• 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!

Fort Hood Suspect Warned of Muslim Threat Within Military

SgtRock

Cancel Cancel Culture and Woke Supremacy
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
7,025
Reaction score
2,896
Location
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sorce: Fox News
Date: Nov. 10, 2009

The Army psychiatrist suspected of killing 13 people at Fort Hood reportedly warned senior Army physicians in 2007 that the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars to avoid "adverse events.


Please take the time to read the part of this article where Lt. Col. Val Finnell, a former classmate of Nidal Hasan at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. in 2007 - 2008. comments on Hasan.

Finnell recalled Hasan telling his classmates and professors, "I'm a Muslim first and I hold the Shariah, the Islamic Law, before the United States Constitution."

In regards to the above quote. Major Hasan took an oath when he bacame an officer in the US Army. Here is the text of that oath.

United States Uniformed Services Oath of Office
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

I know we are looking at this in retrospect but it seems that with all the red flags that this jihadist attack could have been avoided. The FBI droped the ball as well as the army. We have been conditioned not to offend. PC was just an annoyence prior to this incident. Now we are dying as a result of political corectness and a fear of being labled a bigot/islamophobe.

Fort Hood Suspect Warned of Muslim Threat Within Military - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
 
Last edited:
Well hell,


He said he was a ticking timebomb in his environmental powerpoint presentation.....Duh.


This guy was buried in red flags. No one bothered to pick one up.
 
Well hell,


He said he was a ticking timebomb in his environmental powerpoint presentation.....Duh.


This guy was buried in red flags. No one bothered to pick one up.

Thats right, no one botherd to pick one up out of fear they would be labled an Islmophobe. Thats why I conclude that political correctness is killing American soldiers.
 
Where are you who claim he is not a jihadist now? Whats that I hear in the dead of night. A chirping sound, thats it, the sound of crickets chirping. Well lets all pray that he gets a quick military trial and is exicuted by firing squad before Christmas.

Nidal Hasan soon to be another dead jihadist corps, don't forget to wrap his body in a shroud soaked with swines blood!:mrgreen:
 
With every piece of information that comes to light we get a better picture of the massive disasters of PC and diversity have brought us. I'm not going to point out whose fault it is by pointing a finger at one group or another because it's all our fault for allowing those who push this garbage on us and we take it.
Well it's time to take this country back from the do goody two shoes who feel like this PC BS is good for us. Well damn it it gets people killed and has caused education to create a system that rewards failure. It's all tied together and it's wrecking the whole Country.
 
The guy was a nutcase. Now, if you want to label him a terrorist nutcase, fine. We all agree, and almost everyone - Muslims included - would work together to shut idiots like this down.

Where we apparently part ways is what is meant by "being PC". You wanna red flag some Islamic dude who says we should blow up a few buildings to spread Allah's message, I agree. But I get the impression that those of you crying the "being PC" message want to go far beyond that. I get the impression that you believe ALL Muslims are pretty much going to blow up something in the name of their god, and we should have no problem stereotyping them as such. In fact, I get the impression that some of you folks who are all anti-Muslim would be a lot more comfortable if we started taking things a lot further, like not allowing Muslims in the military to begin with.

So, maybe you can clear the air. Be the spokesman for the anti-PC crowd and let those of us pro-PC folks know exactly what you're looking for.
 
The guy was a nutcase. Now, if you want to label him a terrorist nutcase, fine. We all agree, and almost everyone - Muslims included - would work together to shut idiots like this down.

Where we apparently part ways is what is meant by "being PC". You wanna red flag some Islamic dude who says we should blow up a few buildings to spread Allah's message, I agree. But I get the impression that those of you crying the "being PC" message want to go far beyond that. I get the impression that you believe ALL Muslims are pretty much going to blow up something in the name of their god, and we should have no problem stereotyping them as such. In fact, I get the impression that some of you folks who are all anti-Muslim would be a lot more comfortable if we started taking things a lot further, like not allowing Muslims in the military to begin with.

So, maybe you can clear the air. Be the spokesman for the anti-PC crowd and let those of us pro-PC folks know exactly what you're looking for.

Your impression is wrong. Im looking for people to grow a spine and do the right thing even if someone may get offended. Americans including many of our armed forces are putting there lifes on the line to protect us. We owe it to them to stand strong and call things what they are. Don't be afraid to offend, it might save lifes. And besides if it offends someone that you are pointing out a red flag then maybe they are worthy of observation as well.
 
Your impression is wrong. Im looking for people to grow a spine and do the right thing even if someone may get offended. Americans including many of our armed forces are putting there lifes on the line to protect us. We owe it to them to stand strong and call things what they are. Don't be afraid to offend, it might save lifes. And besides if it offends someone that you are pointing out a red flag then maybe they are worthy of observation as well.

And yet, you've told me nothing about what it is specifically that you actually want here. Do you want to do more thorough background checks on everyone? That aint being anti-PC. What about highlighting that this was a pretty bad mistake, and there's gonna be some pretty serious accountability? That aint being anti-PC, either. So, where does this whole anti-PC business come in here? Is there something specific in those news wires where an official said that we don't do that against Muslims because it just aint PC? Because I didn't read that in any of the news. Nor did I read that we didn't do it because we'd be afraid to offend. To be honest, that seems to be nothing but speculation with a partisan slant to it.

So again I ask what is that you want in situations like this. Where do you think us pro-PC folks can help you out here?
 
Last edited:
The guy was a nutcase. Now, if you want to label him a terrorist nutcase, fine. We all agree, and almost everyone - Muslims included - would work together to shut idiots like this down.

Where we apparently part ways is what is meant by "being PC". You wanna red flag some Islamic dude who says we should blow up a few buildings to spread Allah's message, I agree. But I get the impression that those of you crying the "being PC" message want to go far beyond that. I get the impression that you believe ALL Muslims are pretty much going to blow up something in the name of their god, and we should have no problem stereotyping them as such. In fact, I get the impression that some of you folks who are all anti-Muslim would be a lot more comfortable if we started taking things a lot further, like not allowing Muslims in the military to begin with.

So, maybe you can clear the air. Be the spokesman for the anti-PC crowd and let those of us pro-PC folks know exactly what you're looking for.

I see it as just as dangerous to extrapolate what is actually said into what you think some of us might have said could be as big a mistake as the thinking you describe. I think most realize that all Muslims are not bad people as we realize all Blacks, and Hispanics are not gang bangers and all Asians are not geniuses and it's dangerous to stereo type any entire group because of the actions of one.
However the fear of upsetting anyone because there are legitimate questions being raised because of demonstrated behavior is ludicrous at best, and seems to be what happened hear. i heard a dumb ass General say he didn't want to see the diversity in the Military suffer because of this one indecent. Are you (expletive deleted) kidding me. What diversity or PC position makes ignoring obvious issues that should disqualify anyone from service regardless of skin color, religion, or sexual preference or any other damn reason are justification for what was allowed to happen in this case. This BS pisses me off to the max and I am not easily made this up set. I always believed the Military had standards and once established you do do not make exceptions or deviate from them. To do so is to invite problems as we have seen.
 
Last edited:
Political Correctness made early attempts to diffuse this guy seem more dangerous to a person and their career than letting it go on.

There is clearly a line with Political Correctness. A line where "protecting feelings" and preventing "Social Injustice" stops and leaving ourselves vulnerable not only to our enemies but ourselves begins.
 
I see it as just as dangerous to extrapolate what is actually said into what you think some of us might have said could be as big a mistake as the thinking you describe. I think most realize that all Muslims are not bad people as we realize all Blacks, and Hispanics are not gang bangers and all Asians are not geniuses and it's dangerous to stereo type any entire group because of the actions of one.
However the fear of upsetting anyone because there are legitimate questions being raised because of demonstrated behavior is ludicrous at best, and seems to be what happened hear. i heard a dumb ass General say he didn't want to see the diversity in the Military suffer because of this one indecent. Are you (expletive deleted) kidding me. What diversity or PC position makes ignoring obvious issues that should disqualify anyone from service regardless of skin color, religion, or sexual preference or any other damn reason are justification for what was allowed to happen in this case. This BS pisses me off to the max and I am not easily made this up set. I always believed the Military had standards and once established you do do not make exceptions or deviate from them. To do so is to invite problems as we have seen.

Are you referring to Obama's praise of the military's diversity? Because I don't see a thing wrong with that. And if you do, then explain what's wrong with a military being diverse, because I must have missed where that's a bad thing. In addition, the guy who killed those folks was qualified for service, but he was a nutcase. When that was found out, he shoulda been dealt with. But I haven't seen any evidence whatsoever that he wasn't flagged because folks were worried about being PC.

So, you seem to be an 'anti-PC' conservative. I invite you, too, to tell those of us pro-PC folks on the left specifically what you want out of this whole 'shouldn't have to be PC' deal. Name a few things that we can work on as a country to eliminate any more Fort Hood shootings, and we can all work on it together.
 
Last edited:
Political Correctness is a product of Marxist thinking, plain and simple. We don't need it, and it's only purpose was to assist in creating unity in the working class to band together against their Capitalist slave drivers. It came about after Marxism failed in WWI to unify the working class.
 
Last edited:
Political Correctness is a product of Marxist thinking, plain and simple. We don't need it, and it's only purpose was to assist in creating the unity in the working class to band together. It came about after Marxism failed in WWI to unify the working class.

Actually, we do need it. I personally don't want to hear racial slangs accepted in the workplace, or see a bunch of stereotyping of minorities and ethnic groups accepted as commonplace, do you? I personally don't care where the term originated, either. As long as the highly offensive language and actions promoted towards all racial, ethnic, majority or minority groups are kept to a minimum, we'll all get along better.

Now, you should certainly have the right to use such offensive language if you want. But I also believe in just desserts. If some folks wanna hurl racial slurs, have at it I say. But I don't believe they should complain when that ass gets whipped for doing so, or fired from their job for such a thing.
 
Last edited:
Actually, we do need it. I personally don't want to hear racial slangs accepted in the workplace, or see a bunch of stereotyping of minorities and ethnic groups accepted as commonplace, do you?

Because racism and bigotry would run amok without Political Correctness there to keep us in line and society as we know it would come crashing down!

I personally don't care where the term originated, either. As long as the highly offensive language and actions promoted towards all racial, ethnic, majority or minority groups are kept to a minimum, we'll all get along better.

So let's treat everyone like immature children and expect them to act like responsible adults? I would venture to guess you like stuff like affirmative action and minimum wage too.

News Flash: Life isn't fair, bad **** happens, and bad People exist, but most of the time people do the right thing without having restrictions placed on them and stigmas or punishments attached to them should their attempt at doing the right thing fail.

Now, you should certainly have the right to use such offensive language if you want. But I also believe in just desserts. If some folks wanna hurl racial slurs, have at it I say. But I don't believe they should complain when that ass gets whipped for doing so, or fired from their job for such a thing.

Right, those people that hurl racial slangs will get what's coming to them. But the rest of us shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because a few people don't want anyone's feelings to get hurt.
 
Because racism and bigotry would run amok without Political Correctness there to keep us in line and society as we know it would come crashing down!

Except that whenever you avoid using derogatory or bigoted terms, you are being politically correct. So, by definition, not being politically correct means that you're using such terminology.

Don't shoot the messenger, kid. I didn't invent the term. I just support it. Like I said, if you want to avoid being politically correct and hurl a bunch of slurs, have at it. I'd prefer folks to be PC in the workplace, on the news, and in everyday life, though.


So let's treat everyone like immature children and expect them to act like responsible adults? I would venture to guess you like stuff like affirmative action and minimum wage too.

You'd guess right on affirmative action and minimum wage (HINT: read the political lean under my avatar). You'd guess wrong on treating folks like immature children. That aint what being PC is all about.

But you knew that.

News Flash: Life isn't fair, bad **** happens, and bad People exist, but most of the time people do the right thing without having restrictions placed on them and stigmas or punishments attached to them should their attempt at doing the right thing fail.

Selling tickets for your cruise, there, Captain Obvious? Of course life aint fair. Of course bad things happen. And sure folks do the right thing most of the time - in essence, they are 'politically correct' most of the time. But I don't wanna hear a bunch of racial slurs or stereotypes in my workplace, or on the news, or any other public outlet. Now, if you despise being politically correct, and you want the n-word hurled in your place of business, to each his own. But I don't, and I warrant that most folks support being politically correct in such situations.


Right, those people that hurl racial slangs will get what's coming to them. But the rest of us shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because a few people don't want anyone's feelings to get hurt.

Who says you gotta walk on eggshells? You don't wanna be politically correct, fine. Nobody is forcing you to keep your language neutral or your opinions without stereotypes. But if you're gonna actively campaign that we should do away with being PC in a public arena, good luck with it. Most folks like their broadcasts and day-to-day lives pretty politically correct. And i'd warrant that you're one of 'em.
 
Because racism and bigotry would run amok without Political Correctness there to keep us in line and society as we know it would come crashing down!



So let's treat everyone like immature children and expect them to act like responsible adults? I would venture to guess you like stuff like affirmative action and minimum wage too.

News Flash: Life isn't fair, bad **** happens, and bad People exist, but most of the time people do the right thing without having restrictions placed on them and stigmas or punishments attached to them should their attempt at doing the right thing fail.



Right, those people that hurl racial slangs will get what's coming to them. But the rest of us shouldn't have to walk on eggshells because a few people don't want anyone's feelings to get hurt.

Thankyou, my thoughts exactly.
 
Except that whenever you avoid using derogatory or bigoted terms, you are being politically correct. So, by definition, not being politically correct means that you're using such terminology.

Don't shoot the messenger, kid. I didn't invent the term. I just support it. Like I said, if you want to avoid being politically correct and hurl a bunch of slurs, have at it. I'd prefer folks to be PC in the workplace, on the news, and in everyday life, though.




You'd guess right on affirmative action and minimum wage (HINT: read the political lean under my avatar). You'd guess wrong on treating folks like immature children. That aint what being PC is all about.

But you knew that.



Selling tickets for your cruise, there, Captain Obvious? Of course life aint fair. Of course bad things happen. And sure folks do the right thing most of the time - in essence, they are 'politically correct' most of the time. But I don't wanna hear a bunch of racial slurs or stereotypes in my workplace, or on the news, or any other public outlet. Now, if you despise being politically correct, and you want the n-word hurled in your place of business, to each his own. But I don't, and I warrant that most folks support being politically correct in such situations.




Who says you gotta walk on eggshells? You don't wanna be politically correct, fine. Nobody is forcing you to keep your language neutral or your opinions without stereotypes. But if you're gonna actively campaign that we should do away with being PC in a public arena, good luck with it. Most folks like their broadcasts and day-to-day lives pretty politically correct. And i'd warrant that you're one of 'em.

I disagree, most people I know are fed up with political correctness. They long for the day when people spoke there minds. When people where real and said wht they meant. Not this fake ass ******footin I see from weak spineless people today.
 
I disagree, most people I know are fed up with political correctness. They long for the day when people spoke there minds. When people where real and said wht they meant. Not this fake ass ******footin I see from weak spineless people today.

I don't know your friends, obviously, but I find it difficult to believe that most folks want to do away with languages and practices which could offend a bunch of folks, but hey, maybe they do. I personally disagree with the people you cite who 'long for the day when people spoke their minds'. This is being politically correct we are talking about here - it's been my experience when folks talk about speaking your mind in the absence of being politically correct, it often means you wanna hurl a bunch of racial slurs around and not get in trouble for it. And I say have at it - Freedom of Speech and all that. But i'd prefer to keep that stuff out of the workplace, or out of a public broadcast service like the news.
 
Except that whenever you avoid using derogatory or bigoted terms, you are being politically correct. So, by definition, not being politically correct means that you're using such terminology.

Politically Correct n. Conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated.

You can call it that but I prefer to see it as simply not being a dick. And as a member of these United States, I have a Constitutional Amendment that protects my speech and the speech that I don't like, limiting libel and slander. Not to mention things like profiling can save your life, and profiling isn't exactly "Politically Correct"

Don't shoot the messenger, kid. I didn't invent the term. I just support it. Like I said, if you want to avoid being politically correct and hurl a bunch of slurs, have at it. I'd prefer folks to be PC in the workplace, on the news, and in everyday life, though.

Because without Political Correctness, common courtesy and workplace regulation go right out the window? Why do we need some arbitrary term, created by Marxists no less, to require us to be civil? This isn't school. We aren't little kids who have to be nice to each other. Sure it's nice when we are but we can make our own decisions on how we want to act and deal with the consequences accordingly.

You'd guess right on affirmative action and minimum wage (HINT: read the political lean under my avatar). You'd guess wrong on treating folks like immature children. That aint what being PC is all about.

HINT: I saw it, and in a very un-politically correct move, I made an assumption about you based on a stereotype. See, it's not all that bad. ;)

But you knew that.

Did I? Hmmm

Selling tickets for your cruise, there, Captain Obvious? Of course life aint fair. Of course bad things happen. And sure folks do the right thing most of the time - in essence, they are 'politically correct' most of the time. But I don't wanna hear a bunch of racial slurs or stereotypes in my workplace, or on the news, or any other public outlet. Now, if you despise being politically correct, and you want the n-word hurled in your place of business, to each his own. But I don't, and I warrant that most folks support being politically correct in such situations.

Because without Political Correctness, common courtesy and workplace regulation go right out the window? Why do we need some arbitrary term, created by Marxists no less, to require us to be civil? This isn't school. We aren't little kids who have to be nice to each other. Sure it's nice when we are but we can make our own decisions on how we want to act and deal with the consequences accordingly.

Who says you gotta walk on eggshells? You don't wanna be politically correct, fine. Nobody is forcing you to keep your language neutral or your opinions without stereotypes. But if you're gonna actively campaign that we should do away with being PC in a public arena, good luck with it. Most folks like their broadcasts and day-to-day lives pretty politically correct. And i'd warrant that you're one of 'em.

My point is those people can act civilly without having some stupid word or methodology for it. It's called being civil. You're promoting a point of view that was intended to unify the working class for the sole purpose of defeating their Capitalist Overlords when Marxism didn't work in WWI...I'm repeating myself...dammit...Anyways. We all know what is civil and what isn't, that's not the problem. It's when organizations like the ACLU push PC to its limits to get things like the Pledge of Allegiance taken out of our schools because of one line that some asshole doesn't want his kids to say for fear that it may brainwash them into Christianity. We all know what is right, wrong, and acceptable. We don't need guidelines to make sure we don't hurt each others feelings. All this politeness is giving me a headache. Sometimes we just need to be rude.
 
The guy was a nutcase. Now, if you want to label him a terrorist nutcase, fine. We all agree, and almost everyone - Muslims included - would work together to shut idiots like this down.

Where we apparently part ways is what is meant by "being PC". You wanna red flag some Islamic dude who says we should blow up a few buildings to spread Allah's message, I agree. But I get the impression that those of you crying the "being PC" message want to go far beyond that. I get the impression that you believe ALL Muslims are pretty much going to blow up something in the name of their god, and we should have no problem stereotyping them as such. In fact, I get the impression that some of you folks who are all anti-Muslim would be a lot more comfortable if we started taking things a lot further, like not allowing Muslims in the military to begin with.

So, maybe you can clear the air. Be the spokesman for the anti-PC crowd and let those of us pro-PC folks know exactly what you're looking for.

PC is good until it becomes extreme. Then it just becomes a hinderance and stupid. From the Active Duty stand point...allow me,

The bombing at Beirut had even military intelligence voicing that this was a tragic singular incident to be considered "isolated." But by the mid 90s, military intelligence was beginning to conclude and report that there was something else on the rise. The attacks on two hotels in Yemen, the "Black Hawk Down" incident in Somalia, and the bombings in Saudi Arabia showed the military that we had an enemy that was organized and determined.

It was around this time (1996~1997) that Ralph Peters (an Army Colonel and intelligence officer stationed in Europe at the time) and Anthony Zinni (a Marine General and CENTCOM CinC at the time) began noticing that the intel reports that were submitted to the White House via the Pentagon was missing pertinent information about the organized extremists of Islam as a threat in the Middle East. Apparently, the Clinton administration made it clear to the Pentagon that anything less than "politically correct" would be considered unacceptable. In other words, an extremist threat within a religion was too inconveniencing for President Clinton, who was more inclined to toss the military in and out of humanitarian missions inside Iraq, Bosnia, Haiti, and Kosovo. Even the first WTC bombing was considered a mere criminal act with careful attention given to protect the festring Islamic probblems in the Middle East that was reaching out for attention.

But Clinton would change his tune after a couple of our embassies were destroyed in Africa (1998). Of course, it really didn't matter at this point that he was trying to express to America that a rise in terrorism (carefully refraining from using Islamic for the most part) had become a true threat to our nation because our nation was too concerned with Monika Lewinski to hear about anything else. And when the U.S.S. Cole was attacked the typical American reaction was to treat as yet another isolated incident among the many others to be largely ignored. After all, it's only the military personel and a few associated civilians that were dying.

September 11, 2001. All of a sudden Americans cared. All of a sudden they were all about allowing the military to exact revenge. All of a sudden Americans "supported" the military. Did Democrats look back and apologize for dismissing Clinton's warnings as trivial and highly unlikely? Did Republicans look back and apologize for accusing Clinton of exaggerating this terrorist threat just to remove attention away from a blue dress? Did the rest of America step back and remember any of this? No. They instead looked at the government and asked how it didn't see it coming. Some how all the military intel that went ignored, thanks to political correctness, and later warnings by the very president who worshipped political correctness and infected it into the Pentagon, was removed from memory.

Since 9/11, the military has been bombarded with accusations from people who wanted to know every single military detail into military matters just so that they could slap their civilian stamps of approvals on them. Sand bags on the heads? -Too mean. Interrogations on the field of battle? -All interrogations are to carried out by "trained" personel back at the camps only. Martial law? -Too inhumane. Prisoners of war being treated as prisoners of war? -Too inhumane, give them lawyers and Qurans. Reports of military personel calling Arabs "camel jockeys?" - How dare they dehumanize the enemy they are trained to kill and slaughter.

Since 9/11, the military has been bombarded with classes to sensitize us to the Arab plight in the Middle East. We are reminded constantly that our enemies are just a very tiny few within the Islamic civilization even as we face a never ending supply of bodies. We are instructed to stay clear of "witch hunts" within our ranks even though they preach against the country they are supposed to be fighting for. Any class regarding Islamic terrorism is always followed with careful disclaimers so as not to upset any "mothers of America" out there that may be ease dropping on how we are "teaching our young impressionably soldiers to hate Muslims."

The media is scared to death to print a cartoon that may offend Muslims. Funny how cartoons depicting Christianity's silliness has remained open season. Is there an ongoing criticism towards Islam through Muhammed and Allah on the Family Guy like there is towards Christianity via Jesus and God? Even the industry of news and entertainment shy away from taking a look at even the extreme side of Islam for fear that it means that they are...how did you state it...."stereotyping them as such." For this, we fail to address the problems.

The fact is that if the U.S. Army investigated thoroughly and it was made public, his lawyer would parade the military around for witch hunting and harrassment. And the masses, who want every prisoner of war to have a lawyer and a Sunday Buffet, would eat it up. The same thing that brought Al-Queda to New York City encouraged this shooter at Fort Hood, which is a fear of looking at the obvious and calling a spade a spade. You see, it's too politicially incorrect to criticize a religion other than Christianity or Judaism. And it's certainly too politicially incorrect to investigate anybody with a MUslim name because, well, that just means a witch hunt is under foot and paranoia/fear mongering is the agenda.

We have and will continue to sacrifice American lives all for that retarded idea of political correctness. For the average American, we have been at war since 9/11. For the military, we had been at war longer than this, but denied our role. It's personal for us. The same kind of trash that killed 3,000 Americans on American soil had been killing military personel for a decade+.

Political correctness denies us the ability to stare at and label our enemy accordingly. Come to think of it...Pearl Harbor should have just been treated as an isolated incident. Lucky for us, our enemy back then came from an established empire with a national flag instead of a never ending breeding ground throughout the Asian region with a religious banner. Or were we stronger minded people back then to even care about such nonesense?
 
Politically Correct n. Conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated.

You can call it that but I prefer to see it as simply not being a dick. And as a member of these United States, I have a Constitutional Amendment that protects my speech and the speech that I don't like, limiting libel and slander. Not to mention things like profiling can save your life, and profiling isn't exactly "Politically Correct"

You can certainly call it whatever you want, but by definition, you are being 'politically correct' when you avoid doing such things. Again, I didn't invent the term, but I wholeheartedly support it. And it's my guess you do too, regardless of what you choose to call being 'politically correct'. And profiling can save your life? Most definitely. I'm sure that searching every Muslim on a daily basis in the military would have prevented this terrible act from occurring. But are you for searching Muslims simply because they're Muslims, and letting all non-Muslims avoid being searched? If so, that's where we disagree. Treat 'em all the same - you search one group, search the other.


Because without Political Correctness, common courtesy and workplace regulation go right out the window? Why do we need some arbitrary term, created by Marxists no less, to require us to be civil? This isn't school. We aren't little kids who have to be nice to each other. Sure it's nice when we are but we can make our own decisions on how we want to act and deal with the consequences accordingly.

You wanna change the term? How about 'not being a jerkface'. So, let's say we do just that - change the term, but the definition remains the same. Next thing you know, we have folks coming to these forums and everywhere else saying 'i'm tired of people not being jerkfaces'. It's the actions - not the term - that gets people.



HINT: I saw it, and in a very un-politically correct move, I made an assumption about you based on a stereotype. See, it's not all that bad. ;)

You weren't being politically incorrect. You said or did nothing offensive whatsoever - stereotype or not.

Because without Political Correctness, common courtesy and workplace regulation go right out the window? Why do we need some arbitrary term, created by Marxists no less, to require us to be civil? This isn't school. We aren't little kids who have to be nice to each other. Sure it's nice when we are but we can make our own decisions on how we want to act and deal with the consequences accordingly.

Political correctness aint a doctrine, homes. It's a definition. If you act a certain way, avoiding offensive language, stereotypes, and seek neutrality in dealing with races, ethnicities, genders, etc., you're being politically correct. If it's a doctrine, i'd love to read it.


My point is those people can act civilly without having some stupid word or methodology for it. It's called being civil. You're promoting a point of view that was intended to unify the working class for the sole purpose of defeating their Capitalist Overlords when Marxism didn't work in WWI...I'm repeating myself...dammit...Anyways. We all know what is civil and what isn't, that's not the problem. It's when organizations like the ACLU push PC to its limits to get things like the Pledge of Allegiance taken out of our schools because of one line that some asshole doesn't want his kids to say for fear that it may brainwash them into Christianity. We all know what is right, wrong, and acceptable. We don't need guidelines to make sure we don't hurt each others feelings. All this politeness is giving me a headache. Sometimes we just need to be rude.

You can be as rude as you want to, so long as you're willing to suffer the consequences. And I wouldn't call the dude who wants the Pledge being taken out of school as searching for political correctness. He's just being a whackjob. I mean seriously, who is offended by the Pledge of Allegiance? We can argue about removing the 'under God' line (personally I think it should go), but I certainly aint offended by it remaining in there. I just don't say it when I recite the Pledge.
 
What about highlighting that this was a pretty bad mistake, and there's gonna be some pretty serious accountability?

It's one of a hell of a double edged sword. The investigating officer has the option to be accused of harassing a man for his name and singoing him out for his rights of an opinion and risk his career... or take the chance that this guy is one of many who just shoots his mouth off. After all, he's a major...a doctor...nah.

Now people want accountability. Perhaps if the investigating officer didn't have to weigh his career on a maybe.

This is the same dilemma when it comes to homosexual activity. To investigate thoroughly or not to investigate thoroughly. That is the career question. How many people are eager to accuse a high ranking officer of being gay or a terrorist-to-be? This isn't the civilian world. A politician screws up, he still gets re-elected. A military man screws up, it's his career or people die or both.
 
Last edited:
It's one of a hell of a double edged sword. The investigating officer has the option to be accused of harassing a man for his name and singoing him out for his rights of an opinion and risk his career... or take the chance that this guy is one of many who just shoots his mouth off. After all, he's a major...a doctor...nah.

Now people want accountability. Perhaps if the investigating officer didn't have to weigh his career on a maybe.

This is the same dilemma when it comes to homosexual activity. To investigate thoroughly or not to investigate thoroughly. That is the career question. How many people are eager to accuse a high ranking officer of being gay or a terrorist-to-be? This isn't the civilian world. A politician screws up, he still gets re-elected. A military man screws up, it's his career or people die or both.

I agree, the people who would have had to stand up and defend their positions, would have faced a long and steep climb, and that is pathetic. That said, they should have risked that, they should have stood up, they should have defended their fellow soldiers. I am quite sure this would not have happened on a marine base, as PC is out, as it should be.

As far as homosexuals go, again, let them serve.....
 
PC is good until it becomes extreme. Then it just becomes a hinderance and stupid. From the Active Duty stand point...allow me,

You and I can both agree on this. Anything taken to the extreme is just bad - political correctness is no exception.

Regarding the military examples, I, too, have read much of what led up to the 9/11 attack on our country. Clinton Administration failing to act properly on the intel? Sure. Clinton Administration failing to act to save American lives because he wanted to be politically correct? I'd need to see some proof of that. I don't think anyone - even Clinton and his bunch - would sacrifice Americans because they didn't want to offend folks. I think that's pushing it. REALLY pushing it, to be honest.

We have and will continue to sacrifice American lives all for that retarded idea of political correctness. For the average American, we have been at war since 9/11. For the military, we had been at war longer than this, but denied our role. It's personal for us. The same kind of trash that killed 3,000 Americans on American soil had been killing military personel for a decade+.

Being politically correct aint retarded, and we certainly aint sacrificing American lives to be that way. Let's call it what it is - a mistake. This whackjob that shoots up an army base down at Fort Hood didn't get away with it because everyone wanted to be politically correct. The nutcase radicals that hijacked planes didn't get away with it because our society is willing to sacrifice folks in order to be non-offensive to Muslims. No, that just don't happen. And if it does, i'd love to see some cold, hard evidence - and that's something anyone who is anti-PC has never provided. And I don't mean a bunch of folks being pissed off because they want every Muslim searched and separated so they take to blogs and spew a bunch of nonsense that folks will hopefully take as fact. I mean some real, solid, social research-type stuff done by a gang of scientists and psychologists out to get to the bottom of things.

People get bent out of shape at this whole PC-thing, but there is a reason it came about. And it aint because we wanted planes slammed into buildings, or our Army bases shot up.


Political correctness denies us the ability to stare at and label our enemy accordingly. Come to think of it...Pearl Harbor should have just been treated as an isolated incident. Lucky for us, our enemy back then came from an established empire with a national flag instead of a never ending breeding ground throughout the Asian region with a religious banner. Or were we stronger minded people back then to even care about such nonesense?

What do you mean, stare at our enemy and label accordingly? Got an example here? From what i've seen, 'radical muslims' are called just that. See also terrorists, fundamentalist Islam, etc. No, I don't think we have any problem labelling the enemy. But we do have mistakes. 9/11 was one of 'em. So was this.
 
I don't know your friends, obviously, but I find it difficult to believe that most folks want to do away with languages and practices which could offend a bunch of folks, but hey, maybe they do. I personally disagree with the people you cite who 'long for the day when people spoke their minds'. This is being politically correct we are talking about here - it's been my experience when folks talk about speaking your mind in the absence of being politically correct, it often means you wanna hurl a bunch of racial slurs around and not get in trouble for it. And I say have at it - Freedom of Speech and all that. But i'd prefer to keep that stuff out of the workplace, or out of a public broadcast service like the news.

Excuse me, racial slures? WTF are you talkin about. I think you have the wrong idea of what I am getting at here. I am not talking about using racial slurs. Im talking about not parsing words. Im talking about saying what you mean and meaning what you say regardless of who it may offend. My point is some people are so freakin thin skinned they are offended way to easily. If all the red flag evidence points to Hasan being a jihadist why does the media continue to try and claim otherwise. All I want from the media is the facts. Tell me the facts and let me make up my own mind.
 
Back
Top Bottom