.Meet America's New Superjihadist: Major Nidal Malik Hasan
Major Nidal Malik Hasan - Cr: Examiner.com
PC run amuck cost innocents lives, as America's new Superjihadist wove his fiery path of death at Fort Hood yesterday.
Let's meet the Muslim Madman:
- He allegedly yelled Allah Akbar during the shootings.
- He was filmed dressed in traditional Muslim garb when he visited
a convenience store earlier in the day.
- He was giving away Qurans during the morning of the shootings.
- He did not like to pose with women in photographs.
- He was a member of a Homeland Security Panel that had advised Obama.
- The federal government was tracking Major Malik Nadal Hasan's jihadist Internet postings for the last six months, and yet he was promoted to Major in May.
- Colonel Terry Lee quoting Major Hasan:
”The Muslims have a right to stand up against the aggressors” “….maybe we should have more of these where people strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square”
- Also, he received poor performance evaluations, and yet was still promoted.
- A source tells NPR's Joseph Shapiro that Hasan was put on probation early in his postgraduate work at the Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. He was disciplined for proselytizing about his Muslim faith with patients and colleagues, according to the source, who worked with him at the time.
- Hasan attended the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring and was "very devout," according to Faizul Khan, a former imam at the center. Khan said Hasan attended prayers at least once a day, seven days a week, often in his Army fatigues.
- Hasan lectured about beheading infidels at a conference
He talked about how if you’re a nonbeliever the Koran says you should have your head cut off, you should have oil poured down your throat, you should be set on fire. And I said well couldn’t this just be his educating you? And the psychiatrist said yes, but one of the Muslims in the audience, another psychiatrist, raised his hand and was quite disturbed and he said you know, a lot of us don’t believe these things you’re saying, and that there was no place where Hasan couched it as this is what the Koran teaches but you know I don’t believe it. And people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about ‘is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?’
Source Credits: Atlas Shrugs, Jihad Watch, Hot Air, Ace of Spades, Weasel Zippers, Instapundit, Free Republic, NPR, Debbie Schlussel
posted by Mister Ghost at 3:14 PM
19 Comments:
Mad Tom et al.,
Hopefully they'll be investigations,
congressional panels, inquiries as to why he wasn't discharged from the military and monitored.
And hopefully they finally end this PC nonsense.
In keeping with our President's style and manner in dealing with such tragic and important matters: A shout out to MG in da house---'Tru dat!'
Just don't hold your breath. We'll see more discussions on the oppression and bullying of Muslims in the military from this Congress.
Yeah, but there was a story yesterday that said that he ad been disciplined at Walter Reed, but what did they do in the infinite wisdom, they promoted him up and out of their hair...The Peter syndrome I think they call it.
Will should know more about that than me..
I don't doubt that was true. But that goes to the PC nature of the problem--- had they demoted him, investigated or mustered him out for cause, the commanders would have been left open to charges of intolerance. I doubt they had the info about his posting pro suicide bombing comments. The FBI is now claiming they never traced those directly back to him, but I have a hard time believing that. If the FBI is aware that someone on US soil is making comments pro suicide bombers, surely they at least bother to find out who and where those people are. Saying they were 'aware' but hadn't connected him individually just doesn't make good sense to me.
"But that goes to the PC nature of the problem--- "
Bull shit, it goes to the Walter reed problem and they did not want anyone looking in the closets, or under the rugs.
Specially not this administration, they been touting how great government care, aqua VA is. I can just imagine the shit that would hit the fan when they discover that the Dr treating PTSD is a fucking nut case..I doubt his religion ever made any difference, and is just being used now a simple, and convenient excuses to avoid the real problems.
If you don't think his religion had something to do with it, you are delusional or not reading and hearing the same things I am. I heard an interview with an officer, now retired, who worked directly with him in the same division at Walter Reed and he said the guy was constantly referring to abuses of Muslims by US soldiers and the unjust war. Several around him often responded by calling him names, etc. He said there was nothing he was aware of that indicated the guy was unhinged. If they were wanting to hide something it was probably what some of his fellow officers and soldiers had said to him that could have been construed as intolerant or bigoted and perhaps revealed the lack of discipline on the part of commanders had an investigation taken place. Easier to send him elsewhere. That's the way commanders deal with problem soldiers.
http://www.examiner.com/x-7812-DC-SCOTUS-Examiner~y2009m11d6-Politicallycorrect-double-standard-spawned-mass-murder-at-Fort-Hood-by-Muslim-soldier
What he said.
"If you don't think his religion had something to do with it"
Lots of people think the wars are wrong, lots of people hated Bush, none of them decided to take it out on their co-workers. His problems don't seem religious to me they sound more delusional for one, and bureaucratic for two.
Can't be all of the above? If he went around talking Muslim jihadist doctrine and yelled the jihadist motto when committing mass murder, I think it's safe to say that whatever his reasons were for being unhappy-- inability to make friends or score with the chicks-- religion was a major factor in his chosen method to act out. Maybe he saw virgins in his afterlife. That was genius on the part of the 'prophet'--- set up a system to sexually frustrate the hell out of young horny males, then tell them that if they die in jihad they can count on virgins to serve their every need in eternity. Who's with me!
To use your reasoning, lots of people are delusional and frustrated with bureaucracy, but they don't go out and commit mass murder. Seriously, what is your point in denying what is so obvious? You could apply your reasoning to absolve Islam of every act of terror on the part of it's believers. They are frustrated. Delusional. The victim of 'bureaucracy'.Just ignore the fact that they are doing exactly what the founder of their religion told them was the command of Allah. Some of those things and more probably drive the radicals into Jihad, but that hardly absolves the ideology they turn to that encourages them to kill unbelievers who will not submit. I always wonder why libs so freely ridicule and criticize Jews and Christians, but defend the indefensible. Fear, or is the enemy of your enemy your friend?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120162816
What conclusions do you draw from this info?
"Who's with me!"
look at the comment anonymous just left for you here I guess this is your solution, we'll call it "ameliorating" the effects of bad religion. He's with you.
What a cheap shot, MT. You never heard anything of the sort from me and never will. For such a tolerant and enlightened human being, you sure have trouble seeing middle ground sometimes.
OK, so the other day when you wrote:
"Prior to our recent 'enlightenment', the method to ameliorate the detrimental effects of...has been to ostracize practitioners and make the acts themselves illegal."
That wasn't right wing code for mass murder? It is around here.
At least this guy had the guts to just come right out and say it, not hide behind a thesaurus.
Forget the thesaurus, you need a dictionary. Ameliorate means to lessen the ill effects or make better. I happen to believe that homosexuality was labeled 'immoral' because the acts result in much higher rates of disease and don't contribute to the continuation of the species and society. Is that so radical an opinion? It applies to most all acts judged to be 'immoral'.It seems pretty damn obvious and easy to understand. Today, one could make the argument that disease control and overpopulation make the 'immoral' argument moot. I take no strong position either way, but find the argument that bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional baseless for reasons we were discussing.
What I wrote is historically accurate and in no way endorsed what was done, but facts are facts--- How is it you read that into what I said and manage to ignore my often repeated philosophy that I don't care a damn bit what adults to with other adults in their private lives, just don't make demands on mine? I just got through mowing my gay neighbors' yard for them while they are out doing who the hell knows what in Vegas. Why? Because they asked me to and are decent neighbors that mind their own damn business and will give help when asked. Do you make a habit of accusing people of being murderous bigots with no basis in fact or are you having a bad day?
Well then I apologies if I have misunderstood your comment. I take it back connecting you to the other commenter
just don't make demands on mine?
You'll have to explain that one to me.
I happen to believe that homosexuality was labeled 'immoral' because the acts result in much higher rates of disease
`
Except that before "enlightenment" no one knew a thing about disease, what cause them or where they came from. Most believed that they were punishments from god. The usual form of "ameliorating" the problem was to kill the offender or "ostrazise" him, which of course had the same effect, death.
Is that so radical an opinion?
Not unless you know better.
Apology not needed, but accepted. I think I know you and we both like to go after it.
I gave you the CDC report, or NHI, or some other report that showed why homosexual sex as it is practiced by the average gay today is so prone to diseases and self destruction. I do know better, and so should they. Whether previous generations knew that the disease spread throughout their homosexual community was because of various bacteria transmitted through sexual contact with the lower intestine of multiple partners or thought it was because of 'demons' or the judgment of god, it had the same effects. They had other laws against promiscuous hetero sex for similar reasons. 'Immoral acts' were considered immoral for their ill effects on individuals and society. That's still true. We seem to think that because we have a more specific understanding of the ill effects, it should no longer be considered immoral, but are we better off as a society? If people can indulge in such acts without spreading disease and don't feel the need to put it on public display, I don't care one bit and believe they have the right to self destruct or lead happy lives. I am just sick of the socialist view that I will, under penalties administered by the state should I refuse, have my property confiscated to care for and treat those who indulge in risky (immoral) acts. I feel the same way about heteros who have accidental children who become effective wards of the state or similarly spread diseases. You want me to give to charity or give my time by choice, no problem, but that way has long been discarded. And then to be considered a lesser man because I take that view is just upside down from where I sit--- but that's just me.
Post a Comment
<< Home