Posted in Fort Hood, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, Politics, Terror, Terrorism

Fort Hood- A Terrible Tragedy

fthoodMany people have asked my thoughts on the tragedy that unfolded in recent days at Fort Hood, TX. I have received telephone calls, e-mails, and even a comment on another post on this particular blog, all wanting to know if I was going to post about the tragic events that cost 13 people their lives, wounding many others. At last count, 17 people remained hospitalized.

Some people were merely curious, legitimately wanting to know my thoughts on the subject. Others have asked their questions as if daring me to politicize this event, baiting me to write up a post that is sympathetic to the shooter.

For those who thought I’d have sympathy for Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a mass murderer and coward, you are wrong, and obviously do not know me nearly as well as you seem to think you do.

I have nothing to offer with regards to this subject other than that my thoughts and prayers are with each and every one of the families that have been impacted by this heinous act.

I pray that justice is served.

In the meantime, I will not attempt to comprehend what drove a man, a soldier, to take the lives of fellow Americans. Some of the victims had recently returned from tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. That they survived in a war zone simply to be gunned down back at home by one of their own is outrageous and heartbreaking. Others were preparing to deploy overseas, and were ready to face the dangers the war offered, not realizing that the real danger, for them at least, existed here at home.

I have seen some news outlets referring to this as mass homicide, with others calling it a terrorist act.

I feel it is both of those, though I will never truly grasp it as anything that can possibly have a rational explanation.

For me to attempt to understand this type of needless bloodletting is futile. That’s why I didn’t write about it to begin with. I realize Hasan was a Muslim, but were he a true Muslim, he would not have behaved in this fashion. I realize he was a psychiatrist, someone who was continuously subjected to the horror stories of his fellow soldiers. Perhaps the nightmares became too real. If, however, this is the case, he wasn’t any more a real soldier than he was a true follower of Islam.

Did he snap due to the harrassment he received as a result of his religion?

Did his impending deployment to go fight a war he did not believe in cause him to lose his mind?

Most likely, we will never know the answer to those questions, and many more like them.

Personally, I don’t care about the why.

There is no answer, no conclusion I can come to about this incident that will make me understand what has just occured in Texas, nor can any excuse for this man’s behavior justify his actions.

What is important are the lives lost at Fort Hood. The soldiers- the mothers, the fathers, the brothers, the sons, daughters, husbands and wives- who were brutality murdered by a man who was supposed to be one of them.

It is sad that many of us will forever remember the name Major Nidal Malik Hasan.

How many of us will remember the names of the victims?

I will.

I won’t forget Francheska Velez, Capt. John Gaffaney, Pfc. Aaron Thomas Nemelka, Pfc. Michael Pearson, Spc. Jason Dean Hunt, Michael Grant Cahill, Spc. Frederick Greene, Staff Sgt. Justin M. DeCrow, Sgt. Amy Krueger, Pfc. Kham Xiong, Juanita Warman, Major L. Eduardo Caraveo, and Russell Seager.

May they rest in peace, and God bless them all.


Tryin' to get the hang of this life thing... one step at a time!

41 thoughts on “Fort Hood- A Terrible Tragedy

  1. I couldn’t have said it better myself!

    This event is like a dark cloud on the nation. I’ve felt it just from knowing about it though I don’t live anywhere near texas. I’ve felt the grief and it has saddened me as if I knew the people personally.

    If anything I am disappointed in some Americans who are still retreating to their prejudiced camps and targeting their malice against other people who happen to share in the Muslim faith. This in spite of the fact that historically and currently everyday in America white Christians commit crimes and yet no matter how severe or terrible they are always savvy enough to separate the criminal act from the faith background.

    In addition to this tragedy, sadly still, some of the responses show we have not learned very much in how to respond.

  2. Hey BBG guy:
    get with it – shouting “Allah Akbuar” while executing helpless victims may be an indicator that he was acting out his fantasy.
    If you need more evidence of his motivation, check out the mountain of data pouring out about this guy. He constantly tried to covert his patients, led long briefings on how people need to convert, posted how much he loved Al Queda on his Facebook….need I go on.
    OH, ooops, he was killing soldiers, oh, that’s right, America Haters can unite then and defend this murderer as some sort of righteous do-gooder. I am sorry, I must have my real American and Freedom-loving thinking suddenly take over my Communist Thinking (meaning faux-reasoning) to have actually thought that this TRAITOR was motivated by Jihad. Why a good ‘thinker’such as you absolutely has to ignore the real facts since they don’t fit the narrative that the Jihadis hate America…

    1. Hi noneofyourbusiness-

      I won’t pretend to speak for BBGCmac, but I will say that I have not seen a single main stream news outlet portray this as anything other than a tragedy.

      Almost instantly, once the shooter was identified, his religion came under fire by just about everyone- and that includes (and most especially) your own beloved Fox (Faux) News.

      Since you didn’t bother to put the disclaimer in your own comment, I’ll say it for you. Islam in and of itself is not a hateful religion. Muslims in general are not bad people- no more so than the KKK members are good Christians.

      THIS guy- Hasan, the shooter- is a sick man. He represents no one other than himself. This is a tragedy.

      And for the love of God, PLEASE pick a new theme.

      The communism crap is old as hell. Ft. Hood doesn’t have anything whatsoever to do with communism, nor did BBGCmac’s comment.


      Talk about one-track minds!

  3. Sorry Chaze
    normally you seem pretty well informed, but this is not one of those times.
    I won’t be disrespectful here, so I will limit myself to mentioning that you may not know much of what is going on in Europe. To summarize: once the population reaches about 20% Muslim, all hell breaks loose. Witness the protests in England against so-called inflamatory cartoons poking fun at Muslim violence… those protests were nothing but violent. Ironic, is it not?
    Do you really want in-depth and clear evidence of Muslim Violence? (besides the mere 10 or so references in the Koran to ‘love’and ‘love thy neighbor’, there are several thousand references to violence and hate)
    I must decline joining any thought that indicates that islam is somehow a peaceful religion.

    Want evidence? go here and get away from being a dimmi to the sharia out there:

  4. Ref:
    The communism crap is old as hell. Ft. Hood doesn’t have anything whatsoever to do with communism, nor did BBGCmac’s comment.

    Hm… really…

    A short exerpt:
    Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

    OR THIS:
    November 09, 2009
    The Two Americas
    by Paul Jacob
    Could Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards actually be right about something? Not where to go to get a haircut, mind you, I mean about there being two Americas.
    There is the vibrant America . . . and the stagnant one.

    There is the America of ever-increasing wealth, innovation, creativity, new products and services. Choices galore.
    And there is the politician’s America: The regulated America, the subsidized America, the earmarked America. The failing America.
    In one America, it is what you produce that gets you ahead. In the other, it’s who you know.
    In one America, to earmark some money means setting aside funds (into savings) for a purchase — a car, house, college.
    In the other America, to earmark is to grab from taxpayers to give to cronies. It is the highest rite of career politicians: Buying their votes with other people’s money. Oh, there have been reforms, sure. But a recent bill in the House had 32,000 earmark requests.
    In one America, we decide what we pay for. We choose constantly about little things and big. We call the shots. Or we walk down the street and associate with someone else. So we have some faith in those we work with.
    In the other America, we vote. But we rarely get what we vote for.
    Maybe that’s why the new Democratic Congress just registered the lowest approval rating in poll history.
    It surely isn’t because folks love the Republicans.
    Paul Jacob’s “Common Sense” is published by the Citizens in Charge Foundation. Their website can be visited at

    The term Communism is not tired, it is morphing to hide:
    We were fools to think the fall of the Berlin Wall had killed off the far Left. They’re back – and attacking us from within
    Last updated at 3:56 PM on 09th November 2009
    • Comments (169)
    • Add to My Stories
    Twenty years ago today, supporters of freedom and human rights cheered and wept for joy as the Berlin Wall was torn down by jubilant young Germans.
    To so many, that heady day seemed to herald the emergence of a better world. The spectre of communism had finally been laid to rest. Liberty had triumphed over tyranny.
    The end of the Cold War even led some to proclaim that this was ‘the end of history’ – which was to say that liberal democracy was now the dominant and unchallengeable force in the world.

    The collapse of communism was actually a slow-burning process. Its moral and political bankruptcy became obvious decades before that glorious Berlin day in November 1989
    However, the 9/11 attacks on America tragically proved this to be absurdly over-optimistic. The eruption of radical Islamism revealed that, while the West may have been rid of one enemy in the Soviet Union, another deadly foe had risen to take its place. So much is, sadly, all too evident.

    • PETER HITCHENS: The hopes that flared like fireworks fell all too swiftly back to earth
    • Sarkozy posts Facebook image of him hacking away at Berlin Wall the night it came down
    • World leaders gather for £7m Berlin Wall 20th anniversary celebrations
    But what is perhaps less obvious is that communism did not just vanish in a puff of historical smoke. The Soviet Union was defeated and fell apart, for sure. But the communist ideology that fuelled it did not so much disintegrate as reconstitute itself into another, even more deadly form as the active enemy of western freedom.
    Soviet Communism was a belief system whose goal was to overturn the structures of society through the control of economic and political life. This mutated into a post-communist ideology of the Left, whose no-less ambitious aim was to overturn western society through a subversive transformation of its culture.
    To grasp the extent to which this has in fact taken place, we have to go back in time to well before the moment the Berlin Wall fell. The collapse of communism was actually a slow-burning process. Its moral and political bankruptcy became obvious decades before that glorious Berlin day in November 1989.
    For many communist fellow travellers, the scales fell from their eyes when the Hungarian uprising was crushed in 1956. Others, over the years, lost faith not just in communism but in its less radical sister, socialism, as their core tenet of ‘equality’ proved itself in a myriad different ways to be the enemy of freedom and justice, with market forces appearing to carry the torch of liberty instead.
    But as communism slowly crumbled, those on the far-Left who remained hostile towards western civilisation found another way to realise their goal of bringing it down.
    This was what might be called ‘cultural Marxism’. It was based on the understanding that what holds a society together are the pillars of its culture: the structures and institutions of education, family, law, media and religion. Transform the principles that these embody and you can thus destroy the society they have shaped.
    This key insight was developed in particular by an Italian Marxist philosopher called Antonio Gramsci. His thinking was taken up by Sixties radicals – who are, of course, the generation that holds power in the West today.
    Gramsci understood that the working class would never rise up to seize the levers of ‘production, distribution and exchange’ as communism had prophesied. Economics was not the path to revolution.
    He believed instead that society could be overthrown if the values underpinning it could be turned into their antithesis: if its core principles were replaced by those of groups who were considered to be outsiders or who actively transgressed the moral codes of that society.
    So he advocated a ‘long march through the institutions’ to capture the citadels of the culture and turn them into a collective fifth column, undermining from within and turning all the core values of society upside-down and inside-out.
    This strategy has been carried out to the letter.
    The nuclear family has been widely shattered. Illegitimacy was transformed from a stigma into a ‘right’. The tragic disadvantage of fatherlessness was redefined as a neutrally-viewed ‘lifestyle choice’.
    Education was wrecked, with its core tenet of transmitting a culture to successive generations replaced by the idea that what children already knew was of superior value to anything the adult world might foist upon them.
    The outcome of this ‘child-centred’ approach has been widespread illiteracy and ignorance and an eroded capacity for independent thought.
    Law and order were similarly undermined, with criminals deemed to be beyond punishment since they were ‘victims’ of society and with illegal drugtaking tacitly encouraged by a campaign to denigrate anti-drugs laws.
    The ‘rights’ agenda – commonly known as ‘political correctness’ – turned morality inside out by excusing any misdeeds by self-designated ‘victim’ groups on the grounds that such ‘victims’ could never be held responsible for what they did.
    Feminism, anti-racism and gay rights thus turned men, white people and Christians into the enemies of decency who were forced to jump through hoops to prove their virtue.
    This Through The Looking Glass mindset rests on the belief that the world is divided into the powerful (who are responsible for all bad things) and the oppressed (who are responsible for none of them).
    This is a Marxist doctrine. But the extent to which such Marxist thinking has been taken up unwittingly even by the Establishment was illustrated by the astounding observation made in 2005 by the then senior law lord, Lord Bingham, that human rights law was all about protecting ‘oppressed’ minorities from the majority.
    None of this is to say there has been a giant, organised conspiracy to undermine Britain in this way. Admittedly, some Left-wingers did so conspire, but many others bought into these ideas for different reasons.

    More from Melanie Phillips…
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: Fatuous, dangerous, utterly irresponsible – the Nutty professor who’s distorting the truth about drugs 01/11/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: The outrageous truth slips out: Labour cynically plotted to transform the entire make-up of Britain without telling us 26/10/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: Our leaders are queuing to prove their virtue by denouncing the vile BNP. 19/10/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: At long last, a class act who might just save our schools… if his party lets him 12/10/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: If Cameron doesn’t stop Blair being shoehorned as EU President, there’ll be no point in him becoming Britain’s Prime Minister 05/10/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: If the police won’t tackle young thugs any more, then what ARE they for? 27/09/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: A dopey judge, a lesbian teacher and an insidious bid to lower the age of consent 22/09/09
    • MELANIE PHILLIPS: If children are taught that patriotism is wrong, Britain’s very identity is at stake 13/09/09

    Of particular importance was the demoralisation of the British ruling class by the loss of Empire and the indebtedness of Britain to America at the end of World War II – a profound loss of cultural nerve that made the Establishment vulnerable to any ideas, however outlandish, that promised to bring about the New Jerusalem.
    These ideas gained general traction within the intelligentsia, the universities and the media – which is why the BBC is so institutionally skewed towards political correctness.
    However, the terrifying fact is that they form a totalitarian mindset that replicates the way communist societies clamped down on any other than permitted views. Thus the intolerance – or even arrest – of Christians opposed to gay adoption and civil union, or the vilification as ‘racists’ of those opposed to mass immigration.
    This mindset also led to the belief that a sense of nationhood was the cause of all the ills in the world, precisely because western nations embodied western values. So transnational institutions or doctrines such as the EU, UN, international law or human rights law came to trump national laws and values.
    But the truth is that to be hostile to the western nation is to be hostile to democracy. And indeed, with the development of the EU superstate we can see that the victory over one anti-democratic regime within Europe – the Soviet Union – has been followed by surrender to another.
    For the republic of Euroland puts loyalty to itself higher than that to individual nations and their values. It refused to commit itself in its constitution to uphold Christianity, the foundation of western morality.
    Instead, it is committed to moral and cultural relativism, which sets group against group and guarantees supreme and antidemocratic power to the bureaucrats setting the rules of ‘diversity’ and outlawing all dissent from permitted attitudes.
    When the Berlin Wall fell, we told ourselves that this was the end of ideology. We could not have been more wrong.
    The Iron Curtain came down only to be replaced by a rainbow-hued knuckle-duster, as our cultural commissars pulverise all forbidden attitudes in order to reshape western society into a post-democratic, post-Christian, post-moral universe. Lenin would have smiled.

  5. btw; I ACTUTALLY AND FULLY truly appreciate you allowing me to be candid here.
    It is so important to remain informed in this world.
    I visit many other blogs and see that many Americans are hoodwinked by their media…foxnetwork included…
    however, if I were to go with an American broadcasting company, I would go with Fox, where at least one sees dissenting views and an attempt at balance.
    I actually recommend the English version of Al Jazeera. It is very balanced, almost to a flaw.
    The Arabic version? Forget it, they openly advocate chopping off heads….oh, they also want outspoken and educated women (such as you seem to be) also killed as counter to Islam….

  6. @bbg… and C Haze.

    OF COURSE, this was an islamic terror act! This terrorist did what he did, because Allah told him so to do by the Quran.

    You know, that for a Muslim the Quran stands above everything else – even the constitution and our laws and because of this fact alone, the question is: WHY DO WE HAVE MUSLIMS IN THE ARMED FORCES????

    Everybody knows, that the Muslims don’t accept our faith, our society, our rules, our laws, the human rights. How can a Muslim fight on our side to defend our freedom, our constitution, our rights? A Muslim will NEVER fight FOR us against another Muslim (they kill other Muslims in their own countries, but against the “infidels” they are united).

    The conclusion is: a Muslim should NOT be in a security-relevant position. They fight against us from within!

    If Islam would be a religion like christianity, judaism, buddhism, etc. it would not be a problem, but Islam is NOT a religion, ISLAM is a ideology, a fascistic polit-ideology and as long as the Muslims stick to this ideology and live in accordance to the Quran, which is contrary to the human rights, our constitution, our values, etc., they are a threat from within.

    Sorry for the moderate Muslims, who really might be willing to find a way to integrate and assimilate and to separate the religuous part of the islam from the rest of this ideology, but as we are not able to determine who is moderate and who not, we cannot take a risk.

    1. Oh please.

      Unfortunately, (legal) resident alien, you seem to be using the unspeakable acts of a few to justify your own hatred of many.

      If Islam was such a violent horrific religion, why are there not millions upon millions of Muslisms committing terrorists acts just like this one every single day in every single country on the planet? Islam is the largest religion in the world- and it is the largest by far. The fact that we hear about a single tragedy at Fort Hood or a suicide bomber in the Middle East and not thousands or thens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of these acts constantly debunks your own argument.

      When you say “everybody knows, that Muslims don’t accept our faith, our society…” I throw up a little in my mouth.

      What, exactly, is OUR faith?

      I can assure you, the two of us, even as we may both consider ourselves Christians, do not share the same faith. Nor do we follow the same rules.

      One of MY fundamental rules is to be tolerant of all persons, regardless of their religion. There are jackasses everywhere of every faith and ethnicity. There are also wonderful people that fit the same bill.

      If you are, in fact, a resident alien, legal or not, you should be doubly ashamed of yourself. You (or your family, at least) relied on the open mindedness and kindness of people like me- Americans who did not expect you to throw away your identity in order to count yourself among us.

      For your sake, if you or your family are not natural born Americans, I hope your experiences in this country have been more closely in line with MY ideology and not your own.

      Ignorant bigots disgust me.

      1. Muslims commit thousands not millions of acts of violence every day , that is what we know about. So..according to you, the sanctioned rape of a wife or a child is not a violent act?
        Or how about honor killing…even in America – though by far more common in the middle east…

        Who is advocating hate? Muslims or others? I wonder…

  7. To noneofyourbusiness and (legal) resident alien,

    I have to wonder how much the bigoted doctrine of people like the two of YOU contributed to this twisted man’s psychotic break.

    If you’re peddling hate, that’s exactly what you’ll get in return.

    We reap what we sow.

    Of course neither of you want to hear any of that.

    That’d be too much like right.

  8. I’m here in this great country because I’m an American in my heart and I support our constitution and the traditional American values, the values, this great country is build on. I’m integrated, better: assimilated, and accepted by my community because I showed, that I stand for this country!

    If there are people with a totally different ideology, against freedom, against human rights, people who are following a totalitarian rule-book (Quran), they want to destroy this great country.

    And that’s what I’m fighting against – together with Millions of other real Americans, independent from their political party (ok, liberals don’t fight with us, because they don’t accept the constitution and American values either).

    Back to Fort Hood: this was not a “single tragedy”. Something like this happens every day all over the world. Maybe not such a massacre (although there are a lot of them) but violence of Muslims against “infidels”, even in our cities. Have you seen the reactions of other Muslims in blogs, videos, etc.? This terrorist is their hero.

    Muslims don’t accept ANY other faith. It’s written in the Quran (again: every Muslim who sticks to this hate-book and lives in accordance to the Quran is a threat for all Non-Muslims – everywhere). Check out the situation of Christians, Jews, etc. in Islamic Countries.

    Maybe you should speak with some Ex-Muslims – this might open your eyes! But do this as long as they are alive, because you know: if you convert to from Islam to another faith you can (or better should) be killed – according to the Quran.

    I would say, you are very naive and should really take the time to get more information and learn more about the Islam. Read the Quran, speak with Ex-Muslims, analyse the violence (and the motives behind the violence) of Muslims, open your eyes. That’s my wish for you.

    I wish you all the best and hopefully you get your eyes opened some time – before it’s too late…

  9. I have to stand with Chaze on this. A lot of the rhetoric from ‘alien’ is full of hyperbole. And again it never addresses my original premise that Christians (who differ on theology and have done horrible acts from Columbus to McVey and even preachers who pray for the death of the president as one did recently) are always separated from the religion when they do such acts. I wish someone would address this before we go any further. If we are going to associate terrible acts as what happened at Fort Hood and define them as terrorist which I can agree with in terms of my own definition – then we have be willing to say the same about Christians who do the same. If we can’t agree on that then anything else said is starting from a double standard that compromises the rest of your takes.

    There are Muslims who believe they are doing a service to god by doing terrible things – and there are Muslims who believe doing great things in helping people is a service to god. Muslims are no more monolithic than Christians – hell you can’t get Christians to agree on a whole lot anyway as illustrated by the amount of denominations we have. Some believe in women preachers, others don’t. Some emphasise focusing on the poor helping the least of them- others disdain the poor and focus on the very rich and financially prosperous. Some are community focused, others want to be on TV worldwide. This is just the beginning of differences.

    The issue is not being angry at what happened at Fort Hood specifically. The issue is how we handle it and what we teach our kids about it. How do we handle the situation. Do we make something redeeming out of it or do we feed the fire of hatred and division. As Chaze said – Islam is the fastest growing religion AND already the biggest. You don’t have to like it – but you also need not discriminate or buy into stereotypes that you yourself don’t want to be associated with.

    Don’t think for a minute that there aren’t Muslims who have silver stars and purple hearts in the military. I’ve seen them on TV and in print myself.

    It seems to me that in everything in life we have progressed – technoligically we are growing by leaps and bounds and always have been., When it comes to our religious beliefts and prejudices – unfortunately we are still in the stone ages and happy to be there. Surely the god we believe in is not some old fashion stone aged bearded blow hard. It is us who are still trying to catch up to the great love and advancement of our creator. We should open our minds and hearts to expand ourselves to what we have yet to learn about ourselves and our brothers and sisters who are different than us – question our theology being willing to change IF necessary.

    Somebody at some point has to fight these fights the right way. We have to learn to fight against ALL forms of evil, injustice, racism, prejudice, classism, sexism, hatred, against all people. We should all be able to stand on that premise or else its just smoke and mirrors and false piety as far as I’m concerned.

  10. @bb….

    ***And again it never addresses my original premise that Christians (who differ on theology and have done horrible acts from Columbus to McVey and even preachers who pray for the death of the president as one did recently) are always separated from the religion when they do such acts.***

    Maybe it’s different, because it’s not written in the Bible to act so and all the other Christians (or Jews or whatever) dissociate themself from this people. Think about this. I remember very well the reaction of the Muslims after 9/11, I see the reactions of Muslims after this terror-attack.

    ***Muslims are no more monolithic than Christians – hell you can’t get Christians to agree on a whole lot anyway as illustrated by the amount of denominations we have. Some believe in women preachers, others don’t. Some emphasise focusing on the poor helping the least of them- others disdain the poor and focus on the very rich and financially prosperous. Some are community focused, others want to be on TV worldwide. This is just the beginning of differences.***

    you are comparing apples and oranges. if women preachers or not, if helping poor or focussing on the rich (whatever rich might be), etc. – it’s the same “basic idea”.

    ***We have to learn to fight against ALL forms of evil, injustice, racism, prejudice, classism, sexism, hatred, against all people***

    I agree – so we are on the same boat, but you still need to learn where to find injustice, racism, prejudice, sexism, hatred – if you open your eyes and mind, you’ll find it … YES … in ISLAM.

    Would you also defend Hitler and the Nazis? Do you know, that the Muslims love Hitler? Do you know, that Hitler’s book “Mein Kampf” is bestseller in Islamic Countries? Do you know, that Hitler was very close connected to the Mullahs? Do you know, that Hitler had special Muslim combat teams?

    You do-gooders should leave your fantasy-world and come to the real world.

    My recommendation for you (like for C Haze) is: read the Quran, speak with Ex-Muslims, open your eyes and stop being naive…

  11. We are not spouting hate, only facts and thus very serious, deep concerns, stemming from things like this:
    November 12, 2009
    American Muslim: “Yes, Hasan Was Motivated by His Religion”

    NPR’s Morning Edition was in full defensive mode this morning with at least three separate segments devoted to the Fort Hood massacre. One segment, though, was surprising. An interview with an American Muslim who says that, yes, religion was a motivating factor for Nidal Hasan:

    “To say it has nothing to do with the faith of that individual would be dishonest,” [Irfan] Nourredine said. “It may not represent the faith of Muslims around the world or American Muslims, but it does represent his faith and probably people of like mind — the fringe of the community, people who are on the outskirts, who we may not pay as much attention as we need to.”

    There are extremist Islamist elements in America, he says. And he wishes Muslims would accept that and begin dealing with it. For too long, some Muslims have stayed silent about radical beliefs they may not endorse because they don’t want to appear un-Islamic, he says. For some Muslims in the government or in the military, that’s a battle that can’t be won.

    “You’re looked at as a suspect in your own society,” he said. “Then you’re looked at as a hypocrite in your community.”

    Now, why do I expect that the person conducting the interview was shocked at the honesty?
    By Rusty at November 12, 2009 09:40 AM | Comments (3) | Trackback l digg this

  12. HEY LEGAL:
    you seem to point out that the Koran is their guide, commanding them to do terrible things. What about slavery? This one guy in Canada sold his own daughter to some Syrian, but she refused to go there, so the Police had to put her and the rest of family into protective custody to keep the father from killing them.

    I wonder if this sounds like some sort of peaceful religion….

    But None Dare Speak Its Name…
    Posted by: Emperor Misha I
    6:22 pm

    (Via the Jawas).

    A thing named Yusef Salam Al Mezel from Canada decided it didn’t approve of its daughter’s choice not to marry another thing from Syria that it had sold her to for the princely sum of $9,000.

    He sent her e-mails threatening her uncles and cousins would go “crazy” over the family’s honour and to come home before someone got hurt.

    Police spirited the young woman — and the family sheltering her — out of Ottawa.

    There’s no evidence Al Mezel would have killed her but his threats “invoke a seriously dangerous belief system that can and has led to violence against women,” Ratushny wrote.

    And what would the name of that seriously dangerous belief system be?

    Sorry, we can’t say. That would be RAAAAACIST!

    Well, maybe they can’t say, but His Imperial Majesty sure as Hell can:

    It’s that “religion of peace”, pisslam, again, spreading its message of “love” and “tolerance” by threatening to maim, mutilate and murder anybody who doesn’t agree with it and follow its every word. A savage, barbarian death cult that is a throwback to the very darkest, most brutal ages of mankind. A cult founded by a pedophile thief, rapist and mass murderer serving Shaitan himself.

    A blight upon humanity that must be erased if we are ever to know true peace again.

  13. here is some more religion of peace showing its peaceful ways:

    (yes it is a beheading video that youtube does not even take down…)

    OH, is it not odd that there is no Christian beheading videos?

  14. Oh and here is what the media and military are saying:
    So here is a scenario for you: Hasan is a marginal charicter who has had
    > success above his ability because he was able to keep from being
    > deployed and to “Homestead” at Bethesda. Then he gets transfered to
    > Ft. Hood and put in line to deploy. He has lost his position, he sees
    > that he can not get back to the position he held at the “palace.”
    > While he was at Bethesda he engaged in some behaviour that at the time
    > were deliberate efforts to make him untouchable at Bethesda, his
    > poison pill defense against being moved. He was moved and so he acted
    > out the threat he had made since he had built in his mind a quid pro
    > quo: “leave Hasan in Bethesda or Hasan goes on a Jihadi rampage.” If that is true he would have said so overtly.
    > If true quod erat demonstrandum, premeditation and maximum sentencing.

    As predicted there may have been quid pro quo statements that should have been read as if you send Hasan to war, Hasan will go on a Jihadi rampage:

    Fort Hood suspect warned of threats within the ranks Cited stress facing Muslims Hasan spoke at Walter Reed in 2007

    By Dana Priest
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Tuesday, November 10, 2009

    The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid “adverse events,” the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims.

    As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the residency program.

    Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting in the Muslim countries of Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The Washington Post.

    “It’s getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims,” he said in the presentation.

    “It was really strange,” said one staff member who attended the presentation and spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the investigation of Hasan. “The senior doctors looked really upset” at the end. These medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific mental illnesses.

    An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined to comment. It is unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to identify threats from within the military ranks.

    Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow beginning in 2003. He was transferred to Fort Hood as a practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status.

    Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army’s personnel chief, said in an interview Monday that because of the investigation, she and other Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to quit the service or not to be deployed. However, she and another Army official said it would be highly unusual for officers with Hasan’s rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their service obligation.

  15. Legal
    hey is why we can’t trust a Muslim who follows the Koran religiously;
    New jihad code threatens al Qaeda

    The problem with contracts with Islamist is that there are a back door provisions in the Qur’an such as are found in Surah 9: AL-TAWBA whereby Muslims can disavow and renounce any treaty of oath with non-Muslims.
    Surah 9 can be easily interpreted as: Muslims should keep their word with non-Muslims where it is to their advantage. If the Muslim feels that it is not to their advantage then they can break the deal or oath. The translations of the surah tend to indicate that that it is the Muslims choice, to choose if they should honor the treaty/oath or not.

    At least from the translations, the Qur’an appears to be saying to keep treaties and oaths only when it is to a Muslims advantage

    Hence someone can say that as a Muslim his religion allows him to break his oath if he believes that he has been wronged, disrespected or disadvantaged.

    Examples from Qur’an Surah 9: AL-TAWBA:

    YUSUFALI: (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.
    PICKTHAL: Excepting those of the idolaters with whom ye (Muslims) have a treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfilfulfill treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him).
    SHAKIR: Except those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up any one against you, so fulfill their agreement fulfill end of their term; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty).

    YUSUFALI: How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked.
    PICKTHAL: How (can there be any treaty for the others) when, if they have the upper hand of you, they regard not pact nor honour in respect of you?
    They satisfy you with their mouths the while their hearts refuse. And most of them are wrongdoers.
    SHAKIR: How (can it be)! while if they prevail against you, they would not pay regard in your case to ties of relationship, nor those of covenant; they please you with their mouths while their hearts do not consent; and most of them are transgressors.

  16. AND
    Since France is now hopelessly lost to the creeping Communist take over America is in their sites. Don’t believe me?
    try this:
    Pelosi: It’s Very Fair That We Jail You If You Don’t Buy Health Insurance

    Seen on Hot Air, Infidels are Cool has this exchange:

    Stone: Do you think it’s fair to send people to jail who don’t buy health insurance?

    Pelosi: … The legislation is very fair in this respect.

    The left continues pounding the table, insisting that right-wingers are “paranoid” and “extremist” to call Obama a socialist, or to use totalitarian imagery in posters to protest his agenda. Why, it’s just so not true! they bleat. You’d have to be a maniac like Sarah Palin to make these delusional claims! Why, it’s like bad science-fiction!


    Socialism never attends a party without an escort of coercive state behavior. It is a historic fact — indeed, an economic fact — that as the state seeks to regulate and control more and more economic activity, they must, of course, control more and more human activity.

    Economic activity is human activity, after all. Economics is not somehow divorced from humanity. Economic choices are not made of their own volition, passive-voice, without an actor. People make economic choices — and socialism demands an ever-increasing control over those choices, and therefore the people who make those choices. (Or, more accurately: formerly made those choices.)

    Furthermore, apart from the basic definitional aspect of socialism that requires a loss of freedom in exchange, supposedly, for economic security: Socialism has almost never worked as intended, but rather creates new problems and new poverties and new ways to exploit the system (black markets, for one); socialism therefore always requires even additional laws against once-unobjectionable and perfectly-legal behavior. In other words, not only does socialism require a small buy-in, in the form of loss of freedom, but it is always accompanied by unplanned-for (?) additional losses of freedom to “correct” for all the systematic irrationalities and distortions it creates.

    And then it gets even worse after that, because it always fails, whenever it’s been attempted, and the newly-empowered state will fight to survive, as any organism does, and any organism is willing to do an awful lot of violence when its very existence is threatened.

    Note that the third part of that is the scariest step in the socialist takeover of the human condition, but even if that is avoided, the first and second stages are plenty objectionable in their own right. Although socialism has had a pronounced tendency to lead to full fascism and totalitarian control over the increasingly miserable citizenry it supposedly “serves,” and that is the point of all those Nazi posters, it cannot be emphasized firmly enough that even if Stage Three of socialism is avoided, Stages One and Two are anti-freedom and frankly anti-human as well.

    Just less so.

    On a personal level, I go ’round and ’round with myself as to whether Nazi imagery is “civil” or helpful, politically: On one side I know for a fact that socialism tends in this direction. Every. Single. Time. Even in socialist states where fascism is avoided — Britain, say — it is nevertheless the case that the citizenry there exists under a much-diminished concept of “freedom” than your average American would find tolerable, or even imaginable.

    On the other hand, I doubt the effectiveness of such imagery, for the simple fact that few can imagine such things, they seem too speculative and too impossible to contemplate, and so I usually make the case that rather than talk up the farther-off (yet still quite possible, and not quite so far off as some would like to imagine) possibility of Stage Three socialism, we should talk up instead the quite-objectionable-enough and much more immediate and imaginable defects of Stages One and Two.

    Back to this leftist insistence that we’re all paranoid to even think this way, to even define “freedom” in an antique, right-wing fashion, meaning “stuff you are permitted to do or not do without penalty and coercion from the state:” It is especially risible to me, in gallows-humor way, that the left continues to call us lunatics for fretting about increasing state control and increasing state coercion and increasing state outlawing of previously-legal behavior and freedoms even as, in their very first bill out of the socialist box, they propose jailing Americans for engaging in unobjectionable behavior which no one ever before dreamt of being a crime.

    Think about this.

    The left says: You are crazy to claim your so-called freedoms are being taken away, and you are a lunatic to scream about an overly powerful state which will use violent coercion (no one goes to jail without the threat of violence if he doesn’t, after all) to enforce its notions of the “economic good.”

    And with the next breath the left says: By the way, you shall either buy health care insurance or we will throw you in prison for two or three years.

    I’m paranoid? Really? I am not fretting here about some remote and unlikely possibility. We are not speaking here of “slippery slopes” or in terms of “what comes next?”

    We are instead objecting to a black-letter law spelled out for all to see in the very first piece of legislation you’re proposing.

    Right out of the box. The state here — Pelosi, Reid, Obama — are claiming that they can imprison people for behavior that has never before even been hinted as being a crime, on the theory that such behavior constitutes unpatriotic economic behavior which is detrimental to the state’s balance sheets.

    Think about what a broad, all-encompassing term “economics” is. 80% of our waking hours are spent in economic activity of one sort or another. The state here is asserting the right to imprison people for behavior they consider not actually morally reprehensible or harmful as other crimes are, but instead merely detrimental to the Great Push Forward, the state’s master plan of economic health and well-being.

    Right out of the box they propose sending people to jail for acting as economic subversives and economic traitors and yet I am, somehow, paranoid if I point out that the first step here is to reduce human freedom and increase state power.

    And this is just a down-payment, remember. This is merely the first of many freedoms you previously believed sacrosanct to be lost. This is merely the first freedom they’ve realized, in advance, will have to be taken away. When their Rube Goldberg system of cross-subsidizations and stealth-rationing produces a slew of irrationalities and evasions they did not anticipate, we will have a welter of new crimes to correct all that human behavior they now find constitutes bad economic hygiene and must be outlawed.

    But we’re paranoid. We’re lunatics. We’re “extreme.”

    Used to be in this county when we proposed making an entire category of human behavior a crime, that was cause for debate. Civil libertarians on the left would join those on the right in wondering what has so changed in the past several years to require an entire new category of criminality, an entire sphere of human activity now removed from the column of “freedom” and moved to the column of “forbiddance.”

    But not this time. Fascism, as they say, tends to come with a smiling face, and there’s hardly a face more surgically stretched into smiles than Nancy Pelosi’s, quite chipper and blithe as she proposes that she will begin filling America’s prisons with a whole new category of criminal, the economic saboteur.

    And there is no argument about it, and no debate. We are creating an entirely new type of “crime” that could end up imprisoning millions (or — very nearly as bad — compelling behavior and restricting freedom due to threat of incarceration) and the entire left and the entire media (but I repeat myself) blows it off as no big deal.

    It’s just What Must Be Done. Omlette, eggs, some breaking required.

    But I’m a paranoid and extremist to take notice of the fact that what was once my freedom in 2009 shall become a cause for imprisonment in 2010.

  17. Definitions of jihad on the Web:

    * a holy war waged by Muslims against infidels
    * a holy struggle or striving by a Muslim for a moral or spiritual or political goal

    jihad definition

    ji·had (jē häd′)


    1. a war by Muslims against unbelievers or enemies of Islam, carried out as a religious duty
    2. a fanatic campaign for or against an idea, etc.; crusade


    “We love death more then you love life!” – Major Nidal Malik Hasan (Fort Hood jihadist

  18. Top Republican says White House hiding info on Fort Hood
    By Eric Zimmermann – 11/11/09 10:13 AM ET
    The ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee on Tuesday night accused the White House of withholding information on the Fort Hood attack.
    Rep. Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) said administration officials delayed briefing members of Congress about the alleged gunman, raising “red flags” about what the White House was hiding.
    “When they withhold information, you always start asking questions,” Hoekstra told Fox News. “That’s what raises red flags. What do they know that they don’t want us to know?”

    Hoekstra linked President Barack Obama’s handling of Fort Hood to a chain of other GOP criticisms of the president, including the administration’s treatment of detainees and an investigation into possible CIA abuse.

    “It is a political correctness that is making it unable for us to identify the real threat of homegrown terrorism,” he alleged.

    Hoekstra warned that “we have similar Hasans” in the country. The Michigan Republican has called for his committee to investigate the incident. Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) has so far declined, preferring to wait for the conclusion of the joint FBI-Army investigation.
    The contents of this site are © 2009 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsisiary of News Communications, Inc.

    Comments (50)

    PAGE |1|2|3|>
    any surprise? This is a terrorist, radical muslim loving administration. Call them on the carpet for this and impeach their hides… Take note America: 7 years of domestic peace under Bush not even 1 with obama the clown…BY paul on 11/11/2009 at 11:07

    Janet Napoletano published a Homeland Security report warning of a potential increase in domestic terrorism. The Republicans united in a partisan effort to debunk and dismiss Ms. Napoletano’s report. The arm chair quaterbacking now begins.BY Lynne on 11/11/2009 at 11:17

    7 years of domestic peace? Wasn’t there an anthrax problem?BY kim on 11/11/2009 at 11:25
    “Janet Napoletano published a Homeland Security report warning of a potential increase in domestic terrorism. The Republicans united in a partisan effort to debunk and dismiss Ms. Napoletano’s report. The arm chair quaterbacking now begins.”What a load of crap. She claimed RON PAUL and pro-Constitution activitists—like the Tea Party bunch—were dangerous. Meanwhile, the first words out of her mouth when an Islamist killer actually does rear his head was how important it was for the DHS to protect Islam. WTF?!?! Ron Paul or the Tea Partiers, let the cops go after them, beat them, whatever, but allah forbid we don’t protect TROP!BY RR Kesselring on 11/11/2009 at 11:37

    first off, he was not the ALLEDGED gunman, he WAS the gunman, the whitehouse is hiding facts because he was a friend of obama when he was a senator, some in obamas circle are muslim radicals. a couple of friends who went to ft.hood yesterday(famil y in military) said that when obama go on stage, some cheered for him and when he left the stage, the same ones cheered for him but then left after that and did not even stay to hear the names of the ones killed, more obama plants, just like some of the dr.s at his speech and the plants in the townhalls( littlegirl, woman w/cancer who was outed as never having cancer, little boy asking why people dont like him when god loves everyone). obama is a muslim and dont want anyone he is or has been associated with to tell anyone, plain and simple, he proves his religion everyday, no one has yet to be able to show that he is still not a muslim, yet they defend him, does anyone have any proof he is not still a muslim? until you do, he is still a muslim, dont fool yourself, if you say he is not a muslim, then please provide proof to me or do not comment about it.BY cargo65 on 11/11/2009 at 12:02

    Are we close to treason yet?BY jm on 11/11/2009 at 12:12

    Take a look at the chat over the internet and this admin. won’t acknowledge the Islam is the cancer we are fighting. See below.Words chosen carefully Nov. 11 2009 – 10:46 am Fort Hood, massacre Following the massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, some Muslim forums have been advising commenters to show restraint BY larry on 11/11/2009 at 12:14

    7 years of domestic peace?9/11 was among the most horrific blunders of all time. The Clinton administration warned Bush—members of the intelligence community warned Bush yet again. But he dismissed them, saying “ok you’ve covered your @$$” and not pursuing it. Yet when it comes to Iraq we launched a massive war with intel that proved to be “window dressing” by his own administrations admission.BY HST on 11/11/2009 at 12:29

    When was Pres Obama EVER a muslim? YOU need to provide proof that he was a muslin. As far as hearing the names of the fallen soldiers at the Ft Hood service, Pres Obama talked about all of them in his speech. Each deceased person and some others that tried to help the dead and wounded, were in his speech at the service. He mentioned personal facts about each of the soldiers. He and Mrs Obama met with the families of the deceased, met with the wounded and also visited those still in the hospital. They spent a considerable amount of time at Ft Hood.BY SistaNlocs on 11/11/2009 at 12:34

    LYNNE, you are not serious with that statement of yours are you? Janet Napoletano documented a warning of right wing extremest being a danger and violent. As for right wing extremest go, how many Tea Party people have been arrested to date? Most right wing, pro constitution activist are not violent. This person was a Muslim extremest.BY Mark X on 11/11/2009 at 13:09

  19. noneofyourbusiness,

    You can’t possibly expect people to read all this.

    It seems to me that you’re just trying to clog up my site so that people who may actually have something to say that doesn’t gel with your ideology have no opportunity to do so.

    In skimming through the stuff you’ve posted, I have to say I am absolutely horrified, though not for the reasons you’re hoping- rather, that there are people out there that subscribe to this hatred and vitriol.

    You may be willing to look down on others simply because they are different than you… and you may be willing to use the acts of a few to justify your bigotry against the many, but I will not.

  20. bbgcmac
    you are right, and I totally agree, we need to reproach Christians for acts they commit that are violent. The key difference is that Christians don’t advocate this and have dogma to foster/ferment violence. That sort of thinking died in the Church years ago.
    Unfortunately, it remains for Islam to still do this.

    I am no bigot by no stretch. Too bad you can’t read all that i posted here in defense of my positions. You should come to France and see for yourself the the closed MUSLIM communities. The French opened their arms to aplogize for their transgressions in Algeria and now look how the immigrants have treated France! We see stabbing of teachers on a regular basis by the real bigotted Muslims.
    I am not advocating hate, and it saddens me that you think that. I am trying to make a point:
    Islam teaches and promotes the hate. You should be alarmed and disgusted. This Fort Hood event is not an isolated event, it was a premeditated act of terrorism committed in the name of Allah, all according to Muslim doctrine.
    Sorry if I clogged your site, it was not my intent to derail things, just defend my position.

    Here is some information from the other side of aile in America, from the so-called Progressives, the ones who always tell the world that THEY are so tolerant and peaceful. I will then let you make up your own mind who is the bigot…

    go there and see what the Left in America really says and say I am the bigot…
    I again apologize for clogging your site, but you have to understand that your position is not realistic, and if you don’t want to see otherwise, so be it.

    1. noneof yourbusiness-

      The problem with my reading everything you posted is that you simply posted too much. Rather than make your points concisely, you are dumping what amounts to many days’ worth of reading on us, claiming that if we just read all these mountains worth of stuff, we’ll see things your way.

      I’ve skimmed the info, and it simply says the same thing over and over again- and still doesn’t convince me that Muslims are evil people.

      I don’t have the time to do more than skim over the stuff and set the rest aside for a rainy day. I work full-time, I am a single mother with two daughters. I can’t sit and do nothing but read this stuff all day, and I’d venture to say people like BBGCmac are in the same boat as me (minus the single mother part- I’m pretty sure he’s a man).

      The Nation of Islam does NOT condone violence. Yes, there are bastardized sects that feel differently, but they are no more true Muslims than the KKK here in the states are Christian. The KKK will try and convince you that they believe in God and Jesus is their lord and savior as they’re dragging a black man behind a truck or lynching him… even on their way to rape his wife and kids.

      Even the stuff you’ve posted supports the point I’m trying to make. The NPR piece you posted, where they are interviewing an American Muslim says the exact same thing I’ve been saying.

      The acts of these terrorists do NOT represent Islam in any way. There are people in the fringe that are making a mockery and a mess of what actually amounts to a very peaceful religion.

      Islam does not teach and promote hate. SOME Muslims teach and promote hate.

      If anything, I would say shame on the real Muslims out there who are not willing to speak louder against these radical fringe groups. Every once in a while we get a snippet of a real Muslim on NPR or some other news source, but it isn’t happening often enough.

      As for what’s going on in France, you know as well as I do that this bigotry is a two way street. The French government has a heinous history as it relates to Muslims, and simply issuing an “Ooh… I’m sorry about that” from a political platform is not going to undo that damage.

      There are Muslims in France that should not be there, as they obviously do not love that country. There are French people in France who should be ashamed of themselves for the way they treat fellow human beings living in their country.

      Neither party is solely to blame- not the Muslims and not the French. Both have blood on their hands. Again, we reap what we sow… and that goes both ways.

      Perpetuating hate, and justifying bigotry is not the way to solve the problem.

  21. I can’t see how a person is a bigot when he demonstrates just what the Muslim world is saying.
    Don’t you see? They say one thing in the West to appease people, to put them to sleep, all the while working to destroy.
    I am certain that they will go after intelligent women like us. Witness what is going on in France! they are falling upon women and beating them if they do not wear a viel. Is this the acts of a few? Hardly.

    1. noneofyourbusiness-

      So you’re saying this is a conspiracy of sorts? That Muslims in the west (i.e. America) act like they’re moderate just to get people like me to think they’re harmless so that they can attack France?

      Far fetched.

  22. i say France because I am here.
    I am sending a warning to many people about what is going to happen to America.

  23. for instance;
    Islamist Perfidy and Western Naivety
    Which Is More Lethal?

    by Raymond Ibrahim
    Pajamas Media
    November 9, 2009
    Print Send RSS Share: Digg Facebook

    In a blog entry for Islamist Watch, David J. Rusin shows how the word “jihad” continues to be euphemized in the West. Despite Islamic law’s unequivocal portrayal of it as a military endeavor to empower Islam, jihad is still being peddled as “nothing more than a student laboring to pass algebra, a mom driving her kids to soccer practice, or, in the words of the Cambridge study, a civic-minded person engaged in ‘lobbying, activism, and writing’ — a community organizer of sorts.” Rusin concludes by observing: “Why Islamists peddle such specious definitions should be clear. More baffling and disturbing is why they gain traction among so many Westerners.”

    Indeed, therein lies the irony: Islamist perfidy is only to be expected; Western naivety, on the other hand, which, if anything, should have begun to dissipate in our post-9/11 world, has burgeoned to the point of nearly making the former unnecessary. For while there is no doubt that Islamists (and their misguided Western cronies) distort the meaning of jihad, increasingly, even when the true meaning is in plain sight, America’s leaders and media still fail to discern it. In other words, apathy — or willful blindness — regarding jihad has become so deep-seated in the West that Islamists need no longer actively dissemble.

    Consider: When President Barack Hussein Obama addressed the Islamic world from Cairo on June 4, 2009, he said: “As the Holy Koran tells us, ‘Be conscious of God and speak always the truth’ [Sura 9:119]. That is what I will try to do — to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us.” Let us for the moment put aside the fact that Sura 9, from whence Obama quotes, contains the most violent and intolerant exhortations in all the Koran (which is saying something). The problem here is that the original Arabic text of Sura 9:119 says absolutely nothing about “speaking the truth.” The word “speaking” is nowhere in the text, and “truth,” as an abstract, is a wrong translation for sadiqin, which refers to people. The verse most literally translates as “fear Allah and be with the truthful.” In other words, Muslims should stand firm with fellow Muslims (“truthful” serving as a Koranic epithet for “Muslims” the same way “believers” often does). It is, as ever, a call for divisiveness — of Muslims (the “truthful”) versus infidels (the “false”).

    Had Obama or his Mideast advisors and speechwriters simply bothered to read this verse in context — verse 9:111, a jihadi all-time favorite, looms just above, promising believers paradise in exchange for their killing and being killed — or if they had bothered consulting mainstream Muslim exegeses, they might have known that this verse is part of a Koranic segment that deals exclusively with fighting infidels: Muhammad and several Muslims were preparing to invade Byzantine territory; some Muslims wanted to stay behind. It was then that Allah/Muhammad threatened them with this verse to “fear Allah and be with the truthful” (i.e., join ranks with your fellow Muslims on the warpath). Sentences later, this exhortation culminates in one of the most famous calls to violence in all the Koran, regularly evoked by modern-day jihadis: “O you who believe, fight those infidels who dwell around you, and let them find harshness in you!” [9:123].

    Incidentally, the infidels mentioned here are the Christians of Byzantium (or in Arabic, al-Rum, “the Romans”). That modern-day jihadis, such as Osama bin Laden, often liken the United States to Byzantium, which for long thwarted the caliphate’s expansionist designs into Christendom, makes Obama’s choice of verse — “be[ing] with the truthful” — further ironic.

    Speaking of infidels and irony, here is a more recent, a more comical, anecdote: On September 11, 2009, NPR ran a story called “For NYC Muslims, a New Kind of Police Attention,” which tells of how “the NYPD hosts an annual Ramadan program, during which the police get to know members of the Muslim community and Muslims are free to speak their minds.” Lest the theme of this story eludes you, words such as “outreach,” “diversity,” and “building bridges” predominate.

    Here’s the problem (first brought to my attention by the Washington Times’ Diana West): In the audio version of this report (around 0:25-0:50), the NPR narrator says that “there was not an empty seat to be had at the NYPD’s auditorium at One Police Plaza. NYPD brass, Muslim clerics, and community members all stood and listened to the cadences of the call to prayer from the NYPD’s imam,” Khalid Latif. While this is being said, you can hear part of the imam’s Arabic recitation from the Koran in the background.

    The narrator’s enthusiastic talk of NYPD brass standing in awe of the “cadences of the call” makes it difficult to discern exactly which verse is being recited. Only the last few words — qawm al-kaffirin, “nation of infidels” — are crystal clear, raising red flags. Thanks to my trusty Arabic-Koranic concordance, I have placed this phrase as part of Koran 2:286, which supplicates Allah “to make us [Muslims] victorious over the nation of infidels.” Bear in mind that, from an Islamist point of view, the United States is the “nation of infidels” par excellence.

    And there it is: From an American president who publicly defines his mission by quoting a jihadi-related verse, to American-Muslim leaders who publicly pray for the subjugation of non-Muslims (in the middle of an NYPD auditorium, no less), it is clear that the ultimate threat comes more from Western carelessness and indifference — in a word, naivety — than it does from active Islamist machinations. In short, Islamists peddling misleading interpretations for the word “jihad” is but the very tip of the iceberg.

    Raymond Ibrahim is the associate director of the Middle East Forum and the author of The Al Qaeda Reader, translations of religious texts and propaganda.

  24. bbgcmac,

    I’m not going to go into all the other stuff on here right now. I noticed that you wanted someone to address the association of Islam and violence and how that association isn’t as prevalent when a Christian commits a crime.

    I will try as best as I can to explain why this is happening. We can get into a debate about the history of violence in religion in another debate. I recommend reading a book called God’s Crucible. It details the history of war between religions and people.

    The reason for the association is simple. The Muslims that are committing these acts of terrorism want that association. If they did not, they wouldn’t be doing it in the name of allah and Islam. The extremist have given them this branding. You can try all you want to reverse that but, it is impossible. As soon as you think you have reversed a self inflicted stigma, another will kill in mass and leave evidence as to why. If your reward was truly in heaven, why would so many have left behind martyr videos to proclaim why they blew themselves up? The label is there because they wear it with pride. The extremist wear it for the moderates. Against their will or not.

    Why have Christians not raised the same scrutiny? Really, do you have to even ask that question? I’ll humor you and answer it for you. How many Christians claim that it is their duty to kill the infidel? How many videos are out there of a Christian explaining that he is doing this because you are not submitting to the will of allah? The level of violence just doesn’t compare. Another example, the recent movie 2012 features all religious monuments being destroyed except the Islamic sites. Roland Emmerich is the creator of that film. He feared the violence that would ensue from depicting Islamic sites being destroyed. He admitted it. What does that tell you? He was submitted by the violence of Islam. There are 1.2 Billion Muslims by conservative estimates. Just one percent of the billions are millions. But hey don’t worry; it’s just small amounts that are radical. America is about being free. Islam is not. Islam has two separate laws it follows. There is a set for when they are not in power and a set for when they are. Freedom of choice is not a fundamental value in either set. When they are not in power, they will personally submit to the rules of Islam and force those rules on those they have power over. Usually it is family. That is why we see things like honor killings happening here. When they are in power that forcefulness is extended over those they rule. There is no debating this. It is in the Quran and is very clear. I understand that most Muslims are moderate. This is an example of when an enemy of my enemy is my friend is wrong. You may think Christians are intolerable but, Islam has already forced you into submission in your heart. You fear them and you try to divert attention onto Christians because that is what you have been used to painting as the enemy for years. I think it’s time to stop slapping around the little guys and focus your attention on the giant that is about to pound you. That is of course unless you submit (give up your freedom) and turn on the Christian. You’ll be safe then right?

  25. @noneofyourbusiness-

    You know, it’s kind of funny that you would claim to be in France right now. I know I’m just an ignorant American and all, but I could have sworn Stuttgart was in Germany.

    I’m not nearly as stupid as you think I am, and no, contrary to what you believe, you are NOT actually “The Last REAL American”, though you two are obviously one in the same.

    Next time you should pick a better bogus e-mail address. Just sayin’.

    Here’s a thought- if you’d like your mind-numbing posts to carry any weight whatsoever… and maybe even be taken seriously, how about actually telling the truth for a change. Or better yet, how about trying to use your own words to illustrate a point or two… you know, instead of spending all day cutting and pasting shit from Al-Jazeera and The Daily Telegraph.

    See? Liberal or not, I’m not nearly as dumb as I look.

    As for your little buddy “(Legal) Resident Alien”, I do hope he’s doing well. Perhaps you two can arrange reunion of sorts. He is from Germany after all… though maybe you’d prefer to travel stateside? I mean, I hear Greenville, OH is quite nice this time of year.

    Funny- Greenville’s a suburb of Dayton… I believe I know some people who are from that area, one of which was also born in Germany…

    Say hello to the fam for me.

  26. C Haze, you liberals pride yourself for fighting for women’s rights, rights for gays, etc. and then you defend this ideology of the Islam (it’s not a religion!)? Are you kidding me?

    You should have a look to Europe which is turning to Eurabia.

    Let me paste a speech of Geert Wilders. Read it carefully and think about! He is dead on right. That’s the current situation in Europe and everybody who keeps his eyes closed is guilty if first Europe and then America will become a kaliphat and all our freedom and all our rights are gone!

    Here is Geert Wilder’s last speech:

    Please take the time to read and understand what is written here. Every free person should read this – it is so very important.

    America as the last man standing

    ‘In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe ?’

    Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom, the Netherlands , at the Four Seasons, New York, introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem .

    Dear friends,

    Thank you very much for inviting me.

    I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe . This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe .

    First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe . Then, I will say a few things about Islam. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem .

    The Europe you know is changing.

    You have probably seen the landmarks. But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

    All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It’s the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any e! conomic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe , street by street, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.

    There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe. With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

    Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam , Marseille and Malmo in Sweden . In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighbourhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities.

    In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims.

    Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear ‘whore, whore’. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.

    In France school teachers are advised to! avoid a uthors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin . The history of the Holocaust can no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.

    In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system.. Many neighbourhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels , because he was drinking during the Ramadan.

    Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel . I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

    A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

    Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Centre reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France . One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call ‘respect’. And this is how we give them respect. We have Muslim official state holidays.

    The Christian-Democratic att! orney ge neral is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey .

    Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. I call the perpetrators ‘settlers’. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

    Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighbourhoods, their cities, their countries. Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

    The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized.. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a paedophile, and had several marriages – at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.

    Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means ‘submission’. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

    Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam ‘the most retrograde force in the world’, and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defence.

    This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam’s territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan, Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia .. Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

    The war against Israel is not a war against Israel . It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel , Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

    Many in Europe argue in favour of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behaviour, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel , they can get everything. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a ‘right-wing extremists’ or ‘racists’. In! my coun try, the Netherlands , 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat. Yet there is a danger greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America – as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome , Athens and Jerusalem .

    Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe , American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe ‘s children in the same state, in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

    We have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world, that we know.

  27. Lovely! I always like your posts and this one is simply fantastic! You have done a great effort and I wish your blog will reach the topmost rankings soon! We are always with you bro!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s