11 killed at military facility in Texas

Unionist wrote:

Don't you think - all of you - it's time to leave Jingles alone? The over-the-top comments about him would be better reserved for the real mass murderers of this world.

I have no idea why this person killed these soldiers. But I personally reserve more grief and emotion for the victims of U.S. soldiers. That doesn't mean I consider their murderer a hero. But I find it bizarre - scary actually - to read some of the posts above and realize they could be applied to Omar Khadr (in fact, they have been by some babblers).

The frenzy in this thread reminds me of the furore against Sunera Thobani, for daring to mention that the U.S. was a victim on Sept. 11 in part because its hands were stained in blood.

Leave Jingles alone, and apply a little perspective please.

Perspective as in US military adventurism directly kills thousands of people per year and indirectly causes the death and injury of many more so killing a dozen or so crusaders is no big deal?

Or, perspective as in Jingles is showning himself to be a total asshole anyways so, whats a little more offensive behaviour?

I prefer the 'all violence is wrong, and so is getting a woody from select violence because the victims had it coming' perspective. There are no perspectives to violence - its wrong, period.

I think I'll save my perspective for innocent American Muslims who may have to carry one isolated lunatic's bags for a long time. The perp happened to be a Muslim perp but that distinction will most likely be lost in the media scramble to make a mountain out of a molehill.

canuquetoo wrote:

I prefer the 'all violence is wrong, and so is getting a woody from select violence because the victims had it coming' perspective. There are no perspectives to violence - its wrong, period.

I respectfully disagree. That's what conquerors always preach to the conquered - once the conquest has been consolidated. It's up to the victims to determine what methods they'll use to free themselves. When native insurgents meet U.S. (or Russian or Canadian or Polish or British) invaders anywhere in this world, I side with the insurgents. I'll leave you the pleasure of tut-tutting against both, and wishing they would just hug.

Unionist wrote:

And that's why, in the greater scheme of things, the death of a bunch of U.S. soldiers readying for deployment on their "missions" doesn't rate as one of the greater tragedies of our time.

I absolutely concur.

It rates as a great tragedy through the media's perspective of the week, which in turn lends fuel to the assortment of talking heads who ominously rant ad nauseum about the representative enemies within, which engenders a far more lasting impression.

Unionist wrote:

And that's why, in the greater scheme of things, the death of a bunch of U.S. soldiers readying for deployment on their "missions" doesn't rate as one of the greater tragedies of our time.

Gee I was just thinking to myself that in the greater scheme of things, the death of Unionist also wouldn't rate as one of the greater tragedies of our time.

Quote:

And you're referring to the "armed tourist" who went to a country whose government made it illegal for men to shave or for women to read and who harboured terrorists who flew planes into buildings and murdered close to 3000 innocent people, including the brother of one of my best friends?

As opposed to going to war on the basis of a lie (to steal oil) and killing up to a million people? Or sending innocent people to be raped with broken bottles? Dp you think any of those victims had friends, family, lovers? Or do only white lives carry value?

What happened was a tragedy, but it is a small tragedy compared to the crimes carried out in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Palestine where many more people die every single day while over the "great game".

canuquetoo wrote:

Michelle wrote:

Thanks for your calm and intelligent responses, frmrsoldier. 

Jingles, you got your shock value.  Cut it out.  What you're writing is completely offensive, and I'm pretty sure you know it.

Cut it out? Thats all this sick puppy gets for praising murder?  No matter one's politics, violence, especially murder is wrong. Whether commited by tribal feudalists or the operatives of geopolitical brinksmanship its wrong.

Praising such an act is against babble policy and reducing its impact to 'shock value' implies babble policy only enforced selectively.

I agree. Is praising an act of mass murder acceptable on babble or isn't it?

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:

if he's guilty, I certainly do. I think he deserves a trial already. If he's innocent, set him free, if he's guilty, send him to jail. Seems pretty obvious. And you're referring to the "armed tourist" who went to a country whose government made it illegal for men to shave or for women to read and who harboured terrorists who flew planes into buildings and murdered close to 3000 innocent people, including the brother of one of my best friends? Yeah, I do consider that guy a hero and his death a tragedy.

Look, if we went into Afghanistan to protect the rights of women and men there, then why did the Carter, Reagan, H. W. Bush, Clinton and G. W. Bush administrations support the Northern Alliance warlords and mujahideen (Mullah Mohammed Omar of the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden of Al Qaeda among them) during the 1979-89 Soviet Afghan War, 1990-96 Afghan Civil War where Northern Alliance warlords murdered tens of thousands of Afghans during the seige of Kabul (Rashid Dostum and Abdullah Abdullah, among others)? The Taliban regime was in power from 1996-2001, yet there was not a word from the G. W. Bush administration about human rights violations and, in fact, they were negotiating a deal for the TAP (Trans Afghan Pipeline) with the Taliban.

Your comment about the 3000 people who were murdered on 9/11 is closer to the truth: We are fighting in Afghanistan to avenge their deaths. In our current war, we have murdered tens of thousands of innocent Afghans. After we murdered 3000 Afghans (which we accomplished in the first month of war) why didn't we declare that vengeance was served and end the war? Where is the reciprocity?

I don't say that soldiers are evil - until very recently, I was one myself. Who I blame are the ones who sent them there: the U.S. and Canadian governments for the lies they used to send the gullible and the believing over there to commit murder and run the risk of being killed or physically or emotionally injured themselves.

This idea about us fighting in Afghanistan to defend the rights of Afghans is the bullshit our governments tell us to sell our illegal, unjust and immoral war in Afghanistan.

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:

Based on interviews with people who actually knew him and from eyewitness reports. What else are you gonna go on? Or do you assume he's some gung-ho American redneck type who drives a pickup and loves Jesus and joined the military to kill Muslims? It was like during the DC sniper situation several years ago where people seemed so hesitant to point out that the guy was Muslim and that that's what motivated him. Far more stories referred to the shooter as a 'former soldier' instead of a "muslim extremist' as if his military career was what played a role...

I read that he joined the military because the United States of America was his country and he felt he owed it to serve his country.

E.Tamaran wrote:

I'm going to re-edit a post of mine where I had originally wished death by Orca on some traitors. Unionist was quite strident and vocal that that was "offensive" and even alerted the moderator, so I deleted that portion. It's going back in. Death by Orca to the Chiefs who carried the Olympic Torch into Victoria!

Stockholm?

Aristotleded24?

ElizaQ?

Canuquetoo?

Star Spangled "Canadian"?

[b]Michelle[/b]!?

After calling for Jingles to be [you name it] for his words, what do we do with this call for death to FN chiefs?

Let it go?

Stockholm wrote:

As SSB pointed out:

"No evidence? Eyewitness reports that he yelled "Allahu Akhbar" as he began shooting. Spent the morning handing out Korans. Was under investigation for internet postings praising suicide bombings against American soldiers. Was disciplined at his previous job for 'aggressively proseletyzing" his Muslim faith to his patients. Had in recent weeks begun dressing in traditional Muslim garb. On a registration form at his mosque, listed his nationality as "Palestinian" despite having been born and raised in Virginia to parents from Jordan, which even the mosque's imam found strange."

 

There are alternate interpretations to these alleged actions:

1. Spent the morning handing out Korans.

I have also read that he gave away other items of personal property: This is usually a sign of impending suicide.

2. He yelled "Allahu Akhbar" as he began shooting.

This could be a cry for help: "God forgive me for what I am doing."

3. He was questioned (not investigated) about the internet postings of a "Hasan" who praised suicide bombings against American soldiers. So far no public announcement has been made whether there is a connection or not between the internet "Hasan" and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

4. He was disciplined at his previous job for "aggressively proseletyzing" his Muslim faith to his patients.

To me, this (along with some of the other talking points) is a sign of PTSD. Think about it. If the shootout was the premeditated act of a rational killer or if he was an Al Qaeda "sleeper agent" or "mole" (trained assasssin) meant to destroy America from within, then he wouldn't be so foolish or careless to "proseletyze" his patients, bring unwanted attention to himself and thus tip the hand of the public and the authorities, would he?

5. Had in recent weeks begun dressing in traditional Muslim garb.

So what? Prima facie, this establishes nothing.

6. On a registration form, he listed his nationality as "Palestinian" despite having been born and raised in Virginia to parents from Jordan,...

His response to the question of his nationality on the registration form, because it was in a mosque, he was probably thinking in terms of his ethnic culture. Many Palestinians live in Israel (where they are denied citizenship), Jordan and Egypt (where, sadly, they often live in refugee camps - both countries). His parents very well could have been Palestinians living in Jordan. He may also have responded with his cultural identity in this case, to prove his "Muslim-ness".

Outrage over death by Orca, eh?

Now that we all know what was said....

Perhaps before getting all outragey, people might want to look up what Orcas mean to BC Coastal FN's.

That aside if a FN person wants to rail against their leaders and says death to them, apparently  by orca, then who am I, or is anyone, to judge them?

Frmrsldr wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

As SSB pointed out:

"No evidence? Eyewitness reports that he yelled "Allahu Akhbar" as he began shooting. Spent the morning handing out Korans. Was under investigation for internet postings praising suicide bombings against American soldiers. Was disciplined at his previous job for 'aggressively proseletyzing" his Muslim faith to his patients. Had in recent weeks begun dressing in traditional Muslim garb. On a registration form at his mosque, listed his nationality as "Palestinian" despite having been born and raised in Virginia to parents from Jordan, which even the mosque's imam found strange."

 

There are alternate interpretations to these alleged actions:

1. Spent the morning handing out Korans.

I have also read that he gave away other items of personal property: This is usually a sign of impending suicide.

2. He yelled "Allahu Akhbar" as he began shooting.

This could be a cry for help: "God forgive me for what I am doing."

3. He was questioned (not investigated) about the internet postings of a "Hasan" who praised suicide bombings against American soldiers. So far no public announcement has been made whether there is a connection or not between the internet "Hasan" and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

4. He was disciplined at his previous job for "aggressively proseletyzing" his Muslim faith to his patients.

To me, this (along with some of the other talking points) is a sign of PTSD. Think about it. If the shootout was the premeditated act of a rational killer or if he was an Al Qaeda "sleeper agent" or "mole" (trained assasssin) meant to destroy America from within, then he wouldn't be so foolish or careless to "proseletyze" his patients, bring unwanted attention to himself and thus tip the hand of the public and the authorities, would he?

5. Had in recent weeks begun dressing in traditional Muslim garb.

So what? Prima facie, this establishes nothing.

6. On a registration form, he listed his nationality as "Palestinian" despite having been born and raised in Virginia to parents from Jordan,...

His response to the question of his nationality on the registration form, because it was in a mosque, he was probably thinking in terms of his ethnic culture. Many Palestinians live in Israel (where they are denied citizenship), Jordan and Egypt (where, sadly, they often live in refugee camps - both countries). His parents very well could have been Palestinians living in Jordan. He may also have responded with his cultural identity in this case, to prove his "Muslim-ness".

This really takes the cake for grasping at straws. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck ITS A DUCK.

Stockholm wrote:

This really takes the cake for grasping at straws. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck ITS A DUCK.

I got a really good laugh out of that one. Thanks Stockholm. It's been awhile since I got a really good laugh.

So, if you see someone wearing traditional Muslim garb (in America, "the land of the free") then you can be certain it is a "slam dunk" that person is an Islamist whacko killer.

Talk about grasping at straws.

To prejudge is to be guilty of prejudice.

If I'm ever in a jam and find myself in court, remind me not to hire you as my lawyer, o.k.?

An Easy Out

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/24805

"It's hard to pinpoint what's the most shocking thing about Major Malik Nadal Haran's shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas. I'll start with this: there's nothing all that ground-breaking about it. Happens all the time..."

Unionist wrote:

No, that's not what was said

Yes, it is what I originally said.

Ghislaine wrote:

Hasan was most definitely not a hero. I also think we should not all jump to conclusions about what his motives were before anyone really knows anything!

Thanks, G., short and sweet - it would be nice if some of the posters upthread took note of that simple truth!

Jebus H. MacChrist!.  Sounds like there's going to be a lot of attrition through death around here, along with even some formula for who's a hero and who get's mourned more.

Just out of curiosity, I'd be intersted in knowing what death by orca means, but another time perhaps.

Look, I was really uncomfortable with this from the getgo.  In a rare difference of views from Michelle, I may have taken stronger measures about jingles, myself.  I don't think lauding people's random deaths like that belongs on a progressive board, or referring to the clearly troubled shooter as a hero.  Worse, it set a bad tone for really bad comments as the thread progressed, and made the predictable polarization even worse.

From here on, we shall not wish death on other babblers, we shall not wish death upon or openly celebrate the deaths of people by catagory.  (that means if Rush Limbaugh chokes on a chicken bone we may collectively snicker, but not at some random group like soldiers who are sucked in through some back door draft and in the wrong place at the wrong time.) We shall not wish death upon FN leaders involved in a stupid sports event, political ramafications aside.

While I'm here...there are anti Muslim posts above.  don't do it any more.

My own take on things is that we're operating with minimal information, and that will change as time goes by. Speculate if you wish, but remember that it's speculation. What I find interesting is how it's being spun by the powers that be, and some pretty horrible reactions from some segments of the media. 

Some people above seem to be better at staying on topic, so carry on.

Ghislaine wrote:

 I am assuming this will be a military trial - or will it be a civilian one? Anyone know?

According to the smirking chimp article I posted at #81 he will be tried by a military court.

Mass Shooting at Fort Hood: Collateral Damage

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/nov2009/pers-n07.shtml

"The mayhem at Fort Hood in Texas, which has left 13 men and women dead and 30 injured, is a by-product of the brutal wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. It is a form of 'Collateral Damage' for which the American political and military establishment is ultimately responsible.."

Some interesting speculation over at Counterpunch:

http://www.counterpunch.org/stahl11062009.html

"Simply stated, was Dr. Hassan, a devout Muslim, being sent to Iraq to work with U.S. interrogators as a sort of liaision between the American military and Iraqi detainees?...

(A)s one of Middle Eastern descent who strongly opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, if called upon to participate in interrogation sessions, using what to him might constitute dubious interrogation techniques, what happened at Fort Hood today may well have been a deranged response to a righteous concern."

I find it interesting that yesterday another man entered a former workplace and opened fire on former co-workers killing one and wounding several. In the Fort Hood incident there is so much effort to find blame and, more specifically, to blame it on the shooter's religious affiliation. In fact, the common thread through so many similar mass killings is the nationality of the shooter. Hassan was born and raised an American.

Whether than trying to blame the "other" maybe the focus ought to be on a society engaged in a "war on" everything while glorifying mass murder, weapons, and with a foreign policy devoid of all tools other than massive, industrialized state violence. In other words, the culture is psychotic.

I think this might be a real and actual case of what CIA officials themselves have referred to as blowback against their illegal, covert activities as well as the US military's. "Blowback" is rarely talked about in the newz media and is generally described as, "Yes we[we as in the CIA and US military, Brits, Saudis, Pakistanis etc] really were hand-in-glove with Islamic terrorists of the 1980's and 90's, but then, and quite suddenly, they went against us" And there is no proof whatsoever that America and allies actually ever broke ties with religious fundamentalists in Asia. In fact, there is much evidence that those cold war era ties still exist, and that America is still funding the proliferation of militant Islam in Central Asia and beyond.

In this case, Hasan was working with the US military. And then, and quite suddenly, he went against them. And unlike Gulbuddin Heymatyar and others who've carried out gladio operations against US citizens and military personnel, they will crucify Hasan for this, because he is the perfect bogeyman. In this particular instance the bogeyman is real.

Hey everyone! I've been out of town for a couple of days. Did I miss anything?

So much for "no personal attacks", eh? That's alright. I'm a big boy. I do find it amusing that some of those here who express such outrage at my comments were either curiously silent or enthusiastic supporters of Israel's massacre in Gaza. Or is it a massacre only if Americans die?

Quote:

..not at some random group like soldiers who are sucked in through some back door draft and in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It weren't in the wrong place. They were preparing to deploy in the Crusades to happily kill Muslims over there instead of over here. Then, when they got back, they would cry to the base psychiatrist about how traumatic is all was. That is, unless they were honest like Matthew [url=http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/]Hoh[/url] who said "I was never more happy than when our Iraq team whacked a bunch of guys". You know, Muslims. 

Okay, this is probably long enough.