Fort Hood massacre: Malik Nadal Hasan did it

Most likely just someone deranged, like the guys who shoot up college campuses or health clubs. It's kind of surprising that we haven't had one of these within the military before.

If the shooter's name was Billy Bob Johnson, would his name have landed in your headline?

I hope no children were killed or wounded.

Reports suggest all the victims have been adults.

A muslim soldier rolls a hand grenade into his officer's tent during the Iraq war, killing him, and we are told that his religion has nothing to do with it.

A muslim soldier goes AWOL during the Iraq war, living among the muslims in the surrounding countries, and we are told to ignore his religion, to dismiss thoughts that he may have been conspiring with the enemy.

Now, 12 soldiers are killed on a base, in a deployment facility, 31 are wounded (some of whom may not live) by MALIK NADAL HASAN (no relation, I'm Catholic) and Brian leads off with a new round of admonishments to ignore the religion of the shooter.

Okay Brian, the enemy is clearly inside the gates, but we will suspend reality to indulge you and your ilk. Treason happens all the time, and for many reasons. This business of muslim soldiers fragging their own has a unique flavor all its own. But we'll keep ignoring the obvious.

Hey Brian, maybe the base general will start strip searching old ladies coming to visit their grandchildren, just so we don't offend our most trustworthy troops.

A major will have been in the service at least five years, has had two automatic time-of-service promotions plus one promotion that was merit-based.

The fact that he was a Major indicates that he'd spent a considerable part of his life (likely 7-8 years at least) in the Army. That's a significant commitment, and one that would make any "sleeper cell" hypothesis pretty unlikely (assuming that's the implication here).

I get that alleged terrorists like Najibullah Zazi can hide in plain sight in places like Aurora. I find it significantly less likely that they can do they same thing in the military, especially on active duty.

I feel a Manning's Corollary coming on.

should have been "to add pure speculation"

I'm not one to shy away from calling out the evil of Islamic fundamentalism, but I think it's totally off to 1) to assume he's Muslim just because of his name and 2) assume he had a religious motivation just because he's Muslim. That's the definition of prejudice.

I'll be the first to decry it if he was in fact a Muslim with religious intentions. I just think it's premature to be speculating at this point.

"But that the shooter was apparently a Muslim suggests that there was a religious/political angle here, which, if true, makes this story not tragically evil (as it would have been were it a matter of a psychological breakdown), but ideologically evil."

Really? Like anyone else, Muslim (or people with "muslim-sounding names") can also have psychotic breaks unrelated to ideological beliefs.

You're jumping the gun to automatically tie the crazy actions of one man to his (alleged) religion.

I know it makes for an easier, more comforting answer to some - it's not a crazy random seeming event, it's his beliefs! That's something I can avoid in my life! - but sadly, sometimes bad things happen because the human mind is fragile and prone to breaking (from stress, from some predisposition to psychosis).

Driving through the south side of Chicago with my dad and stepmother to get to the Museum of Science and Industry, we stopped at a stop light. There were two mosques in sight. Every person on the street was African-American.

My dad, looking at the mosque, said, "If these people hate us so much, why do they come here?"

I look around at the African-Americans that obviously inhabit the neighborhood, and worship at the mosques.

"Why did WHO come here?" I asked, ready to point out that not all muslims are Arabs, etc. And maybe a corollary about how the people that built these mosques didn't exactly choose to come to this land.

Likewise, it's foolish to assume we know anything more about "Malik Hasan" than what's been told to us. He could be anyone, from anywhere, with any background, and any motivation.

The end of my little tale is that from the back seat, my stepmother screamed "THE WILD DONKEYS!" which is what she calls Arabs, because "God called them that in Genesis."

I was so taken aback I was actually silenced. How does one engage with that?

Your Name

"I think Gerald's was exactly the type of contribution Rod was looking for.."

It's Gerard, not Gerald. And I'm so very, very sorry. I forgot that Islam means Peace. I'm certain that the hijackers who vaporized three of my friends at WTC on 9/11 were only incidentally Muslim. The same goes for the fraggers of late in the military.

The same for the Pakistani mail order bride in my community last week whose husband awoke to her trying to slit his throat for enticing her with western style clothes, pork and alcohol. She too was only incidentally Muslim and we need not be alarmed. Probably she was enraged about the health care debate and the media unjustly focussed on her religious gripes relative to hubby.

I must remember Islam=Peace.

Thank You.

Those examples you list are no more representative of Islam than molesting priests and youth pastors are of Christians.

More details...

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/blotter/entries/2009/11/05/suspect_had_been_upset_about_u.html

So very sad to see that it's come to this, both the tragedy at Fort Hood, and the I suppose unavoidable peripheral tragedy of opinions like the one expressed in this post.

I'm a civil engineer in northern California. My experience with muslims at the university and at work is that they are happy to be in the US, and they enjoy the freedom and opportunity. All have assimilated to American culture quite well and are raising kids who are decidedly American. Some have become good friends.

If Major Hasan is a muslim from another country who decided to fire on fellow soldiers after serving with them, this is a very disturbing development. If Major Hasan is and American (whether he changed his name or not), who then decided on fratricide, it's even more disturbing. I can't see much good coming from it. If American muslims loudly and strongly denounce these murders, that would be a good outcome.

I have to agree with Gerard's perspective. Anyone familiar with the history of Islam has to notice the consistent use of violence and murder to accomplish Allah's goals. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.

Gerard,

I had a non-muslim friend who was killed in the WTC, but I also have muslim friends. Should I spite the latter friends to mourn for the former? The word Islam actually means "submission" roughly translated, and not peace. The histrionics don't get us any closer to the truth of what happened. As others have pointed out here, I doubt this is as simple as you think. cmon, even a Law & Order episode has more plot twists than the way you're thinking.

But I can see how the comments are going to go on here. With a blog title like this, I suppose histrionics is what we'll get. Rod, sometimes I like you, and other times I just shake my head.

http://disastersafe.redcross.org has info on loved ones from Ft. Hood (use the search function)

Because good, god-fearing American Christians never do anything wrong.

Brian, how many more Americans are you going to let Muslims kill before you decide enough is enough? We have a weakling in the White House, someone who coddles these devils (and shares a name with many of them).

The Muslim faith is a faith of violence and lawlessness. Were you in a country governed by the Muslim form of law, you would likely have been taken out and shot for supporting an enemy of the state. Here you have the freedom of speech.

A freedom that you clearly do not appreciate.

Father, with all due respect, perhaps it is time for you to tend your flock, show them the love of Christ, and let the defense of this nation be handled by those who are called to do it. While I have a lot of respect for our good, Christian men of the cloth in this nation, there are times when they forget that Jesus did not ban the sword.

This is one of those times.

You are going to regret this post, Rod.

Crank up the outrage factory!

More on Hassan:

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/blotter/entries/2009/11/05/mccaul_says_suspect_had_specia.html

The absence of anger is very spooky to me. And no matter how officialdom spins this one, I no longer believe them. Another aspect of the estrangement between the governors and the governed.

I would say the name shouldn't be what gets people upset, rather what he did to others?

My late husband's oncologist was named Malik.

So what?

Strange. I thought that the Old Testament God and the New Testament Jesus were the same Person.

Hasan was apparently born in Virginia to Jordanian parents.

Unless US citizens want to get rid of the First Amendment freedom of religion then it's going to be difficult rounding up all the natural-born citizens who adhere to the Muslim faith. Of course, then we're back to where civilization was in the 1500s.

An Muslim Army Psychiatrist headed for Iraq...

Sounds like somebody had some cognitive dissonance (not that that justifies killing a dozen of your colleagues.)

From 1924 until 1965 the US had a sane immigration policy, the result of steady efforts at restriction as it became easier and easier to arrive in the US. The 1924 policy recognized that ethnicity, race, religion and culture are important, and sought to maintain the balance in the population in all those things. It was a good policy, witness the great advances the US made in the middle of the 20th century.

Unfortunately do-gooders who no doubt thought as Richard, Brian, and KateA think, came along and wrecked immigration policy. Populations who have no historical roots in America, and who we don't need, have been introduced. We are paying the price now.

We fought a revolution, a Civil War, beat the Mexicans, went from sea to shining sea, beat the Spanish, helped out our British cousins twice, and put a man on the moon, all without appreciable numbers of Muslims in the country. Why was this population introduced here?

Polistro,

Military bases have exceedingly strict rules about weapons on and off base, privately owned or military-issued. I will not detail these rules here for Force Protection reasons. Suffice it to say the media isn't quite accurate, but there's a lot of regulations about weapons.

Do you know why? It's because you have the Constitutional RIGHT not to have Federal military troops involved in any action within our borders. Sorry, mate, soldiers give up many freedoms to serve in uniform: the right to bear arms freely (they must do so under orders), the right to free speech, the right to search warrants, protection against double jeopardy. They give up their safety in more ways than one.

HOWEVER, I think there may be a few more Military Police pulling security around deployment readiness centers from now on...

As a general point, not knowing the exact details of this attack. Pious muslims/jihadis have made their position clear, have constitutions, make reasoned public statements, commit explicitly religiously motivated violence everywhere around the world daily (do I need to list them and the names of the groups?). To treat these muslims and their self professed religious beliefs as the ravings of children who don't really understand what they're saying or who are unable to act from their stated beliefs is pretty condescending.

Islam has 1400 yrs of religious tradition, many violent wars of aggression that follow well accepted traditions of thought from the Quran and the hadiths.

Quick note on supposed victimisation of Islam: Our petrochemical engineers have made muslim nations fabulous wealth in the middle east. Muslims come to western countries by the millions because of Judeo-Christian tradition of religious freedom they don't find back home: and the suicide terrorists are often highly educated and well to do - this doesn't look like victimisation to me.

Will our compassion extend to those brave muslims who speak up in criticism of the traditional teachings of Islam? Or leave them isolated in immigrant communities that issue death warrants for apostasy? I'm reading willful blindness, a cruelty to brave muslims, in the posts that refuse to identify the religious motives of the killers. Identify these and we can stop them being used as pretexts for violence against their own people and us.

Islam may or may not have been THE motivating factor in this attack. It may have well played some role, this is not the first instance of fragging by a Muslim soldier in this war. IF it is a case of enemy infiltration, again, it's not the first, and I doubt it will be the last. This sort of thing was fairly common during the Cold War, back when the Russians were the enemy. I put my money on psychiatric disturbance, exacerbated or fueled by the inability of this officer to square deploying to Iraq with his faith.

Ultimately, and I say this as an Army Veteran, it is the U.S. Army which is responsible for letting these attacks happen. Clearly, somebody at some level dropped the ball. Probably more than one somebody. That will be investigated, of course.

There are Muslim terrorists and sympathizers in this country. Fact. However, it would be counterproductive in the extreme to somehow wall all Muslims off into police-controlled ghettos, as it seems some people want to do. This would only turn the neutral and supportive portions of the populace into more sympathizers.

We must engage with the whole population, identify and isolate the sympathizers, figure out who the sympathizer's leaders and influencers are, throw the book at THEM, and empower Muslim communities to stand up their own INTERNAL home-grown leaders to counter the influence of outsiders who may be backed (and financed) by terrorist groups that wish to subvert U.S. Muslims and attack Americans.

This will require law enforcement people who simultaneously have real familiarity and respect for Islam and Muslims AND a commitment to countering terrorists, and a flawless information operation campaign.

Also my points above are not in defense of the Mj. He did something abominable. And he might also have been motivated by religion. But that fault lies in him not his religion. All religions have a vein of self-righteous indignation of others - and Islam is no exception. What I find disturbing is how people here especially those of us who have enjoyed a relatively peaceful and enlightened life in the US - with education, freedom or thought, can recoil into just a base mindset, bereft of thought, composure, strength and purpose. That is depressing. We immediately find comfort in the most lazy of mental processes - stereotypes, biases, racism, and lack of comparative or historical perspective.

One does not need to be an academic - just a seeker of truth.
Finally with respect to the 30MM figure that was not aligned to Iraq but to the collective muslim deaths around the world in the last 30 or so years through actions of the non-muslim world.

Compare that to any figure of muslim culpability in the number of non-muslim deaths and you can do the score quite easily.

JP

Uhh Rod what happened to my post? I saw that two people made reference to it but I can't find it? I assume you deleted it. Why? Was it because I called some people who are posting here bigots? Is that a no-no word? If so why is it ok for people who spew hatred towards Muslims on this site but not ok to call them bigots?

PS: Amen to everything JohnP said.

Mel, I'm awake, thanks! I'm afraid I still am not following you, though.

I agree that he could've been religiously motivated…I guess I was just wondering if there was a news source that had confirmed that, since both you and Rod seem pretty definitive. Anyway, I don't really see an urgent need to jump to conclusions about it, since we'll likely know in the next few minutes/hours anyway, right?

http://www.breitbart.tv/co-worker-ft-hood-gunman-made-outlandish-comments-condemning-us-foreign-policy/

"He said, precisely, that maybe the Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor."

Will you weak-kneed apologists for Satan finally give it up?

I bet the good folks in Arizona will be happy to give up some desert for the prison camps we will need. This {expletive} has gone on far too long. It's time we started treating Muslims in the only way that they understand.

M.B. there is a saving about "STRIKE when the iron is HOT"
In order to drive thought a certain way - Mel and others are just paying homage to the above. Now again this Major could be religiously motivated. However even if that is the case I stand by the argument I make.
"Let those among you who has not sinned cast the first stone".

JP

I think that all of us, even those who refuse to acknowledge it, heard that Muslim name on the radio or TV today and thought, "Not this again," and then depending on our circumstances we either thought, "I hope people won't jump to conclusions about Islam," or "Let's wait and see, don't rush to judgment," or "Islamic fascism strikes again!" When a pattern begins to show up, any intelligent person is going to take note of it; but our next reaction here ought to be the second one--not rushing to judgment, understanding what harm can come when we stake out a position before the facts are in. Anyway, there's no need to lob grenades at each other in this thread--the truth will come out eventually.

"Anyway, there's no need to lob grenades at each other in this thread--the truth will come out eventually."

The truth is starting to come out. Again, there are folks here who refuse to accept it.

Rod, I know you do not necessarily appreciate Beck, but he is dead on with regards to putting Muslims in concentration camps. Today's events are yet more evidence for that.

Wow. Folks...let's just chill for the moment, stop throwing mud and speculating and pray for the families of the victims, including the family of Hasan. I believe there is a radical Islamic presence in America and this guy might be a radical. There is certainly evidence indicating that, but there is also reason to believe that he was simply a disturbed twisted guy who had a history of alcohol abuse and went off the deep end with a couple of other people for no particular religious reason. The point is that we don't know because there isn't enough information to prove anything and there isn't any reason to go at each other’s throat when we should be uniting in support of the victims.

I would defend Mr. Dreher though. I don't think he has been unfair or that he will regret what he has said. He's simply stated some obvious trains of thought.

Concentration camps, that's a well-thought out solution...

Do you know, adding fuel or air to a fire tends to make it bigger and badder? Do you really WANT to aid and abet our enemy by giving him such great propaganda for a call to arms? That would be playing into Al Qaeda's hands, following their stated plans, and basically doing half their recruiting and motivating FOR them. We have fallen far too easily into this trap since 9/11.

Quit reading Beck and go read "The Accidental Guerrilla" by Kilkullen. And anything else he's written. I would suggest Fareed Zakariah, whose analysis of the role of Islam in current events and international politics is very readable, but you probably wouldn't read a book by one of THEM.

Major Hassan can tell us what he did and why. He is not dead.

"Some of you people are really unbelievable. You really want a holy war between Muslims and Christians? Really???"

Elizabeth...in case you have not noticed, the war has already begun. It began some time ago, and we did not fire the first shot.

Do you want us to fire the last one, or do you want your friends in the "religion of peace" to do that?

John P,

Spare me the ad hominems. That's always the first resort of really small minds.

Let's look at your list, not in any particular order.

Native Americans. Genocide? True. But that usually comes with a Disney pre-understanding of the gentle Indian who lived at one with nature and one another. Truth is that most of the Nations that lived here were as, if not more, brutal with one another than we were with them.

Slavery. Not all practiced it and it was ended through a civil war between the members of the slave holder class, a war where 600,000+members of that class perished.

I don't ignore the innocent casualties of war. A vaporized wedding party? Sure. But you ignore the fact that we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on smart weapons that have reduced those unintended casualties by orders of magnitude. Do you think that al Quaeda gives a rats a$$ about that wedding party? Not likely. They've killed hundreds of thousands, which leads to my next point.

"You ignore nearly a million dead Iraqis (1 out of 5)"

Now who's the ignorant boob? We've killed about 40,000 bad guys. Fewer than 2,000 civilians. The remainder, are muslims killed by muslims. That's not our fault.

"You ignore the plunder of resources of other so you can keeping running your Dodge Ram"

Another bit of boilerplate from the muslim-apologist, mind-numbed left. We haven't touched one drop of that oil. We pay market price, just like the rest of the world. But I do believe a famous, pious muslim exemplar of peace or surrender, or whatever that great religion propounds, is the one who blew up the Kuwaiti oil fields in 1991. What was his name? Oh yes, Sadaam Hussein. He would also be the one who killed over a million muslims during his pontificate of peace.

As for torture, waterboarding is rather effective. You, my friend are ignorant of the Geneva Conventions that hold that all combatants not wearing their nations uniform, or carrying concealed weapons, or hiding among civilians, or making war on civilians, are by definition outlaws. They have no rights under the conventions and may be disposed of at will (torture or summary execution). That's the set of conventions signed on to by every civilized nation on earth. Waterboarding yielded a bumper crop of lifesaving information from that vermin filth by the name of Kalid Sheik Muhammad. Gitmo is filled with such vermin who violated every single norm of the Geneva Conventions. How then could we have surrendered our civility by enforcing the Conventions. It is through the human rights protestations from weak-minded folk such as yourself that the Geneva Conventions have been gutted, effectively endorsing al Qaeda's brand of waging war. Well Done!

Finally, I never said that Christians are without guilt. I was addressing the argument that Islam s a peaceful religion when actually, its more radical adherents have been pushing for conversion at the point of a sword.

This murderer today received poor fitness reports in no small part because as a PSYCHIATRIST he was manipulating patients by shoving Islam down their throats. Islam's 21st century iteration places it way beyond the wildest excesses of any other religion on earth. The examples you cite are isolated. The bill of indictment I offered indicates a more integrated and systemic approach.

And for all of those good, peaceful muslims out there, the slence at your religion's hijacking has been deafening.

Just saw a news headline that says the two other suspects that were taken into custody have been released.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091106/ap_on_go_ot/us_fort_hood_shooting_soldiers

Looking more like the actions of a disgruntled loner and less like a Muslim conspiracy.

And - from reports about the stuff the Major put on the web, he should have been mustered out or reassigned Stateside before this happened.

Elizabeth,

The United States sided with Egypt, against England in having England return the Suez Canal control to Egypt.

The United States, under Carter sided with the Iranian revolution in throwing off the Shah of Iran. Result: Our Embassy was overrun and our people held hostage for 444 days.

The United States, under Ronald Reagan sent in the US Marines to protect Muslims from the Christian Phlange militia men, who were slaughtering the Muslims in their refugee camps. Result: The muslims send in a truck bomb to the Marine barracks killing almost 250 Marines sent to protect them.

Let's also remember the bombing of the troop barracks in Saud Arabia, the bombing of 2 US embassies in Africa, the bombing of the USS Cole, 9/11...

I'd say that the war is well under way and has been for some time. The only question is whether or not we will summon the courage of our fathers and grandfathers from WWII and fight this all out, last man standing, or whether we will capitulate?

The excuses on this thread for these murderers are chilling.

John E., it's damned difficult to get out of the Army, at all, especially if the Army thinks you are trying not to deploy. You are right, this should have been dealt with, but it sounds like the Army was in default mode: preserving troop end strength at all costs.

During the cold war, did the U.S. allow people whose core identity and ideology was incompatible with freedom (known as communists) serve in the armed forces?

Today, how can we let a people whose core identity and ideology is hostile to freedom (and thus to the United States) serve in the armed forces?

Islam, inherently, in its nature, is as hostile to freedom and the values of the U.S. Constitution as communism was and is. Islamic people in the US deserve freedom of religion, just as communists had and do have the freedom to espouse communism. But they do not deserve the privilege of serving in the military, or in any position the impacts national or public security.

I do not know how widespread the sentiments of John P., Brian, Wolf, and the others on this thread are in our nation as a whole. The decadence of the West, shown most clearly in the constant attitude of obsequiousness, surrender, and sucking up to our enemies, is clearly evident in their sniveling remarks. We might as well surrender if this crew continues to grow in influence and power.

He is not dead AnotherBeliever - he is alive in stable condition.
JP

Rod,

That you started this beast of a thread and allowed it develop as is, is pretty shameful in my opinion, at least if you care to call yourself a journalist. You did not even bother to find out the facts yourself (you know, your job as a journalist) and just allowed such prejudiced comments to proliferate, unchecked.

What's even more obscene, you did not offer a single word of thought or prayer to those personally touched by this massacre. Nope, the most important point was that "Malik Nadal Hasan (Rod speak: a Muslim guy) did it." It's pretty disgusting to see that you (and many of your commenters) thoughts are more focused on sticking it to Islam, than offering solemn hope, thought, and prayer to the injured, the fallen, and their families.

This has been a truly low post, Rod. I hope you take time to reflect.

Elizabeth,

In defense of Rod, a muslim guy DID do it. ANOTHER fragging in this war by a muslim soldier.

Our prayers do go out to the families, but it is also appropriate to show outrage at not only the murder, but at the ideological bent and (surprise!) the identity of the murderer. Maybe you are given to collapsing into a puddle of tears at events such as this. There are many of us who go in a different direction, including those soldiers who were executed and grievously wounded today by another in the long line of disciples of peace or surrender, as the name translates.

Rod 'started' nothing here. Welcome to the ongoing war initiated by those peaceful little men of the mideast. OUTRAGE is most appropriate today. Not all of us have surrendered!

Ok, great Gerard. Rod rolled the dice and accurately predicted that this guy with his name was a Muslim on some religious mission. What do you think he would have said if we found out that a guy with the last name Nadal had committed the same crime?

And I am not in puddles of tears over this. I just think you and Rod are just making huge fools of yourselves, while displaying a good amount of callousness doing it (I'm not a Christian, but it seems like that sort of thing is generally frowned upon - or is it OK if the object of your scorn is a Muslim?).

So how do you plan on dealing with your OUTRAGE, Mr. Nadal? Are you going to go enlist so you can go kill some more mooslins in the Middle East? Maybe reporting your mooslin lookin' neighbor to the police? Beating one up? Or do you just get off venting online? Serious question.

And please, Mr. Nadal, I have never made excuses for the murderers. I have simply called you and Rod out for your idiocy.

Gerard, I would argue that killing them would be giving them what they want: martyrdom. Better to treat home grown terrorists like common criminals. There is not nearly as much glory in sitting in a cell in a supermax as there is in being a lionized martyr.

I don't suggest surrender either. I suggest a cold calculating precision targeting of people who want to kill, preferably before they get around to doing it. And a very clear distinction between extremists and their sympathizers, and the rest. You can be moved the category "the rest" to "the extremists" (and importantly, vice versa) but these categories need to be out there.

And I support most (maybe all?) of those policies too. But your cries for religious war do nothing to make us safer.

Sounds like the perfect candidate for the death penalty.

Well, a muslim terrorist does what muslim terrorists do... and the Army, apparently in thrall to PC sensitivities, pretends that all religions are morally equivalent and that being muslim at a time we are in at least two shooting wars with same, does not pose a security risk. I'd like to see the US military be more pro-active about the safety of American servicemen.

Thehova: If there ever were a time for the death penalty, this would certainly be it. I'm still not convinced that this man wasn't just totally deranged, but I still don't think it's early enough to know anything for sure yet (which is one of the reasons I'm so irked at hearing people wanting to turn it into a rumble over religion).

Elizabeth:

"Most are entirely secular(like the shooter very may well have been). This thread is not so much about addressing the threat of Islamic terrorism, but maligning the Muslim faith and the people who practice it."

That's a great point. Are we maligning an entire faith? No, not really. However, did you notice all the full page ads in the New York Times from the various Muslim Groups in America pledging their loyalty to their adopted (or native) country and denouncing the perversion of their religion? Have you sen the The muslim scholars and representatives of these groups on TV calling for Muslim cooperation in ratting out the terrorists among us?

Me neither. That's the problem. Silence. Eery silence.

As Thomas More said, "In your silence is your assent".

Reasonable people could conclude a certain collusion has taken place. Then when muslim soldiers in the US army start fragging their fellow soldiers, the suspicions deepen. When one of those soldiers holds the rank of Major, that becomes critical mass.

No one is pushing fear of Muslims. They're doing a pretty good job all on their own.

Nor are we pushing for a religious war. Read the papers. Jihad has been declared ON US. The religious war is on and innocent Americans AGAIN were SLAUGHTERED this day. The cowardly bastards hide among civilians, strike without warning, and now take advantage of the uniform and rank of Major to sneak in the weapons.

The religious war is on Elizabeth. If all of Islam rose up against these thugs who have hijacked their religion, they'd all be dead in a day. Then we could all get on with mutual respect and our daily lives.

Again, the silence is deafening.

I just have one thing about all this religious war stuff - If you really think Muslims are out to get us - and you really think we should go get them first - then join the army. I hear they have plenty of opportunity to do this. But don't advocate for someone else in the military to go out and risk their life for your Holy War if you ain't willing to go join too.

Gerard - real civil - someone calls you on this and you start degenerating into anger and nasty names - it is not crap to suggest that before you send people of to war to be killed - you need to be prepared to go with them
I agree jhihads have notions of re-establishing the ancient boundaries. But it is crap (as you so eloquently put it) to suggest that ALL muslims are jhihadists- or that all islamic nations are characterized by people who are just foaming at the mouth waiting to invade their christian neighbors. This is a minority - a dangerous minority - but does such a minority justify your hysteria? Hardly.

My observation is that people who are always screaming that we need to defend ourselves against whoever - have this great willingness to send young men and women off to war to die - while they sit at home ranting about the dangers we face. If we face dangers - then be prepared to back up your hysteria with a willingness to join those you would send to fight and die. Or do you prefer surrogates do the dirty work - maybe we could hire mercenaries?

I think it's revealing that Rod didn't bother deleting the comment calling the perpetrator "Hadji". If a black officer committed mass murder would Rod take the time to observe he wasn't a Swedish Lutheran? No, because that would be pretty racist. Would Rod not delete a comment calling him the N word? No, because a comment like that would be racist, as would one saying we should put all black Americans into concentration camps, or that all black people are violent, or all black people hate white people, and so on. If your first response to hearing that a person from group X has done something horrible is to run to add it to your list of all the reasons to hate and fear group X, you need to take a look in the mirror.

[Note from Rod: You know what it reveals? That a) I missed that comment, and b) no doubt in part because I don't know what "hadji" is, or that it's a slur. I'll go find the comment and delete it. -- RD[]

he has had this plain a long time .and waited to enbrasses our county an our president.an use his race for an excuse.i pray for the wounded an him as well but our county need to keep a close watch on them ,who are muslim that are employed by our goverment.who can be trusted? being hung up on their religion an hurt other . that's! not how it work.

I am so glad that you are not a real journalist you have absolutely no evidence or real fact.

CAIR's statement

http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?ArticleID=26126&&name=n&&currPage=1

U.S. Muslims Condemn Attack at Fort Hood
Posted 11/5/2009 6:15:00 PM

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 11/5/09) - A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy group tonight condemned an attack on Fort Hood military base in Texas that left at least 12 people dead.

In a statement, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said:

“We condemn this cowardly attack in the strongest terms possible and ask that the perpetrators be punished to the full extent of the law. No religious or political ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence. The attack was particularly heinous in that it targeted the all-volunteer army that protects our nation. American Muslims stand with our fellow citizens in offering both prayers for the victims and sincere condolences to the families of those killed or injured.”

Along with innumerable condemnations of terror, CAIR has in the past launched an online anti-terror petition drive called “Not in the Name of Islam,” initiated a television public service announcement (PSA) campaign against religious extremism and coordinated a “fatwa,” or Islamic religious ruling, against terrorism and extremism.

SEE: CAIR’s Anti-Terrorism Campaigns

CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

- END -

CONTACT: CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, 202-488-8787 or 202-744-7726, E-Mail: ihooper@cair.com; CAIR Communications Coordinator Amina Rubin, 202-488-8787 or 202-341-4171, E-Mail: arubin@cair.com

In the past, I have criticized Rod for his inflammatory and sometimes (if not often) unfounded or distorted reports on alleged Muslim misdeeds. But I thought he reported this correctly, with the appropriate caveats. It is a matter of special note when an attack of this kind is perpetrated by someone with a Muslim name. A person of reasonable curiosity will want to know more. That's not to endorse the bigoted comments made in response to Rod's post.

But how do you know a name is a "Muslim name."

Yes, I know, the guy turns out to be a Muslim.

But his name, is still, his name.

I can guess you can choose to judge people based on their name, even when you know within a few hours, you're going to know a lot more details about him.

Me? I'll wait a couple hours and won't waste my time pontificating on a dude's NAME.

The manufactured outrage on this site alone has boosted the November GDP numbers. We used to be a service-based economy. Now we're transitioning into an outrage-based economy. Do your part - manufacture some outrage today. Don't depend on imported outrage.

Hear Hear AnotherBeliever - I am 100% on board with you.

JP

There is no way this President is going to please the 20% or so who are rabidly opposed to him. President Bush spent absolutely no time trying to reason with the rabid left who opposed him. So the best thing our President can do is simply ignore folks like you, listen to the advisors he has selected, and do what he feels is right and proper in his situation.

Whether one is a rabid anti-Obamanite, or a slobbering kiss-up Obamabot, he should have done the right thing. And the right thing in this instance would have been, photo op or not, criticism or not, to fly to Fort Hood.

Another Believer said,

“I don't suggest surrender either. I suggest a cold calculating precision targeting of people who want to kill, preferably before they get around to doing it. And a very clear distinction between extremists and their sympathizers, and the rest. You can be moved the category "the rest" to "the extremists" (and importantly, vice versa) but these categories need to be out there.”

Well said. Let also gently suggest that, having targeted them, we should not be hesitant in taking action. Finally, to echo Gerard Nadal, thank you for your service.

Elizabeth and Cecelia, I won’t tell you to “put your big girl panties on.” That’s not my style. I’m guessing Rod might even regret saying it. I will tell you both to grow up a bit and start refining your critical thinking skills. How you make Rod and Gerard Nadal out to be the villains is beyond me. You ignore any careful or qualifying statements they have made. You are also ignoring Rod’s post of David Frum’s piece. Until you come up with a better explanation, I will have to regard your comments as quite interesting exercises in sophistry.

Finally, to all those who have been so high-handed with Rod and Gerard Nadal and a few others, can you even begin to imagine the things they are posting on Free Republic? I imagine the postings of the Freepers make Rod and Gerard Nadal look like paragons of political correctitude. Let’s not harass people for saying that 2 + 2 =4.

Ignoring facts doesn’t make them go away.