• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

12 dead, as many as 31 injured in Fort Hood shootings

The BBC whilst being respectful to this atrocity, stated that this deranged Army Major had been the subject of concerted religious baiting.

This in no way ameliorates his dreadful act, but it may, if true explain this demented persons "reasoning".

I'm done, I have more respect for myself than to read some of the ****e that is posted here.
 
The BBC whilst being respectful to this atrocity, stated that this deranged Army Major had been the subject of concerted religious baiting.


By the vast majority of soldiers he outranked? Yet another copout to avoid truth and to absolve responsibility.
 
And how many of those deaths are you absolutely sure are the result of religious motivation? I mean seriously, if it's on the internet it's got to be the gospel right?

You've confirmed your source? Or you just accept it as truth because well...that link means your argument is sold..right?
Junior.. I don't need a link, but provided one for my claim and request but can easily back my claim with my own knowledge.

Are you aware of the Western Sahara and Mauitania?
The 150,000-200,000 dead in the Algerian Civil War?
Thousands/Tens of Thousands dead in Nigeria from Islamism?

TWO MILLION Dead at the hands of the NIF (Natl Islamic Front) in Sudan's First Genocide of Christians and animists in the south?
(1983-2003 but still ongoing)
The better known/trendier Genocide 2 of 300,000 BlackER Muslim Fur people.

The Persecution of the Copts in Egypt.
The Ethiopea/Eritrea religous war, not just 'famine.
(and thats just partial north africa islam)

Israel/Palestine.
Dar al Harb Lebanon, The civil war there and current Hezbollah /syria/christian violence.
Millions of Maronites now gone.

Shia-Sunni killing in Tens of Thousands now.,.. well after the 1 Million dead in the Iran/Iraq war.
Christians are now all but gone from the Middle East.

The Balkans
Chechnya.
Armenia/Azerbijan

India/Pakistan/Kashmir.
We just interrupted a religous war in Afghanistan.

Indonesia (EAST TIMOR 10k++), Ambon, Bali, Sulawesi The Molluccas.
Laskar Jihad/Jemaah Islamiyah there and in other places in SE asia.

Philippine and Chinese islamic separatists.

The recent deadly insurgency in Southern Thailand killing more than the I-P conflict.


and ON and on AND On..
But that's plenty sufficient add up to/justify my claim .

I dare say you canNOT demonstrate such knowledge.. just apologism... 'same as the now Utterly GUTTED RightinNYC


Your posts are EMPTY and goofy argumentation... mine are Fact-filled.
 
Last edited:
I spent years learning my enemy (since 1993). Doesn't mean I know how to fight a war in Vietnam. I am without doubt that this was religiously feuled and motivated by a man who snapped over the prospect of having to go to war against Muslims.

1) He didn't chooose to slaughter civilians.
2) He didn't choose to slaughter his chain of coomand.
3) He didn't choose to commit suicide.

He made a statement against those who...what?

Throughout the course of the day, we've learned the following confirmed facts:

*That there were 2 shooters, then 3, then 1
*That there was a second round of gunfire, then there wasn't
*That he used M-16s, then that he didn't
*That the guy was a muslim convert, then he wasn't
*That the guy was from Jordan, then that he wasn't
*That the guy was suffering from PTSD, then that he wasn't
*That the guy was dead, then that he wasn't

Considering that, I'm a bit hesitant to try to draw any conclusions about his inner motivations based on the confirmed facts that we're hearing right now. Does it seem possible, even plausible that he did this because of his religious beliefs? Sure. Does that mean that I'm "refusing to accept a conclusion that is slapping me in the face"? I don't think so.
 
The BBC whilst being respectful to this atrocity, stated that this deranged Army Major had been the subject of concerted religious baiting.

This in no way ameliorates his dreadful act, but it may, if true explain this demented persons "reasoning".

I'm done, I have more respect for myself than to read some of the ****e that is posted here.
Recently a Muslim man murdered his daughter for being "too Americanized". Guess where he immediately headed assuming he'd be safe - the UK.

Thankfully he was deported back to the US and is awaiting a 1st degree murder charge.
 
I spent years learning my enemy (since 1993). Doesn't mean I know how to fight a war in Vietnam. I am without doubt that this was religiously feuled and motivated by a man who snapped over the prospect of having to go to war against Muslims.

1) He didn't chooose to slaughter civilians.
2) He didn't choose to slaughter his chain of coomand.
3) He didn't choose to commit suicide.

He made a statement against those who...what?

He snapped. I couldn't agree more. Did he snap because he is Muslim and his faith commanded him too? Or did he snap because he became emotionally unhinged over being forced to fight in a war he didn't believe in?

There is a huge difference in the two. Some in this thread are insinuating he did this because he's a Muslim and that's what Muslims do...because of their religion. This guy may very well have been a Muslim but also snapped because of severe emotional strain. You don't know otherwise. I don't know otherwise.
What you are doing is rushing to pretend that you don't know what is going on in your world and choosing to pretend that you are bewildered and are in need of absolute confession before you reach the conclusion that is slapping you in the face.

I know that was one hell of a run on sentence, but whatever. It's not an "assault on Islam." It's facing reality.
So you're a mind reader as well? Have you seen "The Men Who Stare at Goats?"

You don't do your argument any favors when you decide that you know what I'm thinking and what I'm trying to hide behind. You are completely wrong in your assessment of what's going on in my mind and what the reality of this situation is. You've lived in a fish bowl apparently.

You're very words betray your very one track mind on this subject. You've studied your enemy since 1993? And who is your enemy Gunny? Islam? Or religious militant extremists?
 
Junior.. I don't need a link, but provided one for my claim and request but can easily back my claim withn my own knowledge.

.....

Your posts are EMOPTY apologism and goofy argumnentataion... mine are Fact-filled.

And every conflict involving anyone who is Islamic is obviously a conflict due to Islam, just like any conflict involving anyone who is Catholic/Chinese/Tall is a conflict due to Catholicism/China/Height.
 
Throughout the course of the day, we've learned the following confirmed facts:

*That there were 2 shooters, then 3, then 1
*That there was a second round of gunfire, then there wasn't
*That he used M-16s, then that he didn't
*That the guy was a muslim convert, then he wasn't
*That the guy was from Jordan, then that he wasn't
*That the guy was suffering from PTSD, then that he wasn't
*That the guy was dead, then that he wasn't

Considering that, I'm a bit hesitant to try to draw any conclusions about his inner motivations based on the confirmed facts that we're hearing right now. Does it seem possible, even plausible that he did this because of his religious beliefs? Sure. Does that mean that I'm "refusing to accept a conclusion that is slapping me in the face"? I don't think so.

This was you. Not me.

It was likely that this was a 1 to a handful of shooters all day. The amount of shooters didn't matter. Either way, his (their) faith and personal beliefs in this war "against Muslms" was and is a very huge part. Of this, I have not wavered and have been consistent. It's amazing you people still don't quite understand what I do.

Everything else was for the masses who needed their daily drama from TV. The drama will persist for those who are far removed from this fight going on far from their borders, but obviously leaks into the fabric of American life.
 
Last edited:
Junior.. I don't need a link, but provided one for my claim and request but can easily back my claim withn my own knowledge.

Are you aware of the Western Sahara and Maritania?
The 150,000 dead in the Algerian Civil War?
Thousands/Tens of Thousands dead in Nigeria from Islamism?

TWO MILLION Dead at the hands of the NIF (Natl Islamic Front) in Sudan's First Genocide of Christians and animist in the south?
(1983-2003 but still ongoing)
The better known/trendier Genocide 2 of 300,000 BlackER Muslim Fur people.

The Persecution of the Copts in Egypt.
The Ethiopea/Eritrea religous war, not just 'famine.
(and thats just partial north africa islam)

Israel/Palestine.
Dar al Harb Lebanon, The civil war there and current Hezbollah /syria/christian violence.
Millions of Maronites now gone.

Shia-Sunni killing in Tens of Thousands now.,.. well after the 1 Million dead in the Iran/Iraq war.

The Balkans
Chechnya.
Armenia/Azerbijan

India/Pakistan/Kashmir.
We just interrupted a religous war in Afghanistan.

Indonesia (EAST TIMOR 10k++), Ambon, Bali, Sulawesi The Molluccas.
Laskar Jihad/Jemaah Islamiyah there and in other places in SE asia.

The recent deadly insurgency in Southern Thailand killing more than the I-P conflict.

and ON and on AND On..
But that's plenty sufficient add up to/justify my claim .

I dare say you canNOT demonstrate such knowledge.. just apologism.

Your posts are EMPTY and goofy argumentation... mine are Fact-filled.

You've not proven anything yet. I'll ask again, how many of those deaths were the result of Muslims acting on their religious beliefs and not some other factor such as war for land, social dominance, political issues, etc?

Please answer the question.
 
He snapped. I couldn't agree more. Did he snap because he is Muslim and his faith commanded him too? Or did he snap because he became emotionally unhinged over being forced to fight in a war he didn't believe in?

So..it could have been an ingrown toenail for all we know? Do you really need clueless reporters to give you what you already suspect and know? You are not a court of law. If he was heading to a war against non-Muslims you wouldn't even know his name.



You've studied your enemy since 1993? And who is your enemy Gunny? Islam? Or religious militant extremists?

Well, that's the question. The militant enemy is the extremist. But the civilization that breeds this enemy is....what? Just hapless bystanders? And what was Germany to the Nazi? Just innocent bystanders who sent their youth to wear uniforms.
 
Last edited:
He snapped. I couldn't agree more. Did he snap because he is Muslim and his faith commanded him too? Or did he snap because he became emotionally unhinged over being forced to fight in a war he didn't believe in?

There is a huge difference in the two. Some in this thread are insinuating he did this because he's a Muslim and that's what Muslims do...because of their religion. This guy may very well have been a Muslim but also snapped because of severe emotional strain. You don't know otherwise. I don't know otherwise.

So you're a mind reader as well? Have you seen "The Men Who Stare at Goats?"

You don't do your argument any favors when you decide that you know what I'm thinking and what I'm trying to hide behind. You are completely wrong in your assessment of what's going on in my mind and what the reality of this situation is. You've lived in a fish bowl apparently.

You're very words betray your very one track mind on this subject. You've studied your enemy since 1993? And who is your enemy Gunny? Islam? Or religious militant extremists?

I agree. I was discussing earlier in the thread based on the known facts that it appears that he had reached his breaking point and snapped.
 
This was you. Not me.

It was likely that this was a 1 to a handful of shooters all day. The amount of shooters didn't matter. Either way, his (their) faith and personal beliefs in this war "against Muslms" was and is a very huge part. Of this, I have not wavered and have been consistent. It's amazing you people still don't quite understand what I do.

Everything else was for the masses who needed their daily drama from TV. The drama will persist for those who are far removed from this fight going on far from their borders, but obviously leaks into the fabric of American life.

You have such a jaded view of civilians. You're so convinced you're right that it has blinded you to all other possibilities.
 
Remember Tim McVeigh....a militant with a very non-muslim name. But I think his motivations were more political than religious.

But he certainly was a ex-soldier with a grudge.
 
You've not proven anything yet. I'll ask again, how many of those deaths were the result of Muslims acting on their religious beliefs and not some other factor such as war for land, social dominance, political issues, etc?

Please answer the question.
The Great majority of those were Muslims acting on religous beliefs

We're not talking and NOT counting street crime. (Low IQ liberals love that idiotic comparison of , ie, murder rates or 'domestic violence'; Islam doesn't even count unless the wife dies.)
(Or EDIT above .. Goofy posts saying naming McVeigh as if he was acting in the name of chrsitian Jihad or Christian principal.)


Virtually everywhere Islam touches another religion.. war.

and as I said a few pages ago- my posts are FULL of facts-- yours just semantic BS.. trying to Bluff your way through.

Your posts are notably EMPTY cheap shots.

You have demonstrated NO knowledge of the topic whatsoever-- merely a transparent and Failed attempt to recategorize violence demosntsrated by me and more than one link to Islamism.
('trop'/the religionofpeace.com counts only attacks in the name of Islam and most of the things I cited .. the same)
 
Last edited:
So..it could have been an ingrown toenail for all we know? Please. Do you really need reporters to give you what you already suspect and know? You are not a court of law. If he was headng to a war against non-Muslims you wouldn't even know his name.
What I already suspect and know? We don't all think like you, and you don't have the market cornered on the logical process Gunny. You can wite off my fifteen years of law enforcement, much of which was spent investigating violent offenders and actually gathering facts about motives and causes, and just say "well you know what you're thinking, you know what you believe." But it will get no traction. I don't assume certain things and then say I know them to be facts. I'll leave that to you and some of the others.

Well, that's the question. The militant enemy is the extremist.
Not necessarily. A militant enemy may in fact simply be an insurgent group that strikes against foreign occupiers because they're foreign occupiers. In that case you're as much an "extremist" as they are.
But the civilization that breeds this enemy is....what? Just hapless bystanders?
What? The civilization? No Gunny, it's not "the civilization" that breeds "this enemy." It's an element within society. There are literally hundreds of millions of Muslims who've never lifted a finger in jihad nor ever will. Because they choose not to. There are religious extremists within Islam who prey upon at risk Muslims. It's very deliberate and it's very systematic. It's also a very minority situation. You cannot prove otherwise.

And what was Germany to the Nazi?
How much do you know about Adolf Hitler Gunny?
 
Last edited:
You have such a jaded view of civilians. You're so convinced you're right that it has blinded you to all other possibilities.

You are actually absolutely correct about my views towards civilians. Almost 18 years of active military life has showed me what military personel are worth to the average civilian. It has also showed me how little the average civilian knows about things beyond our shores. It is far more frustrating than most will ever know.

All other possibilities are for those who need to think that there is a rational explanation to everything. For people like me, the irrational is common place and we need an understanding of just that to deal with it.
 
You are actually absolutely correct about my views towards civilians. Almost 18 years of active military life has showed me what military personel are worth to the average civilian. It has also showed me how little the average civilian knows about things beyond our shores. It is far more frustrating than most will ever know.

All other possibilities are for those who need to think that there is a rational explanation to everything. For people like me, the irrational is common place and we need an understanding of just that to deal with it.

I know a great deal about what goes on beyond our shores from hands on experience, but I'm a civilian and I've never served as a soldier. You can have worldly experience that doesn't require you to have served.

I do agree with you about the irrational though. Our explanations for things help us sleep at night but they are not reality.
 
The Great majority of those were Muslims acting on religous beliefs

Oh, well if you say so, that must be the case.

Virtually everywhere Islam touches another religion.. war.

Virtually everywhere (one religion or people) touches (another religion or people) in the third world = conflict. This is a pretty basic fact of life.
 
The Great majority of those were Muslims acting on religous beliefs
Prove it. So far you've not done this. Forgive me if your history here does not allow me to just accept your word on this subject.

We're not talking and NOT counting street crime. (Low IQ liberals slove that idiotic comparison of , ie, murder rates.)
You don't know that. You have no idea. Otherwise you would provide some actual evidence that supports your case, not just a link to an obivously bias website that gives what are actually very ambiguous body count numbers.

Virtually everywhere Islam touches another religion.. war.
Yeah okay, and when you can intelligently fix blame on the issues that lead to that conflict and prove it was Islam that was the cause you get back with us.

and as I said a few pages ago- my posts are FULL of facts-- yours just semantic BS.. trying to Bluff your way through.
I'm not bluffing anything. Your posts are ambiguous and full of rhetoric. I'm humoring you at the moment and giving you a chance to actually prove your case. Religionofpeace.com isn't going to cut it.

Your posts are notably EMPTY cheap shots.
Yeah, now click your heels three times....

You have demonstrated NO knowledge of the topic whatsoever--
Well thusfar simple logic has defeated you. You've utterly failed to get past my first line of questions regarding your "facts."

merely a transparent and Failed attempt to recategorize violence demosntsrated by me and more than one link to Islamism.
('trop' counts only attacks in the name of Islam and most of the things I cited .. the same)
I'll be waiting for you to actually debate. When you decide to do this, please...just answer my first set of challenges to your argument. You're the one claiming you know so much about Islam and are bringing facts. So let's see you back it up.
 
Many chose/HAD to ignore this potential Bombshell...
(and I found it after searching a CNN recitation)

Perhaps not the same Nidal Hasan? BUT!

Did Nidal Malik Hasan Telegraph His Shooting Spree? MediaElites




Did Nidal Malik Hasan Telegraph His Shooting Spree?

Posted by Steve Huff, Nov 5, 2009

UPDATE, 8:20 p.m.: Sources tell the Associated Press that Nidal Malik Hasan came “to their attention at least Six Months ago because of Internet postings that discussed suicide bombings and other threats.”
So… read on.

Original post made at 7:37 p.m.

We should really, really keep in mind the possibility that Nidal Hasan may not be as uncommon a name as the average American might assume.

Still, an interesting comment was made by a “NidalHasan” on May 20, 2009 on a document published on the document hosting service, Scribd.com. The document was titled, “Martyrdom in Islam vs. Suicide Bombing.” (Martyrdom in Islam Versus Suicide Bombing) Regarding the content of the document, “NidalHasan” wrote the following (http://www.scribd.com/NidalHasan):

"There was a grenade thrown amongs a group of American soldiers. One of the soldiers, feeling that it was to late for everyone to flee jumped on the grave with the intention of saving his comrades. Indeed he saved them. He inentionally took his life (suicide) for a noble cause i.e. saving the lives of his soldier. To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate.
Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause. Scholars have paralled this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers.

If one suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a strategic victory.
Their intention is not to die because of some despair. The same can be said for the Kamikazees in Japan. They died (via crashing their planes into ships) to kill the enemies for the homeland.

You can call them crazy if you want but their act was not one of suicide that is despised by Islam. So the scholars main point is that “IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOUR INTENTION IS THE MAIN ISSUE” and Allah (SWT) knows best."​
[.......]
 
Last edited:
Who ignored it? What is it you have proven with this? Did this gunman commit suicide? Did he martyr himself?

Please, give us some more insight here.
He certainly potentially Martyred himself!
He almost died trying but is alive.

I post PLENTY of insight.. you post NOTHING but empty scepticism of fact-filled posts.
Where is your info or insight?

Really, what Despicable and utterly Bankrupt tactics on your part.

Hypocritical 100% empty trash wanting me to write a book/post link after link and plenty of knowledcge... while you post NOTHING.
 
Last edited:
What I already suspect and know? We don't all think like you.....

And I have never expected you to. I sometimes forget that my world is seperate from most. What is obvious for me is not obvious for most.

You can right off my fifteen years of law enforcement, much of which was spent investigating violent offenders and actually gathering facts about motives and causes, and just say "well you know what you're thinking, you know what you believe."

So keep the streets safe from gangs. Terrorism and military "snappery" is my world of understanding.


Not necessarily. A militant enemy may in fact simply be an insurgent group that strikes against foreign occupiers because they're foreign occupiers. In that case you're as much an "extremist" as they are.

And this proves my point. Philosophy has no place in war. Maybe it brings the street gangs closer together. I don't know. But labeling us all as an "enemy" does nothing to win wars. There's winners and losers. Freud doesn't have a couch in the room.

What? The civilization? No Gunny, it's not "the civilization" that breeds "this enemy." It's an element within society. There are literally hundreds of millions of Muslims who've never lifted a finger in jihad nor ever will. Because they choose not to. There are religious extremists within Islam who prey upon at risk Muslims. It's very deliberate and it's very systematic. It's also a very minority situation. You cannot prove otherwise.

Hmmm...hundreds of millions of Muslims should be able to sudbue those who smear their religion shouldn't it? If it's just a few, I mean, what's the problem? Egyptian, Saudi, and Syrian militaires (in which the west has built) should be able to combat those in Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq who pervert their most sacred beliefs and make the world feel defensive shouldn't they?

But they don't. There is more to this than pretending that a handful of "rogues" are the enemy. Now, the civilization is not our enemy. But it is our problem. And pretending that the civilization is not the problem is foolish. You can lock up every gang member in a neighborhood but in the end, unless you deal with the corruption, poverty, and misery that exists in the neighborhood, the gang member will continue to be produced. The gang member now becomes a symptom of something else you won't deal with.



How much do you know about Adolf Hitler Gunny?

He had a mustache and liked long walks on the beach. It say's so on his website. Let's not pretend that all of Germany were hapless victims as they benefitted and prospered in the riches "Hilter" brought home.
 
Back
Top Bottom