You have met them. Those oh so logical Libertarians where every acceptable thought has to be a verified part of a system. They have to tie themselves in logical knots to come to the proper logical conclusion.
Ralph has a few words about that.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds,
Now that I'm a Republican I no longer have to compromise my logic to come to a predetermined conclusion. What a relief.
Well any way - we are neural computers, not digital logic machines. Correlation machines not computing machines (generally). Our reasoning for the most part is different. Einstein didn't compute all the partial derivatives when he wanted to pick up a glass of water.
Welcome to the world of cognitive dissonance, in which we know in our hearts that we must never allow Satan an inroad through communism or theocracy, but don't want to be dogmatic about it.
I can only be a Republican for a short while, and then the nausea gets me and I give up. Usually because of some Republican going on about the Married Gay Menace.
Hmm... Maybe it will work better once pot is legal. Marijuana helps with nausea.
:: Fritz November 7, 2009 01:54 AM
Fritz,
Once the Democrats destroy the economy every one will be a menace. So the Democrats will bring us equality.
=========
And before you make fun of me guys - how many logical people do you know across classes. The American voter? Easily swayed by "making history".
And you guys tell me that logic rules? Puuuhhhhlease.
Humans tend to make decisions by pattern recognition not calculation. Mostly.
And for the sake of argument suppose a question has a range of answers. How do you pick. You pick patterns you are familiar with. Peace or war? Is it 1938? Or are we in a period of hope similar to the founding of the UN?
We sold ourselves for another spin on the merry-go-round. IMO our hope is that the Chinese might thoroughly screw up their economy. It's not 1938 because the Chinese are not into invading, only in owning.
:: Fritz November 7, 2009 02:32 AM
I never use that idiotic quote from Emerson. His other writings are equally incoherent.
:: Brett November 7, 2009 07:57 AM
Female Shoots Jihadi (05:28 PM)
Yes indeed. A female police officer, Sgt. Kimberly Munley, put an end to jihadi Nidal Malik Hasan's murderous rampage at Fort Hood.
A female civilian police officer is being hailed as a hero in the aftermath of a gunman's rampage at Fort Hood -- an outbreak of violence that the officer is credited with ending by shooting the alleged gunman four times despite being shot herself.
The attack killed 13 people and wounded 30 others at the Texas military post, but the carnage ended there, thanks to the quick response of Fort Hood Police Sgt. Kimberly Munley.
Munley and her partner responded within three minutes of reports of gunfire on Thursday, Lt. Gen. Bob Cone said Friday. Authorities say Munley, 34, exchanged fire with the gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who remains comatose in a Texas hospital. Munley is in stable condition, officials said.
"It was an amazing and an aggressive performance by this police officer," Cone said.
Yes it was. And I'm sure it had to gall the jihadi to be taken down by one of our ladies. You don't mess with American women.
Which reminds me of Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester who together with Sgt. Timothy F. Nein charged an ambush by at least 34 men in Iraq. The final count for the enemy was 27 dead, six wounded, and one captured.
Don't f*** with our women you jihadi bastards. Because they will shoot your ass. And if you are sufficiently unlucky you will get bagged. Body bagged.
I married a sturdy Midwest girl. She likes guns. A true credit to her gender.
But I love the Rondstadt version too. When I was working on a microprocessor system for Seeburg in '78 I worked in a 8 by 12 concrete wall room with a juke box so I cranked it up and Rondstadt's version was in the mix. I had a great time.
Voters ousted Democratic supervisors in Yorktown and Lewisboro and elected GOP majorities in both towns, as they did in North Castle, North Salem and Somers. A 24-year-old Republican even cracked the all-Democratic Ossining Town Board.
As one specific example, Yorktown shifted from a Town Board of 4-1Democrat to 3-2 Republican.
The issues that caused the stunning GOP Wins? Taxes and the Economy.
And what about that Libertarian thing?
Democrat elected officials have become such a pariah in this heavily Blue New York City suburb that one Democrat even got beat by a Libertarian.
Total of 8 Libertarian Victories throughout Pennsylvania
Bill Beeman is a former Libertarian Party member. He recently switched parties to Republican, and became the non-establishment GOP nominee for County Council District 6 in Erie, Pennsylvania. He was staunchly opposed by the local establishment.
Libertarian Republican goes on to discuss the other seven wins. Follow the link.
Maybe this has something to do with my suggestion that Republicans need a rebranding campaign.
Smaller government and lower spending.
And this time we really mean it.
We are coming to get you elected bastards who think you are our masters. This is America you sons of bitches and the People Are The Masters. You are our servants. Get it mofos?
This is in honor of the fallen at Fort Hood and for the wounded who will need our ongoing help. Here is one way to help:
Project Valour-IT helps provide voice-controlled/adaptive laptop computers and other technology to support Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines recovering from hand wounds and other severe injuries. Items supplied include:
# Voice-controlled Laptops - Operated by speaking into a microphone or using other adaptive technologies, they allow the wounded to maintain connections with the rest of the world during recovery.
# Wii Video Game Systems - Whole-body game systems increase motivation and speed recovery when used under the guidance of physical therapists in therapy sessions (donated only to medical facilities).
# Personal GPS - Handheld GPS devices build self-confidence and independence by compensating for short-term memory loss and organizational challenges related to severe TBI and severe PTSD.
From Veeshir (who has left so many helpful comments here that I treat an email from him like a homework assignment), my attention was directed to a perfect -- perfectly dreadful that is -- example of the contempt some of our highest elected officials have for the Constitution:
James O'Connor, Burris's communications director, later told CNSNews.com that although the word "health" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution, the senator was referring to the Preamble of the Constitution which says the following:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The Preamble to the Constitution is introductory in nature, and has nothing to do with defining the limited powers which are granted to the federal government. While promoting the general welfare is a purpose, as is securing the blessings of liberty, the way these things are intended to be accomplished is by ensuring limitations on government which the Constitution spells out.
But don't trust me. Here's what constitutional author James Madison had to say:
If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions. (James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792 Madison 1865, I, page 546)
If anything can be done in the name of "promoting the General Welfare," then why bother enumerating the powers of the federal government? And why stress the government's limitations in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments?
As Walter Williams pointed out not long ago, Madison later added this:
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
Ditto, Thomas Jefferson:
"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
Opined Veeshir,
I know it's just Burris now, but it'll spread.
And when you try to show them those comments you showed me when I (facetiously) said that, you'll be ignored.
If they can deny that there's a right to bear arms while simultaneously saying that there is a right to abortion, they can do anything with that document.
[Hoyer] added that Congress has "broad authority" to force Americans to purchase other things as well, so long as it was trying to promote "the general welfare."
How do people like Hoyer get and stay elected? The man is simply wrong, wrong, wrong. And not just wrong, he's shockingly wrong.
Either the man has no idea what the Constitution or federalism means or else he's a demagogue.
"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
While that purports to be a quote from Federalist #41, the words do not appear in the text of Federalist 41 that the commenter linked and claimed to be quoting! Nor could I find it in this version of Federalist 41. That does not mean that Madison didn't say it, though; only that it doesn't appear to be where it's proponents say it is.
Sorry if I sound like a crank, but here's the problem. I loved reading the above purported quote from Madison, and I'd love nothing more than to be able to cite it, as it sounds as if it was specifically written to rebut the noxious position of Steny Hoyer. I hate to be a spoilsport, but if I am unable to find it at the source* provided, I really can't cite it in good faith. This should not be a game of stuffing words in your favorite founder's mouth and then citing them because you like them. Yet the above is all over the Internet, attributed to Federalist 41. Or else simply quoted without a source, as it is here. That prompted this very reasonable comment:
Where is this quote from? When did he say/where did he write this?
To which the "Editor, Liberty Quotes" replies,
Madison is referring to a bill to subsidize cod fisherman introduced in the first year of the new Congress
http://www.barefootsworld.net/nortonuc12.html
OK, so now it's a quote about a cod fishing bounty. But that's not Federalist 41. Instead, the quote is said to be taken from a book by Thomas James Norton, and the book is quoted here and here. That wasn't quite not quite good enough for me, because I was already burned by the Federalist 41 citation, so I looked further. Finally, I found the entire quote -- in the text of a House debate "On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties."
Anyway, it's not Federalist 41, but I'm delighted to help do my part to save it from the fate of unsourced or badly sourced quotes. Why would anyone need to that, when what Madison did say in Federalist 41 is more than adequate to rebut Steny Hoyer?
It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.
Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms "to raise money for the general welfare."
But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity, which, as we are reduced to the dilemma of charging either on the authors of the objection or on the authors of the Constitution, we must take the liberty of supposing, had not its origin with the latter.
The objection here is the more extraordinary, as it appears that the language used by the convention is a copy from the articles of Confederation. The objects of the Union among the States, as described in article third, are "their common defense, security of their liberties, and mutual and general welfare." The terms of article eighth are still more identical: "All charges of war and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury," etc. A similar language again occurs in article ninth. Construe either of these articles by the rules which would justify the construction put on the new Constitution, and they vest in the existing Congress a power to legislate in all cases whatsoever. But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare?
It's been a bit of a chore, but the bottom line is that Steny Hoyer stands refuted. By constitutional author James Madison. (Not that a little thing like being refuted would matter to someone like that, but still...)
* By the way, it's always a good idea to beware of unsourced Madison quotes, of which there are many floating about. The general rule has long been that the burden is on whoever does the quoting to come up with a verifiable source. Repetition on the Internet is not proof of anything.
:: Comments left behind ::
I thought that the expansion of federal power has rested on the commerce clause and the necessary and proper clause.
"The first authentic use of 73 is in the publication The National Telegraphic Review and Operators' Guide, first published in April 1857. At that time, 73 meant "My love to you"!
So, the true 10-year cost of Obamacare is... $1.8 trillion.
A trillion in new taxes, $800B in new deficit spending (oh, excuse me, I mean "imaginary Medicare cuts that will never happen"). And the next ten years are going to be even worse.
I would just like one candidate to come forward and seek office on the platform that he will do everything possible to put Pelosi, Reid, et al, in jail for this absolute theft and abuse of power.
I know it won't ever happen. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
:: hoss November 6, 2009 11:01 AM
America's dysfunctional relationship with radical Wahhabism (09:24 AM)
Linking my earlier post about the Fort Hood shooting, M. Simon quoted what I said about the shooter's imam:
Hasan's imam Faizul Khan is no ordinary imam. He is on the Board of Directors of the ISNA, a radical Wahhabi outfit which "enforces extremist Wahhabi theological writ in America's mosques.
Such people and their murderous ideology are a huge problem in this country -- and the biggest reason is our friendship with -- and dependence on -- Saudi Arabia, which is the biggest sponsor of radical Wahhabism. I am sick to death of Saudi influence and creeping Wahhabism paid for with our petrodollars, and have been for years. Sometimes when I fill my tank I wonder whether it would be better to patronize only the companies that don't buy Saudi oil, but then I'd be giving the money to Hugo Chavez. Seriously, our dysfunctional relationship with the Saudis is so odious that after a massacre like yesterday's, I'm tempted to scream "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!"
Anyway, I am sure that Simon's reaction to what I said would be shared by a lot of people:
The Whabists need to be expelled from America. Whether they are native born or foreign born.
Radical Islam is not a religion. It is a traitorous political party masquerading as a religion and should be treated as such.
Under our Constitution, though, citizens cannot be expelled from America for their opinions. Not even citizens who agree with radical Wahhabism. I say this as someone who livedforyearsaround the corner from a Saudi-funded madrassa. Much as I disliked having people who subscribed to this poison in my neighborhood, had any native born Americans among them been rounded up and deported I would have been right there on the front lines with the ACLU, because if one administration can round up Americans for being Wahhabists, what's to stop another from rounding them up for being "radical rightists"? Or infidels? However, if Americans belong to enemy organizations, they can be made to register as foreign agents and put under surveillance, just as Communist Party members once were.
At the very least, it seems like a no-brainer they should not be given positions as officers in the military for God's sake.
But that latter is up to the Commander in Chief, isn't it?
Hmmm....
Perhaps someone should ask the president why the military he commands says no to gays and yes to radical Wahhabists.
MORE: Ralph Peters excoriates the total inability of the president, the media, or military to call Hasan's act what it is -- terrorism -- and offers a grim prediction:
I guarantee you that the Obama administration's non-response to the Ft. Hood attack will mock the memory of our dead.
Read it all.
And Ann Althouse wants to know how this man was allowed to become an Army psychiatrist:
I want to know why what was wrong with Hasan was not detected? Was he given a pass because he was Muslim? Is there a fear of suspecting or offending Muslims in the military that keeps people who should see signs of dysfunction from acknowledging what they see or doing anything about it? On the other hand, if it really is the case that people in the military are harassing Muslims, that too should not be ignored. There should be rigorous equality for Muslims. It shouldn't even be necessary to point out what is obvious: Muslims in the military shouldn't experience special treatment either of a positive or a negative kind.
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.
The fact that a nutcase like that was made a Major in the United States Army and entrusted to to deal with soldiers' mental problems ought to outrage people even if he hadn't committed mass murder. I'm with Ralph Peters on this one:
Now 12 soldiers and a security guard lie dead. 31 soldiers were wounded, 28 of them seriously. If heads don't roll in this maggot's chain of command, the Army will have shamed itself beyond moral redemption.
MORE: ShrinkWrapped (who is a psychoanalyst) takes a critical look at the Islamic terrorist from from a psychiatric point of view, and warns that reacting in a P.C. manner only aggravates the situation:
When the immediate reaction of Islamic spokesmen is to warn everyone of Islamophobia, they too are supporting the projection and externalization that is the hallmark of radical Islam and the "lone, psychiatrically deranged" paranoid.
Every effort should be made to resolutely maintain a posture that specifically and emphatically denies the use of projection and externalization to the radical Islamists. Groups like CAIR should be confronted by our MSM and government on a regular basis to expose their use of such psychological processes for all to see. Whenever a "lone, psychiatrically deranged" individual commits an atrocity, we must be alert to attempts to shift the psychological impetus for the attack from the attacker to the surround. It is an unhappy reality that confronting a paranoid's projection and externalization does not work in a therapeutic context. It either convinces the paranoid that you are part of the persecutory conspiracy or, if accepted and internalized, leads to significant depression. However, we cannot treat terror as a therapeutic situation. When Muslims support, in their speech and writing, convictions that reflect the use of projection and externalization, they must be considered potential dangers to the community. This requires a form of "racial profiling" but the alternative is to wait for an atrocity of such significant proportions that "lone, psychiatrically deranged" non-Muslims begin to take things into their own hands.
I'd also like to know whether Hasan fits the profile common to many young Muslims in Europe whose parents came to the West seeking better lives only to see their children indoctrinated by religious viewsmore radical than what they'd left behind.
Psychologist Dr. Helen asks a number of good questions:
This man was being entrusted with the mental health of soldiers, and no one could be bothered to take the time to find out if he was mentally stable himself? After a poor review, remarks that make you wonder which side this guy was on, and possible writings on a web posting that are troubling, he was not investigated?
Was it political correctness and concern for his Muslim heritage that kept officials from looking further into his mental health? Was the army so desperate for a psychiatrist (there is always a shortage) they didn't dare do anything?
The public deserves an explanation.
I agree.
:: Comments left behind ::
I agree with you. And I knew the Constitution is/was an impediment.
OTOH we may find ourselves in a situation - not now and hopefully not ever - where these attacks get more frequent and the government does nothing. (say the Whabists have tied our legal system in knots)
Blood will then run in the streets. Vigilante justice will obtain. I'm not sure I like that option better than preventive deportation.
How to square that circle?
At the very least we can deport non-citizens as a preventive measure.
For whatever reason, Hasan snapped. Simple explanation. He went crazy and religion was his justification for murder and revenge. From all the posts on numerous websites, his decline started months ago and no one paid any attention to his growing insanity. Maybe all shrinks act violent in their off time?
I'm not trying to either justify the murders or excuse Islamic terrorism. I think it's just a case that he went nuts and found an object to focus on.
The scary part though, is how many soft targets may now be exploited by more die hard terrorists? We all know it's only a matter of time before Beslans' start occurring here.
:: hoss November 6, 2009 09:46 AM
We are fighting a war against an ideology we are funding.
If it weren't for oil, the Saudis would be an odd bunch of goat-herders, whose quaint religion we might read about in the National Geographic.
I think it's monstrous that this man was basically indoctrinated by means of money derived from petrodollars.
Problem is, cutting off that source of funding would expensive...
American energy policies has transfered vast weath to repressive and odious Middle Eatern Regimes, why should one be surprised that they use their wealth to placate internal threats by redirecting their activities outward?
:: Brad November 6, 2009 10:03 AM
Simon --
Europe is dead. I read sometime ago that France will be over 50% Muslim by 2011. UK is going nuts between immigrants and citizens. When the 'youths' are not burning and torching in the suburbs, the left is apologizing for and to them regardless.
Melanie Phillips posted a week a two ago about the Labour plan to turn UK into a multi-cult society's massive failure.
Germany is in constant daily battles with Turks, Arabs and the police.
Holland gives more rights to Muslims than it's citizens over fears of cartoons.
The list is long and almost endless. The plot by an evil, muslim cleric in the 70's to infiltrate and re-populate Europe and the world worked. Leftist supporting asskissers like Dulles and his ilk, have killed western society.
:: hoss November 6, 2009 10:06 AM
Eric,
It wouldn't be THAT expensive. What could be done is an AGRESSIVE program to develop American oil resources to drive down the price of oil such that the Saudis and oil tics couldn't meet their payrolls.
There are down sides to that: we would use up our remaining reserves faster than is good for us in the long run.
Or an all out R&D program to develop oil substitutes that are cheaper than oil. That would take a little longer.
Coal throughout the MidWest plains. Natural Gas in the ArkLaMiss. Huge oil fields in the AWR.
Can't upset environmentalists though. They need gas, shoes, etc., to go to oil exploitation rallies but don't want to see any refineries on the way there. Oil fields are just so icky......
Regarding not supporting Saudi Arabia with petrodollars, if you're in the Northeast Sunoco (I believe) does not import oil from the Persian Gulf, neither does BP (theirs comes from the North Sea; as for Chavez, it is my understanding that only Citgo is Venezuelan owned.
Some time ago, I saw online a list of oil companies that do not use the Persian gulf as their source, I don't have a link, bu t you may want to do a search.
On a larger scale, there are many people who feel that they don't want to support radical Islam with U.S. dollars. The solution is simple;begin drilling and using the oil and natural gas reserves in our own country even while we move toward renewable sources.
They don't want to do that either. They're like a wealthy person sitting on their cash and wearing shoes with holes, all the time complaining that their feet are getting wet.
:: T November 6, 2009 10:58 AM
BP exploits out of the Caribbean, Kazakistan, and the Sudan. They support, albeit indirectly, the slaughter in Southern Sudan.
:: Hoss November 6, 2009 12:42 PM
Libertarian Wins In Queens (04:06 AM)
It seems that a Libertarian can actually win in one of the most liberal areas of the country. New York City.
Libertarian Dan Halloran wins City Council Seat in New York City
Dan Halloran was elected to the Queens City Council in District 19. He was nominated by the Republican, Conservative, Independent and Libertarian parties. Dan is simultaneously a Libertarian Party member and a registered Republican. He serves as State Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus.
Let me explain it for my electorally challenged friends. Moderates decide elections. And any one running on a Libertarian Platform is definitely moderate compared to the core of the Republican Party.
Sorry you missed my point so completely on the theocrat comment.
It was not to accuse anyone of being a theocrat, though that is what those who would supplant the Constitution with the New Testement most certainly are, but only to say those charges are inevitable when the social issues take center stage. Why play into them?
The leftpress will seize, bend, lie, and mailiciously contort any hint of religion because it feeds their theocrat boogeyman narrative. Knowing this, how could emphasizing religious beliefs possibly build a larger audience than promoting fiscal sanity and smaller government?
I would defend to the death your right to practice your religion but kill you in a heartbeat if you abuse my constitution to force it on me.
I am not suggesting we keep the socons off the bus, just away from the steering wheel, and especially the microphone. Moderates, you know, the ones that actually decide elections, are about as comfortable with blatant displays of religiosity as socons are with are with a cross dresser in a gay pride parade.
Frank has a few more words on the subject and you should follow the link and read them. He is good. Damn good. Of course the fact that I agree with him doesn't hurt.
Here is what I think should be done: Keep repeating "I'm against abortion but I believe reproduction is none of the government's business". The Palin strategy.
Yes it is offensive to my pro-life friends. But keep in mind that in America elections are won among the least committed voters. So will it be smaller government and lower spending or Democrat Rule as far into the future as you can imagine?
Resist Net has this from Walid Shoebat a former jihadist.
TO WHAT LEVEL IS US MILITARY, FBI, CIA, DEPT. OF HOMELAND SECURITY INFILTRATED W. MUSLIM JIHADISTS?
In the wake of the cowardly Ft. Hoot mass fatal shooting of 11 or more unarmed U.S. soldiers by Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan, America has the right to know the truth about sleeper war cells in the U.S.
Walid Shoebat Former Islamic Terrorist who was once part of Jihad war cells in the US and understands fully the mindset of terrorists has been warning America of the potential of this very type of tragedy and worse for many years.
Shoebat contends that the US Army, Navy, Air Force, FBI, CIA, Dept. of Homeland Security are all infiltrated with Muslim Extremists.
"America needs to awaken from its sleep and its unwillingness to face the issue of fundamentalist Islam in our midst which undoubtedly is the cause of the tragedy in Ft Hood" says Mr. Shoebat, adding, "Some very serious decisions need to made when it comes to having Muslims protecting our country, as it is impossible to know whether they maybe honorable or foxes in the hen house."
-- Nidal Malik Hasan is NOT a convert but Jordanian Muslim SINCE BIRTH! Infiltration by Islamists in the military is a fact My own brother served in the United States Air Force and his loyalty was to his ideology, yet allowing him to guard nuclear facilities should be on check. Religion is a sensitive issue but we should not undermine our security from fear of 'Islamophobia.'
-- Muslims by Sharia Law are mandated never to fight Muslims. Muslim soldiers need to be questioned whether this is an issue, yet we virtually never question them.
-- Converts to Islam are susceptible to Islamization, the case of Sgt. Hassan Akbar from Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait killed two Americans and was influenced by the MSU (Muslim Student Association), also Ali Muhammad a double agent that worked for the FBI and collaborated with Al-Qaeda
-- Speaking at the Air Force Academy in Colorado to expose the infiltration of Islamist. Not only were over a hundred of Middle Eastern Muslims allowed to infiltrate, but were also allowed to threaten us with death with no repercussions whatsoever -- Omar Khalifa, a student, got away with the threats and while Khalifa was related to Osama Bin Laden's son-in-law, he was largely ignored!
-- At the Marines, our event was cancelled as to 'not to offend Saudi visitors. At Camp Bullis was a Muslim in the U.S army who said he was 'offended' that I spoke on the issue of terrorism. Has 'Political correctness' seeped into our military apparatus to the point where no one can say anything lest they risk we offend someone? When Americans are being killed,all issues should be on the table.
-- The big question: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome or Terrorism?
Nidal never served in Iraq or Afghanistan to qualify as a candidate for Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome.
First off. I'm one of the few, the proud, the Jews. Heh. Also US Navy. Yank them rods. (Nuke qualified a very long time ago)
Hasan's imam Faizul Khan is no ordinary imam. He is on the Board of Directors of the ISNA, a radical Wahhabi outfit which "enforces extremist Wahhabi theological writ in America's mosques."
So that is one way to tell. The Whabists need to be expelled from America. Whether they are native born or foreign born.
Radical Islam is not a religion. It is a traitorous political party masquerading as a religion and should be treated as such.
via AtlasShrugs...now properly sanitized for reading at CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NYT
Washington - A top US Army official confirmed Friday that the suspect in the killing of at least 13 people at a Texas army base likely shouted Jesus Christ' (God is great) before opening fire.
Army Lieutenant General Robert Cone, commander of the Fort Hood, Texas, base where the shootings took place on Thursday, made the comment in answer to a question from NBC news.
Cone said 'there are first hand accounts' to the effect that the suspect, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, had yelled the Christian religious chant.
NBC reported that the death toll had risen to 13, as one of the victims had died overnight.
The 39-year-old suspect in the killings is a US Army psychiatrist described as a devout Christian who opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and had been trying to resign from the Army, according to media reports Friday.
Another 30 people were injured in the shootings. All but two were members of the military, officials said Thursday.
Cone said Thursday that investigators, who now include the FBI, had not ruled out the possibility it was a terrorist attack, but said evidence indicated it was more than likely a fundamentalist uprsing.
/sarc off/
:: hoss November 6, 2009 08:54 AM
hoss,
I get your point. And don't disagree with it. For now. See my replies to Eric's
I consider Rand's non-fiction to be her real intellectual contribution. As art, her fiction is lame, ludicrous characterization and and monologic dialogue.
:: Brett November 6, 2009 08:14 AM
Thursday, November 5, 2009
"the name tells us a lot" (05:44 PM)
That's what Shepard Smith on Fox News just said about the officer who is described as the primary gunman who killed 12 people and wounded 31 in a mass shooting at Fort Hood Texas.
He is described as "a convert to Islam" and a major who was about to deploy to Iraq, and who was known to be upset about the fact that he was about to deploy.
They are not giving out the name on Fox News, although they keep saying "We've been given a name" and "the name tells us a lot."
This aroused my curiosity, so I checked around online. According to this news site, the shooter has been identified as Malik Nadal Hasan:
Fort Hood, TX (WSYR-TV/ABC News) - Twelve people have been killed and 31 wounded in a shooting spree at a Texas military base by what officials believe was possibly carried out by an Army officer.
The suspected gunman was identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan.
The shooter was killed and two other suspects, who are also soldiers, have been apprehended, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone said.
Apparently there were two other suspects, so there seems to have been a plot.
MORE: The dead suspect's name is all over the Internet, so I don't know why Fox is stalling in reporting it.
Frankly, I'm not surprised. We live in a time when "mainstream" American Muslimssupport a violent, murderous advocate of a Sharia state in the United States (also a convert to Islam) and call him a "respected Imam" after a fatal shootout with the FBI.
MORE: At 5:56 p.m. Shepard Smith explained that they will not release the suspect's name until the Pentagon confirms it.
Suspects names have become more sensitive than ever, haven't they?
AND MORE: As of 6:03 p.m., Fox News had confirmed the name from the Pentagon. It was Major Malik Nadal Hasan.
I hope no one calls the murderous bastard a martyr, but they probably will.
My opinion is that I hope he rots in hell.
AFTERTHOUGHT: If Major Malik Nadal Hasan was a convert to Islam as is being reported, does that mean he originally had another name?
If so, I assume that will be reported eventually, but these days I don't like to take anything for granted.
Is it reasonable to speculate that a mass shooting of U.S. soldiers (apparently by multiple plotters) might have been, um, an act of war?
MORE: Glenn Reynolds has a roundup of links, and says this:
Note that early reports are usually wrong, but it sounds quite bad, and likely to have some sort of terror connection. But stay tuned.
It certainly doesn't look like the act of a lone nut.
The shooter was killed and two other suspects, who are also soldiers, have been apprehended, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone said.
Hasan allegedly opened fire and killed 11 people on the base before he was shot dead, bringing the total number of fatalities to 12.
The general said there were "eyewitness accounts of more than one shooter," and the others were tracked to an adjacent facility.
Cone called the attack "a terrible tragedy, stunning." He said the community was "absolutely devastated."
According to sources, Hasan attended the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, MD. He graduated in 2003 with a degree in Osteopathy and later finished his residency as a psychiatrist.
In 2009, Hasan completed a fellowship in Disaster and Preventive Psychiatry at the Center for Traumatic Stress.
Still no confirmation on the report that he's a convert to Islam.
There's also this:
The CounterTerrorist Unit said they have "no word" yet on whether this incident was terrorism-related.
People are entitled to know. Or are they?
MORE: Regarding the ongoing mystery of the man's background, investigators say they're not clear on his religion or how and when he got his name (which strikes me as peculiar, for the Army would keep records on all officers):
A source tells the CBS News investigates team that Hasan is a licensed psychiatrist in Bethesda, Md. He is a drug and rehab specialist who got his Virginia psychiatry license July 12, 2005.
It was not known whether he was treating people at the base.
Officials says it was not clear what Hasan's religion was, but investigators are trying to determine if Hasan was his birth name or if he may have changed his name and converted to the Islamic faith at some point.
According to the Army Times, Hasan was promoted to Major, medical corps on April 22, 2009.
As of now, the lead agency for the investigation would be US Army Criminal Investigation Command, know by its historic initials of CID, because the crimes took place on Army territory. Interagency cooperation with the FBI and ATF and state law enforcement agencies is already being done. If, however, the shootings are deemed to be terrorism (perhaps an Islamist connection), by federal law the FBI is the lead agency for all terrorism investigations.
In 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq by American and allied forces, Sgt. Asan Akbar of the 101st Airborne Division's 326th Engineer Battalion threw a grenade into a tent area in Kuwait filled with 101st troops, killing one and wounding 15. He said his Muslim religion was a factor in the attack.
US officials have been concerned about Islamist infiltration of the US military for many years. See this statement of J. Michael Waller, Professor of International Communication, Institute of World Politics, before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary six years ago: Terrorist Recruitment and Infiltration in the United States: Prisons and Military as an Operational Base.
And according to a report I found here (which also confirms the Damascus University education), Hasan was born in Virginia to Jordanian parents.
And if this man was some sort of enemy agent, he should not have been in the Army in the first place.
AND MORE: The latest reports are that Hasan is alive:
Authorities said immediately after the shootings that they had killed the suspected shooter, but later in the evening they recanted and said that he was alive and in stable condition at a hospital, watched by a guard.
"His death is not imminent," said Lt. Gen. Bob Cone at Fort Hood. He offered little explanation for the mistake, other than to say there was confusion at the hospital.
A law enforcement official identified the shooting suspect as Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the case publicly.
The violence was believed to be the worst mass shooting in history at a U.S. military base.
I still hope he rots in hell, as soon as possible.
(Assuming he did it, of course. He now becomes the alleged shooter.)
MORE: In yet another (but more recent) version of the story, Hasan is now described as the only suspect in the case:
The U.S. soldier accused of carrying out a mass killing at Fort Hood in Texas is still alive and in custody according to the U.S. military, with no other suspects.
Twelve people were killed and over 30 injured in the shooting at the world's largest military base.
Ford Hood commander Lt. Gen. Robert Cone said Army psychiatrist Major Malik Nadal Hasan is the only suspect in the shooting, saying he was shot "multiple times" but would not reveal his condition except to say his death is not imminent.
Lt. Gen. Cone refused to make any comment about Major Hasan, except to confirm he was the suspect and one of the firearms he carried was a semi automatic weapon.
He said the shootings took place in two facilities adjacent to each other, and the quick actions of military personnel prevented more deaths. He talked of soldiers ripping their uniforms apart and applying first aid on the scene to save lives.
Lt. Gen. Cone said the evidence does not suggest it was a terrorist attack, but limited his comments saying he wanted to make sure he only gave the facts.
The FBI was assisting the military in the investigation which was on-going, he said.
As to why they said there were other shooters, who knows?
I think it's going to take some time to get the facts.
MORE: Something does not make sense. There still persistent reports that the man converted to Islam. According to the Huffington Post, "late in life":
Arab and Muslim political groups are bracing themselves for a wave of anger and attacks after news broke on Thursday that the primary suspect behind the shooting deaths of twelve soldiers at Fort Hood had a Arabic and/or Muslim-sounding name.
Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a native of Virginia, is believed to have been responsible for opening fire on his fellow soldiers at the U.S. Army base.
It was not immediately clear whether Nidal Malik Hasan was, in fact, a Muslim, though reports surfaced that he had converted to the religion late in life.
Everyone agrees that Major Hasan was Muslim. Most say that he was a recent convert, but his cousin says that he had been a Muslim all his life.
And now, the motive. The cousin says that Major Hasan had taken a great deal of "harassment" over his Muslim faith and his Middle Eastern heritage, and had expressed distress over his pending deployment. But Colonel Terry Lee USA (retired), who once worked with Major Hasan, says that he had expressed sympathy with Abdulhakim Bledsoe, the suspect in the shooting at a Little Rock, AR, recruiting office last summer, and even said that "it's about time that Muslims stood up against the aggressors," and words to similar effect. This officer further states that Hasan had had similar arguments with several people, on such themes as whether Muslim should fight Muslim. (Furthermore, Col. Lee says that no one ever "harassed" Hasan or called him any racial names. Hasan, not any of the others, started those arguments.)
If a Colonel knew that Hasan had expressed sympathy with the shooter at the recruiting office, why didn't he speak up?
Something does not make sense about the man being a "recent convert," because if he was born with a Muslim name to Muslim parents, he is presumably Muslim from birth.
Unless "recent convert" means he was a recent convert to a radical form of Islamic fundamentalism.
Video here of Hasan's comments on the Little Rock incident. He's quoted as saying that "maybe the Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor," and even "strap bombs on and go into Time Square."
Colonel Lee (who knew him) asks, "Why was he transferred to Fort Hood?"
I have to ask a question.
Why the hell was he allowed to be in the Army?
And why did they say he was dead?
I'm beginning to smell something fishy about the whole thing.
The $64,000 questions: What was he doing at Fort Hood among the population if he thought suicide bombers were heroes? And why are the feds tipping the AP about this if they haven't even confirmed that he was the author yet?
And,
So here's where we are right now, near 11 p.m. ET. This guy raged about Muslims standing up to aggressors, praised suicide bombers, and the lead theory in the media is ... PTSD? For a guy who's ... never been deployed? A friend just e-mailed me with a good question: Even if he was suffering from some type of trauma from listening to vets' war stories, shouldn't a shrink trained in dealing with trauma been able to diagnose himself and seek treatment?
PTSD is about as lame an explanation as you can get.
If this guy had PTSD, then so did Mohammad Atta, and so does Osama bin Laden. And Timothy McVeigh. And I'm sure Stalin and Hitler did too.
Since when do we put incidental psychological factors ahead of primary motivations?
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.
And the Army promoted this religious nut to Major? Alllahpundit also reports this:
I'm hearing on Twitter that Fox interviewed one of his neighbors within the last half-hour or so and that the neighbor claims Hasan was handing out Korans just this morning. Does anyone have video? Or is this a bad lead? Smells fishy to me but multiple people have mentioned it.
A lot of things smell fishy.
I think there's a lot of disinformation floating around and there's sure to be more.
At least six months ago, Hasan came to the attention of law enforcement officials because of Internet postings about suicide bombings and other threats, including posts that equated suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on a grenade to save the lives of their comrades.
Story continues below
They had not determined for certain whether Hasan is the author of the posting, and a formal investigation had not been opened before the shooting, said law enforcement officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the case.
One of the officials said late Thursday that federal search warrants were being drawn up to authorize the seizure of Hasan's computer.
Retired Army Col. Terry Lee, who said he worked with Hasan, told Fox News that Hasan had hoped President Barack Obama would pull troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Lee said Hasan got into frequent arguments with others in the military who supported the wars, and had tried hard to prevent his pending deployment.
Hasan attended prayers regularly when he lived outside Washington, often in his Army uniform, said Faizul Khan, a former imam at a mosque Hasan attended in Silver Spring, Md. He said Hasan was a lifelong Muslim.
"I got the impression that he was a committed soldier," Khan said. He spoke often with Hasan about Hasan's desire for a wife.
On a form filled out by those seeking spouses through a program at the mosque, Hasan listed his birthplace as Arlington, Va., but his nationality as Palestinian, Khan said.
"I don't know why he listed Palestinian," Khan said, "He was not born in Palestine."
Well, considering the reports that his parents are Jordanians, and the fact that many Jordanians are in fact displaced Palestinians, it is entirely possible that his parents were Palestinians.
If Hasan's parents were Palestinians (or descended from Palestinians), wouldn't that make Hasan a Palestinian according to the commonly accepted definition of that term as it is used in virtually every Arab and Muslim country in the world, as well as many other countries?
In its common usage today, the term "Palestinian" refers to a person whose ancestors had lived in the territory corresponding to British Mandate Palestine for some length of time prior to 1948.
Are we to believe that Hasan's imam's definition of Palestinian as someone "born in Palestine" is different from that of the rest of the Muslim world as well as Wikipedia?
Or is there something fishy going on here too?
MORE: Hasan's imam Faizul Khan is no ordinary imam. He is on the Board of Directors of the ISNA, a radical Wahhabi outfit which "enforces extremist Wahhabi theological writ in America's mosques."
AND MORE (This is now November 6): According to the base commander at Fort Hood, Hasan yelled "ALLAHHU AKBAR!" when he started shooting.
That sounds like Jihad to me. The only question in my mind is whether this was part of a larger plot.
But I expect to see a lot of denial.
:: Comments left behind ::
I just spoke to my daughter who has many friends stationed or working at Ft. Hood. Her husband deployed from there in 2003 with the 4th ID.
She served four years in the Army, which is where she met her husband, who is still active duty.
Through tears, she questioned her support of Muslim soldiers... those she considered Americans first.
And I have to admit that I am biased against psychiatrists, civilian or military, having come to the conclusion they must be a bit crazy to go into the field in the first place. I don't like social workers either.
I doubt this man was an enemy agent from the start of his Army career. To gain the rank of Major requires a bit of time served even if one is in the medical corps.
But I think it likely that he was vulnerable to indoctrination because of his background. And... well, that sucks.
He has done nothing but make Americans more suspicious of Muslims no matter what their job or place of birth.
(OT - but I blame black Muslims for the disintegration of the African American community also. No data to back that up, just a feeling from watching it happen in the South.)
From what I understand, his job as a psychiatrist would have been to encourage returning soldiers to unburden themselves by sharing their wartime stories. I don't know why a Muslim would be placed in that position in the first place (unless he wasn't honest about his faith, or a reawakening of his faith had occurred). How could he not feel personally conflicted? And as Donna B. says, psychiatrists are not very balanced to begin with.
:: Beth November 5, 2009 10:54 PM
Sorry, that should have been as ERIC said.
:: Beth November 5, 2009 10:55 PM
What to say?
Frankly, eric, I am more concerned about YOU losing it, than I am about the alleged Ft.Hood murderer.
Keep the faith, friend.
:: Penny November 6, 2009 12:37 AM
We've been in Afghanistan and Iraq for how long? Why would someone who obviously has major objections to what we're doing over there remain in the military? I was under the impression that most people enlist for a few years at a time? People who join the military know exactly what they're signing up for and if they don't initially, they should have it figured out before re-enlisting.
:: Melissa November 6, 2009 12:40 AM
You are right Melissa... but those who have been trained in a specialty like medicine generally sign up for longer terms than others.
It would not surprise me at all that any doctor (any specialty) who signed up before 9/11/2001 never expected to serve in a battlefield. Though, I don't know for sure, I think this man must have re-enlisted... I do not know what the enlistment time is in exchange for an MD. It's four years for a bachelors...
My son-in-law is a Major... and my daughter kept saying... how could an officer turn against his troops... then she asked how could any Soldier, regardless of rank, turn against his fellow Soldiers, regardless their rank.
She has finally heard from all her friends and none were injured, so her tears of worry have somewhat dried up. The tears of sadness for those families who have had a Soldier die in this travesty may flow for some time.
Her tears of anger... I don't know what it will take to staunch those. I have not heard such anger in her voice since Sep 2001.
My family is of the southern Scots-Irish tradition that holds military service as an honor and duty.
That there is a Revolutionary War veteran in our genealogy is not a suprise. (One proven, three or four more, not proven... but we know they were there fighting from Alamance on.)
My ancestors were not always on the same side. My Arkansas ancestors were Confederate soldiers, my Alabama ancestors were Union soldiers (they actually tried to secede from Alabama when it joined the Confederacy) and... I have one ancestor who fought for both sides.
So, I am no stranger to political disagreements. But... religious disagreements bound with political ones... that I fear more than anything.
Either is bad enough... together, it is evil, IMHO.
Would there have been taunts from Army personnel had he not presented himself as a Muslim opposed to Army goals?
My husband was a Marine, enlisted in the early '60s and there's not doubt in my mind that hazing takes place in the military.
Yet... for the most part it's friendly hazing... and it's not automatically aimed at those who hold a different viewpoint.
For the most part, hazing is a contest... who can crawl past the sentry and sabotage next day's assignment. Who... can disrupt the normal daily routine with a "bomb" in the latrine...
Though some of these antics and practical jokes resulted in injury to Soldiers and Marines, that was never the intent.
This officer's intent was harm at the least... and most likely he intended death. That is NOT the same.
Does anyone think taunts legitimize the killing of anyone?
Where is the justice in "you've made fun of me therefore I will kill you?"
Fun... taunting... it's something to learn to deal with. It's either based in reality or it's not.
If I make fun of you for believing in unicorns, does that that give you the right to kill me?
If you make fun of me for not believing in unicorns doe that give you the right to kill me?
I sure hope they send all those tough military types to sensitivity training. I cannot believe that they would allow name calling in today's Army? They probably have foul mouths and sweat too.
good grief.
They burn our soldiers. Blow themselves and civilians up. Beat women. Bugger boys. And we are so evil that we photograph them in women's underwear and for that, we all deserve death.
:: hoss November 6, 2009 10:51 AM
You have to see and read it for yourself. The most assinine of all excuses for murder....
"However, something disquieting about the date... It should be noted (as others like Ali Eteraz already have) that today is Guy Fawkes Day - the anniversary of a plot by a Catholic dissident to blow up the English Parliament then dominated by Protestants). If the shootings were motivated by some sense of grievance against US foreign/military policy, then the date is surely significant."
:: Hoss November 7, 2009 09:15 AM
Barack Obama, top Republican strategist! (04:49 PM)
Dear Barack, Please continue to campaign for Democratic candidates in future elections. The Republicans welcome all your help. Thank you.
He was quite effective, wasn't he?
Nothing wrong with giving credit where credit is due.
:: Comments left behind ::
Like Clinton, he's only good for himself, not his party.
Hopefully, unlike Clinton, even he can't lie his way out of the mess he's creating in this country and around the world.
Clinton had the advantage that the country was cruising along, Obama is screwing us up and making the world a very unsafe place.
The worst part is going to be in the spring.
I look for wars between Israel and the Iranian axis (Iran, Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Palestinian Terrorstan) and another war when Russia invades Georgia during after the spring thaw.
Maybe NoKo and China will get in on the act.
Next year is going to one interesting and dangerous year.
