muslim "brothers" and had to go out in a blaze of gory.

There's a whole bunch of info being reported by the AP, CNN, etc. that would support either of these statements. Either way you look at it, his religious belief is the epicenter.

How about a third option, flippedgazell.

3. Hassan is a Muslim who believes in the Koran and tried to follow its commandments on how to deal with us disgusting infidels.

There is altogether much too much Pollianaism extant among practitioners of western society, ratmagiclady.
You have but to look at England and France and Holland and Belgium and Germany and Sweden and and now, even areas of the USA to see what that attitude begets.

The Koran, just like Hitler's Mein Kampf, spells out exactly what our world may expect. We ignore those warnings/predictions/calls-to-arms at our peril.

Mickey

[flippedgazelle]

Originally Posted by mickeyobe

How about a third option, flippedgazell.

3. Hassan is a Muslim who believes in the Koran and tried to follow its commandments on how to deal with us disgusting infidels.

I'm just going to where the articles I've read have led me.

[Ash]

Originally Posted by Parallax

I agree with you about the people. Jackasses are like jellybeans; the come in many flavors and colors. It is my contention though that, unlike the Quran, neither the New or Old Testaments say, in essence, that anyone that doesn't think a particular way should be killed, or made to suffer, or are less than human.

The Old Testament is full of conflicts, full of killing. Just look at David's life. As a warrior, he had blood on his hands most of his life. He was even ordered by God to kill and defeat many tribes with the sword. But the New Testament, which fulfills the Old in Christianity, brought Christians under a new covenant - of mercy and loving one another and God, rather than being smitten for the wrong done. The new covenant in Christianity is about forgiveness, and never about killing.

The Qur'an, OTOH, justifies killing only when restraint cannot be made. It does say that Allah prefers mercy but also gives a provision for waging holy war - militancy can then be an interpretation of the Scripture. So to muslims, it is OK to defend the cause of Islam through killing if it's perceived to be justified to them.

This is no generalisation - it's in the Scriptures, and there's little ambiguity about them.

[flippedgazelle]

The Old Testament specifically encourages to kill "anyone that doesn't think a particular way ". Think Sodom and Gomorrah.

I'm a New Testament guy, myself.

[Ash]

Originally Posted by mickeyobe

How about a third option, flippedgazell.

3. Hassan is a Muslim who believes in the Koran and tried to follow its commandments on how to deal with us disgusting infidels.

There is altogether much too much Pollianaism extant among practitioners of western society, ratmagiclady.
You have but to look at England and France and Holland and Belgium and Sweden and and now, even areas of the USA to see what that attitude begets.

The Koran, just like Hitler's Mein Kampf, spells out exactly what our world may expect. We ignore those warnings/predictions/calls-to-arms at our peril.

Mickey

In being an EEO, the Army has to consider a muslim as favourably as a non-muslim, considering all entry requirements are met. Gooshin's unanswered question in a previous thread is all the more pertinent here too: "How does one distinguish the non-militant muslim from a fundamentalist/extremist muslim?" Truth is you can't, neither will a modest muslim hand over an extremist muslim if they see one. And by the fact that Islam gives provision to defend its own cause, a muslim offer in the Armed Forces is left with quite a dilemma.

BUT, the muslim officer HAS agreed that on signing up with the Armed Forces that he obeys orders and performs duties expected of him by the country's military. An officer should EXPECT to be deployed to Afghanistan at some stage and have to serve in Coalition forces there against insurgents, terrorists and fundamentalist muslim recruits. That's a given. This officer had either not considered this or purposefully ignored it, until it became blatantly obvious he could ignore his deployment no more. Who knows what went through his mind? Time will tell.

[Ash]

Originally Posted by Blue

There's enough information to speculate. What he says may or may not clear up the speculation.

I'm not going to buy the "As a psychiatrist, I couldn't handle hearing about carnage of war, so I decided to create more death" line of defense.

Then again, a psychiatrist is no more immune from insanity than anyone else. In fact, I think psychiatry itself attracts a certain type of character...

[mickeyobe]

"The Old Testament is full of conflicts, full of killing. Just look at David's life. As a warrior, he had blood on his hands most of his life. He was even ordered by God to kill and defeat many tribes with the sword. But the New Testament, which fulfills the Old in Christianity, brought Christians under a new covenant - of mercy and loving one another and God, rather than being smitten for the wrong done. The new covenant in Christianity is about forgiveness, and never about killing."

True, the Old Testament was full of blood and gore but it was never considered immutable. Jews have evolved from warring tribes to today's, as peacefull as the rest of the world will allow, modern advocates for peace.

As for the followers of the New testament, which, evolved from the Old Testament, to name but a few of your love they neighbour examples, there is the expulsion of all Jews from England by Edward I. The Bloody and long lasting Spanish inquisition. Schmeilnicki's massacers of tens of thousands of Jews in the Ukraine. The Russian and Polish pogroms of the last and previous centuries. The Nazi holocaust. Ahmadinejad's calls to exterminate all Jews.

But both Jews and Christians have become to a large extent desirous of peace with their neighbours.

Islam does not permit such an evolution and, indeed, abhors it and is still intent on world conquest.

Just read what their Imams teach in the mosques.
Listen to what their children are taught in their Madrassas.
Stop trying to find a rational explanation for the bloody deeds being inflicted on mankind today by the followers of Islam.
Trust them at your peril.

Yes. I have reluctantly become an Islamophobe.

Mickey

[Ratmagiclady]

Originally Posted by mickeyobe

How about a third option, flippedgazell.

3. Hassan is a Muslim who believes in the Koran and tried to follow its commandments on how to deal with us disgusting infidels.

Again, Islam has some pretty conspicuous company as regards how to treat 'disgusting infidels.' A lot of Christians... And Biblical passages that are read by some with intent... Say that about me every day.

There is altogether much too much Pollianaism extant among practitioners of western society, ratmagiclady.
You have but to look at England and France and Holland and Belgium and Germany and Sweden and and now, even areas of the USA to see what that attitude begets.

Decent health care and relative social harmony?

It's not being a 'pollyanna' to refuse to give in to xenophobia.

So, they have a book which says you ought to be killed in nasty ways and it's no sin to do so. I live with people like that every day. They're called 'Biblical Literalists.'

They're called Christians.

If I went around the world indicting everyone who's got a holy book that says or is purported to say it's OK to brutalize or kill me, I wouldn't have Christians and Jews who are as good as family to me. ( I might be the only religious person in the discussion who *doesn't* have a book with such 'marching orders' in it. *Quakers* have that same book. And Sufis have a Koran. Gentle people. )



Maybe I'd go live with the 'pollyannas.' Being Americans, as with many nations, means we don't have to play that way.

The Koran, just like Hitler's Mein Kampf, spells out exactly what our world may expect. We ignore those warnings/predictions/calls-to-arms at our peril.

Mickey

And do you apply this standard elsewhere? And what exactly do you mean to *do* as regards 'not ignoring?'

What do you see happening next, if we ...err, 'stop ignoring' in the way you would seem to have in mind, whatever that may be, Mickey?

Pluralism is our *protection.* Our *freedom.* And our *principle.* This is what we stand on, as Americans. No, it's not being 'pollyannas' to ... err, not panic? Give in to vague fears and aggressions? Undermine everything we stand for cause all of a sudden people realize some have a book much like their own that someone *else* purports to claim power to subdue the world with?

What are you proposing, here, Mickey?

I think what we ought to *all* stop ignoring is these tides of hatred and xenophobia people seem to think it's somehow 'brave' to knuckle under to. Wherever they come from. If I judged all monotheists by how you judge Muslims, it wouldn't make a difference to me *what* you thought you were protecting.

We could be... People?

[Rupert]

Count me in Mickey....you won't find any converts here, they are too busy defending the indefensible and bashing those Christians and Jews for what happened centuries or longer ago. We are talking about today, and about what is happening currently with Muslims throughout the world, and it is not a quest for peace.

BTW-Ratlady, nothing personal here, you do not offend me, but every subject under the sun does not relate to gays and lesbians. To call attention to your cause in every subject under the sun is not beneficial to your profile. It makes many wonder if gays or lesbians are capable of just being "normal" people, and not just fixated on their sexuality. Again, nothing personal, I have no malice towards gay/lesbians, but just join in the ranks of the rest of us with our "normal perversions" of the truth.
Regards!

[Ratmagiclady]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Count me in Mickey....you won't find any converts here, they are too busy defending the indefensible and bashing those Christians and Jews for what happened centuries or longer ago. We are talking about today, and about what is happening currently with Muslims throughout the world, and it is not a quest for peace.

Well, what have you just signed on for, Rupert? It seems no one will ever say.

BTW-Ratlady, nothing personal here, you do not offend me, but every subject under the sun does not relate to gays and lesbians.
To call attention to your cause in every subject under the sun is not beneficial to your profile. It makes many wonder if gays or lesbians are capable of just being "normal" people, and not just fixated on their sexuality. Again, nothing personal, I have no malice towards gay/lesbians, but just join in the ranks of the rest of us with our "normal perversions" of the truth.
Regards!

Err. You're the one claiming it's all about sex when I mention your high horse isn't exactly all so tidy. By the standards you want to indict all Muslims by. Frankly, it's people who want to call me nasty names and the like over that that think a little thing like, oh, *my whole family life as an American* should not be talked about.

Actually, I was primarily speaking as someone who's neither Christian nor Muslim.

And how the both of youse very often sound just the same to me. Yeah, it's maybe 'worse' in a lot of Islamic countries. That's why I don't want to see *you guys take it there with a different brand name.*

And, I have to step out a while. Meanwhile, tell me what you propose to *do,* in that.. unspecified non-pollyanna way.

[Mike Cash]

United States Code > TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 47 > SUBCHAPTER X > § 918 > Article 118: Murder

Any person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he—

(1) has a premeditated design to kill;

(2) intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm;

(3) is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to another and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or

(4) is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, sodomy, rape, rape of a child, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault of a child, aggravated sexual contact, aggravated sexual abuse of a child, aggravated sexual contact with a child, robbery, or aggravated arson;

is guilty of murder, and shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct, except that if found guilty under clause (1) or (4), he shall suffer death or imprisonment for life as a court-martial may direct.