The attack at Ft. Hood

[ruggbutt]

Funny how you don't exactly bother with that 'all religion is a crock' thing, when you choose to focus on Muslims.

LOL, I gotta rescind my "you're not an east coast douche" verdict. I'm focusing on muslims cuz this thread is about a Muslim who shot fellow soldiers cuz he didn't want to have to fight other Muslims. He lectured about

"Muslims conflicted about fighting against other Muslims".

The article mentioned nothing about Christians nor christianity. And all we need to do is go back a few pages in this thread where you explain away and minimize him and his reasons and I quote:

The guy, according to several, had been upset by folks casting aspersions on his name, despite the fact that he was American born

. The fact is my east-coast douchebag friend, that you will defend anyone and everyone who fits into a category that the DNC caters to. And you do so regardless of their actions, especially when those actions involve breaking the law. If there's one thing I despise more than a raghead who kills for honor or Allah (or anyone using religion as a reason) is someone who will argue a point in the criminal behavior of another, completely ignoring common sense or decency. I imagine you're probably a decent guy face to face Slick, but I also bet that slimy, greasy DNC mentality oozes from your pores and creeps out decent folk. The great thing about this country is that we're allowed to vocalize our opinions, unless it's at a rally or a function where Obama or the DNC is present. You're one of those people who only give a shit about the law when it applies to you and your best interests.

It's ok though, cuz at the end of the day I'll stand behind you to allow you to vocalize your fucked up reasoning. Even though I disagree with it. And that my friend is a feature you are distinctly lacking.

[callmeslick]

keep focusing on the DNC, it makes you look smart, Ruggie. And no, this thread is not about Muslims, so much as it is about:
1. A crazy person(the shooter, not badmouthing you, here), or at least a highly unstable one.
2. Suspect or lax military security in time of war.

[nuf]

keep it coming, folks, acwos is entartaining again

[fatman]

And no, this thread is not about Muslims, so much as it is about:
1. A crazy person(the shooter, not badmouthing you, here), or at least a highly unstable one.

Thats funny here i was thinking the two were intertwined

[Morbid Jester]

I find it funny about the whole "muslims fighting muslims" excuse. Muslims don't get along with each other and when one muslim leader signs a treaty of some kind with another they often end up breaking it.

+1 Just read some history of the Middle East and Islam, they've fought each other as often...as Christians have fought each other.

Absolutely true, yet there are some things to consider IMHO:

1. I know, everyone must make their own experiences in order to grow and mature, but theres also the choice to LEARN from the mistakes others made before you (in this case the "Christians"). Just fast forward to the age of reason....?
2. If it was strictly Muslims againt Muslims in Muslim land, I'd be happy to let them go at it until noone is left standing. However, at this point Non Muslims are a tad more than just "collateral damage". They are targets.
3. Back when Christians were at each other, or even during WW2 the means ranged from blades to guns and bombs. Today we have to factor in the inherent suicidal tendencies on the Muslim side and we may have add nuclear or biological capabilities (and be they a threat only).

So, while the principle may be the same, the outcome may be vastly different. For the whole world. Alas I think your argument doesn't hold that much water....

As for the shooter: no matter how you slice it, his belief was involved in the decision to go bezerk. In any case I'd be highly alert when in an quasi secular society -and the armed forces to boot- someone switches their loyalties away from society to -any- form of religion.
There may not be any atheists in foxholes, but once you join, you should have your priorities straight. And that would be to place your fellow servicemen and your society over your religion.

I think this is true regardless of him being picked upon. I am certain homosexuals may go through the same -if not worse- in society or the armed forces. I have yet to see one of them shoot people as a reaction...

[ruggbutt]

And no, this thread is not about Muslims, so much as it is about:
1. A crazy person(the shooter, not badmouthing you, here), or at least a highly unstable one.
2. Suspect or lax military security in time of war.

Incorrect about your first statement and number one. You minimize the crime and the man by saying the guy was crazy. He wasn't. He was a religious fanatic which doesn't necessarily make him crazy. And he's muslim. And he shot the soldiers cuz he didn't wanna go to the middle east to kill other muslims. If he was crazy he'd never have attained the rank of major, he'd have been run out of the military.

It's every bit about Muslims and religion. As for the lax security it's easy for you to coach from the sidelines isn't it? I don't know if security was lax or not but anyone who wants to shoot a group of people can do so with impunity for a short time. It doesn't matter where you are. Any armed reaction to an action takes time and time is the enemy when there is gunfire involved.

[callmeslick]

If he was crazy he'd never have attained the rank of major, he'd have been run out of the military.

no, he wasn't. And, that's the point Pudfark and I have been trying to hammer home. This whackjob actually gave a residency presentation(research speil to medical professional staff) that was a bizarre ramble with very little data, mixing a bit of religious extremism, conjecture and stream of consciousness venting. All present seemed to think he was a bit off. That was over a year ago. He was known to have contacted via email a radical cleric. His friends, generally Muslims, even noted that he was acting odd, as did various coworkers. It seems they just promoted him, transferred him, and made him Ft. Hood's problem to deal with. And therein, my friend, lies a huge concern in a wartime military. THAT is what I am referring to when talking about security failures, not the realtime response at Hood. Hell, it doesn't take all that much imagination to see a case like this ending far worse, especially given the access of medical staff.

[Pudfark]

Ol Slick is correct about the point I brought up...(soon to be quoted in his sig..i'm sure) lol

We can all have a hoot and a holler about nearly everything...and we do....

There is a Huge problem in the Military...it undermines thier effectivness, integrity and state of readiness to defend our country. We, all of us, are in jeporady now...It makes absolutely no difference as to whether the Major was a Muslim or a Jew or anything else....We all know that our country is in a "System Wide" Failure mode.....and many institutions have failed and are failing now and the whole argument is how to fix it.....and it is going to take years to do so.....

The Most Important Thing is....OUR Military...nothing else matters....and the entire media is missing that point...and so is the vast majority of the public......as we slide towards oblivion....The Military must be fixed by the Military and damn for sure not by the politicians and it must be fixed right now...

Old Pudfark sez: Damn, Rugg'stir, Slick and Pud wuz all online at the same time....nobody wuz a bleedin....next round's on me fellers....

[callmeslick]

Old Pudfark sez: Damn, Rugg'stir, Slick and Pud wuz all online at the same time....nobody wuz a bleedin....next round's on me fellers....

I'll have a gin and tonic, thanks.

[Soapy]

Pass me some single malt and a cheap pack of smokes, kind soir