The Real Shock of Fort Hood

It's not that the massacre occurred. It's that it hadn't occurred before.

BY STEVEN SIMON, JONATHAN STEVENSON | NOVEMBER 18, 2009

The greatest shock of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's murderous spree at Fort Hood last week may not have been the spree itself, but the fact that it was the first of its kind in the United States. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, Muslims in America have been subject to innumerable stresses, including discrimination and the strain of divided loyalties in their country's eight-year-long war against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia. The confusion is enough to inspire conflict in the minds of even the most patriotic of American Muslims in the U.S., let alone young Muslim GIs directly exposed to enemy propaganda. The fact that one unstable member of this community finally erupted in violence should be no surprise.

The conventional wisdom is that unlike Europe's discontented Muslims, America's Muslims are prosperous and happy, having benefited from the welcoming embrace of our "melting pot" nation. This is basically a complacent fiction. According to a Gallup poll released in March 2009, while Muslim integration in the United States has been more successful than in Europe, Muslims remain less civically engaged in American society and less inclined to view their social position positively than any other religious group.

These attitudes have hardened since the attacks of Sept. 11, with American Muslims increasingly choosing not to assimilate into American society and instead finding solace in their religious identity. For example, exclusionary Muslim students' associations on college campus have grown, as have Islamic schools and Muslim radio stations and publications. These initiatives may resemble those taken by other religious and ethnic groups in the United States since the nineteenth century to promote acceptance and assimilation.

But the Muslim situation differs. As a relatively well-integrated minority, Muslims were able to protect their considerable stake in America -- American Muslims' income is slightly above the national average -- by keeping a low profile. Sept. 11 rocked their quiet world, abruptly placing them in a conspicuous and tortuous position. The domestic aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, including physical attacks on Muslims in the streets, being singled out for airport security screenings and in other forms of surveillance, and biased media treatment, implied that suppressing their Muslim identity was better for their health, that they couldn't take their civil rights for granted, and that their interests depended on the absence of serious future attacks within the United States.

At the same time, many Muslims also found the moral territory of those years murkier than the average American did, results from a 2007 Pew Research Center survey suggest. The Sept. 11 attacks appeared to be retaliation for policies, like unbending U.S. support of Israel, that American Muslims themselves tended to disapprove of. Muslims were also less supportive of the American reaction to the attacks: military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan and indefinite detention and torture of terrorist suspects. And many Muslims perceived the implementation of the U.S. Patriot Act as biased. Thus, to most U.S. Muslims, maintaining a low profile simply by demonstrating unalloyed approval of their adopted country's policies would have been unprincipled and unpalatable. Yet the absence of a fervently patriotic response only confirmed the suspicions of many non-Muslim Americans.

In turn, the evolving attitudes of non-Muslim Americans toward their Muslim compatriots have been more conducive to Muslim alienation than assimilation. According to a 2006 Gallup poll, a third of Americans admire "nothing" about the Muslim world. Nearly half of all Americans believe the U.S. government should restrict the civil liberties of Muslims. A July 2007 Newsweek survey indicated that 46 percent of Americans think that the United States is accepting too many Muslim immigrants, 32 percent consider American Muslims less loyal to the United States than they are to Islam, 28 percent believe that the Koran condones violence, 41 percent are convinced that Islamic culture "glorifies suicide," 54 percent are "worried" about Islamic jihadists in the U.S., and 52 percent support FBI surveillance of mosques. Since Sept. 11, Muslims have faced increasing racism, employment and housing discrimination, and vandalism. Media coverage dwelling on the violence associated with radical Islam and ignoring the respectable lifestyles of most American Muslims, along with Christian right-wing rhetoric casting the campaign against terrorism as a clash of religions, has contributed to the public's misunderstanding of Islam.

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: TERRORISM, NORTH AMERICA
 

Steven Simon is an adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Jonathan Stevenson is a professor of strategic studies at the U.S. Naval War College.

BUFFALO09

5:04 AM ET

November 19, 2009

Warning Sign

Let me begin by saying, "All praise belongs to Allah".

There was no mention of "personal responsibility" or "accountability" mentioned throughout the entire article in regards to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's actions where he went on a killing spree all in the name of religion and killed numerious Ft. Hood military residents. It would not make any sense for Maj. Nidal Malik to be held accountable for his actions as an admition accepting responsibility would not facilitate the argument that was desginated to label society in the U.S. as Xenophobic.

Malik, according to this article is the real victim here; not the thirteen dead and scores of wounded. How did he become the victim? My best friend is muslim whose family was fortunate to escape Pakistan in the late 70's with their lives, and they said that they are disgusted as to the amount of attention which has been given to Malik. They said that their are no excuses for actions which took place that day and led to many deaths; they also are curious as to when people will begin focusing on the real victims "The Dead and Dying" as oppossed to the POOR Maj. Malik.

It is quite shallow to continue and assign blame based solely upon religious identificaiton and also highly irresponsible, while it shifts issues away from truthful, logical, non-biased observations. It would be interesting to see how "
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has percieved this situation.

 

LANDON VALENTINE

4:33 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Muslims in America

First off, this guy's commentary makes pretty good sense, and more than most of the others.

That said, I don't happen to have too much empathy for Muslims in America. While I support legal immigration for all, they have effectively made their own bed. Thusly, they shouldn't complain when they have to sleep in it.

They come here and try to adhere to their own "sharia" form of law, when that isn't the system of law in this country. They carry out so-called honor killings, thinking themselves immune from infidel justice, or simply above our law and society.

They remain mute except for a very few, when muslims carry out attacks against America and her people, even here on our own soil. And more often than not, they are vocal in their support for such activity, even before 911 and its aftermath in Afghanistan and Iraq.

These two academics, the co-authors of this piece, should be ashamed. How disgusting, and sadly, just what I'd expect from a couple of pencil necks looking down from their ivory tower of academia. As I read this drivel, I couldn't help but wonder how many times they've been on a patrol in Iraq or Afghanistan, or how often they've interacted with the local populace in either place.

I won't bother writing more, as I'm sure it would be a waste, but I couldn't resist this much. To the authors: do us all a favor, and go sharpen some pencils; write some papers on something you know something about from a firsthand perspective, and not what you read about in the Early Bird, or hear at some briefing or Pentagon cocktail party. You're weak in every sense of the word and it shows...

 

CHOKKAN7

10:13 AM ET

November 20, 2009

Ft. Hood

I think it's advisable to remind all concerned that, while the perpetrator is in custody and will hopefully face the consequences of his actions, the underlying reasons for the attack are still largely a matter of speculation being pieced together by various parties who'd like to spin the facts to suit their agenda. If harassment due to his faith did play a part, then the military would do well to ferret out the ones responsible, but I'm doubtful that they will do so, given the tendency of military leadership to whitewash anything that might reflect badly on the service. Similarly, if the attacks were sparked by Hasan's fear of deployment, then plenty of warning signs were in evidence before the attacks, yet the military's reticence to deal with problem officers (can anyone imagine an enlisted man displaying the sort of behavior credited to the gunman still remaining in the service for any length of time?) would seem to have played a major role. However one tries to spin it, it would seem that the military's blind spots should be on trial just as much as the gunman.

 

JPT308

10:51 PM ET

November 22, 2009

Ft Hood / Unfriendly fire.

Let me begin by saying, "Praise who ever you want". Welcome to any one of the many misguided cults that convinces people that they are superior to those of lesser gods. You are lost in a smoke screen created by those who wish to gain your loyalty and control you. Perhaps those indigenous to the rain forrest with there little grass huts and there many gods are worthy of conversion. If they resist, then destroy the bad ones, the evil ones, and SAVE the rest willing to convert. After all, there not like us, there heathens, infidels. So point that gun and pull the trigger without remorse, your not killing a brother, your killing a sub human, someone less deserving of life than you!

How much deeper into pseudo religious psychosis can we possibly slip. If God doesn't work, let's try country. It's O.K to kill this person because he's German, Japanese, Chinese, Russian, Afghan, Iraqi, Somali, British, American Indian, Pakistani. Pick any country and with little or no reason, other than the never ending pursuit for power and control, any government, or clergy, can in short time, manipulate the powers of fear, mistrust, suspicion, apathy, and hate in the minds of there faithful followers. Hell, if the powers that be didn't go through the trouble to train, arm, and transport you to a distant land and command you to kill the guy on the other side of that hill you might just find out he has 2 children and a wife at home, and his country has placed him in the same screwed up situation yours has you! I imagine there would be a lot less killing in the world if our governments and clerics could actually practice what they preach!

So heres the real deal, all religion aside, your POOR Maj. Malik is nothing more than a misguided, cold blooded killing coward. He walked into a room of unarmed men and women and opened fire with premeditated intent. So loathsome was his act, that justice needs to be swift and decisive. Only then, can the family's of the true victims attain closure, may the souls of the lost rest in peace and may those in recovery mend quickly.

The greatest misconception in all of this is that our leaders and commanders are telling us that by spending millions of dollars in study and research we might somehow be able identify future threats and prevent someone from twisting off and going on a similar or worse killing rampage. This is the personification of "false sense of security", another smokescreen currently being developed by the powers that be. Actions such as his can never with certainty be predicted, potentiality can be assessed at best, but no one can ever know the exact moment or day a mind will snap.

Malik is a traitor of the worst kind. He is a traitor to his brothers in arms who trusted him and would have died defending him. He is a traitor to all muslims, by his self professed religious rants during the shooting spree, he drew undue attention to a multitude of nonviolent muslim believers that wish only to assimilate peacefully into mainstream America. To better there lives without excessive scrutiny and or discrimination by there neighbors around them.

His actions and the actions of other like minded individuals have cast a shadow on the progress of so many peaceful men and woman of Muslim faith. His actions must be denounced and despised by all, before we can begin heal, not as Christians, Muslims, Protestants, Taoists, Buddhists, and all other faiths, but as Americans. Because united we shall stand, but divided we will shall surely fall.

 

ZING43000

2:28 AM ET

November 24, 2009

The point of this article is contradictory

Let's be real for a moment, here. Maj. Nidal Hasan was given a pass, not because the military is inept, but instead, precisely because his superiors did not want to give even a hint of prejudice against him on account of his Muslim religion.
The authors argue that we should make a point of being understanding and sensitive to American Muslims' sensibilities lest we get more of these Hasans. I would argue that it is precisely this sensitivity that allowed Hasan to create and execute his plan without being stopped.
You can't have it both ways: if you want to be sensitive, you are going to force witnesses to think twice before they expose and prosecute the next Hasan, and, that will inevitably lead to more Hasans. If you want to stop Hasans, then you need to take actions against any one who associates with anyone who acts like a radical. And, yes, that will inevitably lead to false positive results. There is a devil at play no matter which way you slice it. That's always what happens when rigid laws meet humanity.
Let's not blame Americans or our Armed Services for Muslims' persecution. There is little doubt in my mind that Maj. Hasan was/is a radical and it was his superiors' fear of being perceived as anti-Muslim that led to his having been given the benefit of so many doubts.

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

11:03 PM ET

November 24, 2009

 

GJTRYON

11:48 PM ET

December 11, 2009

"All praise belongs to Allah".

With a tad reserved for the guy who shot the legs out from under that Mohammedan SOB!

 

BUFFALO09

5:25 AM ET

November 19, 2009

Seven salient facts about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan

Christopher Hitchens offers valuable insight in this article that chooses to focus on reality as oppossed to categorizing the entire U.S. muslim population as victims.

http://www.slate.com/id/2235760

 

TEBUCKY

10:23 AM ET

November 19, 2009

fighting against Muslims?

I don't understand the conflict that Hasan and other Muslims supposedly face. We're fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. Do they represent Islam? How can one be divided about fighting a group that wants to oppress Muslims?

On another note, this story is full of excuses that are dubious. There haven't been a large number of attacks on Muslims post-9/11. And who exactly were these people that were "taunting" an officer in the military?

The authors bend over backwards to state that all US Muslims are loyal, but they're all subject to snap at any time due to the oppressions they face. To them, it sounds like a reaction like that of Hasan is a natural response to disagreement with US actions. It is not, and a more realistic reaction to these events will be necessary within the US Army than what is suggested here.

 

CHRIS BARRETT

12:08 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Hasan and Jihad in America

Immigration into the US should be halted by every means available. Personally, I could care less what the foreign "repercussions" might be. Perhaps they would be strong enough to press our corporate-controlled Congress to pass a massive Energy Program that would, on the scale of New Deal programs, unlink the US from the oil of tyrants.

Secondly, Islam is an ideology that ratchets the Middle East nations backwards to a medievalist time. It is an easily exploitable religion: ripe for fanatical radicalism, justification of mass murder, and cultural oppression of women. No person of Islam can honestly become a Westerner much less an American.

Thirdly, personally, I am opposed to any integration of Islamism into US society or American culture. I would advise all Americans to arms themselves and bother to go through the process of legal conceal weapons certification.

If this sounds like a war cry, let us make the most of it. I detest violence and that is exactly why I detest Islam. For me, it is a cult for ready-made violent justifications; its sweet jewels of Koranic peace and wrapped in hate. Americans are foolish if the expectation is for more the jihad.

Let America move rapidly to energy independence from the Mid East and fascists like Hugo Chavez. We actually have little time to waste. We can produce new fields of research and investment, new jobs, and vastly reduce the rate of entropy. But it will take Americans demanding a new path away from the control of Congressional misrepresentation and the Robber Baronage of Oil Corporations. It is the only path to the 21st century and America has to date timidly not taken the first courageous step.

As globalization interconnects all things, we should not be surprised at the complex intersection of such areas as oil economics and the ever rising violence coming from a jihadist infested Koran. This has nothing to do with party affliation...I consistently opposed both Bush regimes and voted for Obama. It is more a matter of a clearer view...

 

DGREEN27

1:50 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Islam is not responsible

It is not Islam as a whole that is the problem, it is those corrupt leaders in the Middle East who take advantage of the religion to further their own interests. What is currently happening in the Middle East is similar to what has occured in almost every impoverished and chaotic region of the world throughout history. There is no ideology or religion that is safe from the possibility of a power-hungry leader who seeks to gain power through hate and division. History has seen this take place with Christianity and Judaism, as well as political ideologies such as republicanism and socialism (and some would argue, democracy).

Above all, what must not be done is to seal off our borders to immigration. Every great empire throughout history has been immeasurably benefitted from the willingness to listen to and accept talent from all over the world. It has always been when those same nations become xenophobic and seal themselves off from such ideas and talent that they begin to decline in power and prosperity. Obviously, sufficient screening of immigrants from any nation is needed to protect ourselves. But to seal ourselves off from the world would be disastrous.

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

11:48 PM ET

November 24, 2009

No person of Islam can honestly become a Westerner much less an

Chris,

Everything you said makes perfect sense, so how could you ever vote for a muslim like Obama, the most unAmerican President we have ever had in the last 235 years?

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

12:07 AM ET

November 25, 2009

Islam is not responsible

Your you kidding me?

Islam has everthing to do with it. You can keep telling yourself that as they, yes they Islamic believers cut your throat.

Have a dirty green day

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

12:19 AM ET

November 25, 2009

Islam is not responsible

Are you Kidding me?

No, it would not be a bad idea to stop letting any more Muslims into this counrty. We should of done it a long time ago. 1990 would of been a good start. If Islam is so great and their way of doing things then why don't they stay there? Why because they want come and take over our religion and counrty and replace it with theirs.

Most Americans just don't get it. They are not here to become like us for the most part.

 

CHRIS BARRETT

12:16 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Of course more Jihad is on the way

I should carefully edit what I write. When I wrote: "Americans are foolish if the expectation is for more the jihad" I actually meant that we are quite deluded if we do not expect more jihad commited by Islamists in America. We have terribly vulnerable southern borders. The days an immigration policy that brought in millions of cheap laborers for industrial expansion is no longer needed. Let America get its sleepy head out of the MidEast sand and close the borders.

 

BRUTUS6

12:22 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Know Your Subject

With this story so apologetic to Muslims, it seems the authors Simon and Stevenson have never actually read the Qu'ran. All of it. Or maybe they HAVE read it and they are sympathetic to the Islamic cause: to never rest until the entire world 'submits' to Islam. Those who would rather read the Cliff's Notes version of the Qu'ran should find Islam And Terrorism, by Gabriel (not his real name... he was an Egyptian Islamic scholor who had to flee Egypt for his life after he converted to Christianity).

 

RICHARD HARNACK

3:27 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Which Came First

It is not fully clear as yet which came first, Major Hasan's disquietude towards our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan; his shock at repeatedly having to listen and counsel with soldiers suffering from PTSD an other mental violences engendered by combat; or, his increasing confusion and seeking solace in a partiuclar form of his faith.

Given the rate of suicide in our Armed Forces is increasing, and given that other stressors are affecting our returning and serving military family, work and social life; Major Hasan's actions may also be viewed in these contexts as being a "natural" outgrowth.

For our military to have the system rigged in such a way that if a subordinate noticing a superior's aberrant behavior, and this subordinate chooses to report this, it is the subordinate who is "gigged". The net result is that subordinates feel constrained in this type of reporting for fear they may lose a rank grade, or come to be viewed as a "trouble-maker".

No, sad to say Major Hasan may or may not have viewed his actions as part of a "radical Islamic Jihad". He may simply be yet another military man who chose a route similar to Lee Harvey Oswald and Timothy McVeigh. Being emotionally disturbed by what each saw in their service and how each chose to interpret their experience in light of their own religious-political understanding. It may be time for everyone to go back and re-read Eric Hoffer's True Believer.

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

11:32 PM ET

November 24, 2009

You don't know Dick, Richard

Great job in letting Jihad Hasan off the hook. Are you a Pysco srink or defense lawyer?

 

SFSOTO

4:39 PM ET

November 19, 2009

Islam and terrorism

Islam is not unique in its defense of extreme actions in defense of a faith. Christianism is no better. It so happens that Western nations long ago created clear separations between church and state, and Islamic culture is at this point where Christianism was during the Middle Ages. I remember cringing when, a couple of days after 9-11 we were treated to the image of our leaders celebrating a religious ceremony of mourning in the National Cathedral, as if religion had not been at the philosophical foundation3 of the fanatical group that had attacked us. Truly, Al Qaida and the Crusaders took their orders from the same kind of leadership. Our Christian Right is constrained from becoming an American Taliban only by an enlightened constitution of the US, written by men who wanted to avoid turning our country into the kind of nation that, in the Old World, had been torn for centuries by religious hatred.

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

11:22 PM ET

November 24, 2009

What?

Those are some good drugs you on!

 

GJTRYON

11:36 PM ET

December 11, 2009

equivocation

"Our Christian Right is constrained from becoming an American Taliban only by an enlightened constitution of the US..." Sorry to disturb your neat but nescient ethical geometry, Grand Equivocator, but Christians of all kinds are constrained from becoming another Taliban by something called the New Testament and by the example of Jesus Christ. The fact that Christians often choose to ignore the letter and spirit of their founder in no way alters the truth that it is ultimately that very founder's words by which such transgressions stand condemned. Contrast this with Islam, whose foundation texts not only sanction violence but explicitly command it. Contrast this again with Islam's founder, reputed to have personally murdered upwards of 1200 individuals and to have overseen the dispatching of upwards of 20,000 during his lifetime. Nice try!

 

HOUSTON_37221

6:17 PM ET

November 19, 2009

joking, right?

So, we have an all VOLUNTARY military in which these AMERICANS volunteered to serve, in which they took an oath to defend the country, follow orders, adhere to the rules, etc. - an oath that is supposed to be the HIGHEST oath they take..... and the authors wish to excuse some of the muslims from honoring that oath and duty because they're shooting at other muslims? The absurdity of that is beyond worthy discussion. I guess all those Christians serving in WWI and WWII, not too mention the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, the Spanish-American War, etc., should have been excused because they were shooting at other Christians?

Got no problem with truly conscientious objectors - there are some folks that just believe we shouldn't kill or ever be at war - of course, have trouble believing folks like that would be part of our VOLUNTARY military of today.

and really, equating muslimism to the equivalent of nationalism - doesn't that make all those the folks who are muslim and based on being muslim try to undermine our military efforts the equivalent of traitors?

 

REMIXEDGDOG

10:15 AM ET

November 20, 2009

Social Engineering and the Military

Well before the Fort Hood shootings shocked the nation out of its complacent sense of false security, there was an incident in the build up prior to the invasion of Iraq. An enlisted Muslim soldier in the Army threw a hand grenade into a tent of officers in a base camp somewhere in Kuwait. He fragged them, wounding several officers and killing one. After an extensive investigation of the incident, the Army brass concluded that this Muslim soldier had "an attitude problem."
Oh really? Let's not go out on a limb, guys, and draw some rash conclusion.
The Fort Hood shootings is actually a dramatic indication of how the institution of the Army views itself and really functions as a closed society rather than how American citizens view themselves as American citizens.
Although Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson pointed out President Truman's social integration of the armed forces in 1948, as a Vietnam veteran, I experienced racism during my tour of duty as a white guy simply living in a black hooch. By other white servicemen, that is. I still remember this first time I was called "a N-lover" by other guy in our compound as I walked by his hooch to take a shower one morning.
So the armed forces as an institution does not respond to social engineering as quickly as the authors pointing out the historical fact of Truman's ground-breaking presidential directive to integrate the military.
And there should have been a directive from the Joint Chiefs of Staff sent out to all commanding officers to screen all Muslims serving in the armed forces after that soldier fragged those officers. But, of course, there wasn't, because social change in the military moves slower than an iceberg at the North Pole.
Now, on the other hand, if the brass are held accountable for the behavior of the men under their command, which is done right now with mandatory drug screening, and that supervision is tied to their wish for promotion, then there will be a real change in the attitudes of Muslims serving in the military and more importantly how non-Muslims soldiers treat and interact with them.
In my experience as a soldier, I've never met a career officer who doesn't want to retire as a full-bird colonel. Tie that service-wide ambition to demonstrating their true leadership qualities. Then you will see real change.

 

JIM1900

5:53 PM ET

November 20, 2009

The worst thing you can do

The worst thing you can do to Muslims in the U.S. is to suggest that they would only be willing to fight Christians, not Muslims, as this article seems to suggest. It is of course ridiculous, whether they agree with U.S. policy or not. There are a lot of other people who view the whole U.S. response to 9/11 to be misguided; you don't have to be Muslim to recognize the obvious.

But the opposite also holds true. There are a lot of reasons people want to limit immigration, whether Muslim or otherwise. And reducing the chance of terrorism does in fact require some trade-off of conveniences, if not liberties. The author seems to find the subject convenient for grinding a lot of his axes at once.

With friends who write articles like this one, the Muslims don't need many enemies.

 

SARGON

6:00 PM ET

November 20, 2009

What Americans must know!!!?

By the of the father and the holy sprit +

Peace to all Americans who do believe in peace.
What America must know about the Muslims in general?
America treats every person with fairness when it comes to daily live in jobs in politic it’s truly a land of opportunities trust me it might not make sense to you but I’m speaking as outsider and just comparing it from where I did come from.

AS a Christian born in Iraq both my parents are Assyrians the indigenous people of Mesopotamia (Iraq) today. We had no rights as who we are we can’t hold governments jobs or higher rank in the militaries can’t be a pilot and many more.

Here in the United State really don’t ask your religion or where you from when applying for a job!? That’s fairness correct?

During Iraq Iran war in the 1980s our people where to go and fight the enemy’s it turn out the enemy of Iraq where the shiaa sect them self they where killing the Assyrians Christians in the front zone and that went with out any detections till some of the Sunnis
Did see what was happing and did bring it to there superiors and action was taking by executing many that where involved.

When it comes to American militaries I would truly recommend those people can’t never ever be trusted to be give a higher command and even a weapons to fire.

As seen what had happen in fort Hood is a perfect example and action must be taken sooner not later a grave lesson been learned here.
These people when do come to US they don’t change there thinking there women don’t intermarry with other them Muslims but there men can merry American girl but with the condition to convert to islam?
So my massage to All Americans STOP given your self and turning to islam? For what?

Americans I know we can’t unite in politic or in religion but this is a different time you must come together on one commend ground and just be (one) the enemies are here and knowing your doors to give up Christianities to islam?!

A Proud uncle of George who did a one year tour in Iraq he's American Assyrian.

Salute to our troops
Respectfully yours,

Amen +

 

MOE MORALES

9:02 PM ET

November 20, 2009

Issue at Hood

The authors are very sophmoric in their approach to the Hasan, Hood and Muslim issue. As an active duty Chaplain, who has been stationed at Hood and deployed twice their attempted absolution of Hasan is incredible. First, he is an Army field gradeofficer, no one, I mean no one under him could have harassed him with out serious repercusions. Second, no one in his chain of command, those senior to him, apparently responded to him to prevent him from attending various military schools, and they provided him with evaluations that enabled him to get promoted to Major. So the canard that he was a poor abused Muslim is ludicrous at best and morally reckless at worst. Thirdly, to use morally insoucient arguments that Muslims in general and military ones in particular have been targeted is risible. Where is their supporting stats? I see nothing, and in fact as a Chaplain I am fully cognizant that if Hasan was being disrespected there are multiple ways to get a complaint made and addressed, especially one from an officer who is a minority in ethnicity and faith. Is the system perfect, no, but it operates even if slowly nonetheless. Lastly, for these authors to completely ignore the evidence, that is mounting, that he was inspired by jihaidist and extremist ideologies is an exercise in willful blindness. Hasan acted deliberately months, weeks and days before he shot my fellow Soldiers and civilians. He even acted in a premeditated manner the day of his actions, clearly not the signs of one who was mentally distressed. Of even greater note is the ignorance of these authors to the fact that if MAJ Hasan was mentally or religiously conflicted he had more than enough access to resources to resolve this issue, but chose instead the course of action that has lead to his impending trial. MAJ Hasan was not mentally impaired, at all. I have deployed twice, worked with mental health professionals to deal with Soldiers who have and developed PTSD and am aware of none of them moving from the stress of counseling support to murder in response, so the pre-trauma, vicarious PTSD is a repugnant excuse for Hasan's actions, and dishonors those whom he murdered in cold blood.

 

AN AMERICAN 1ST

11:55 PM ET

November 24, 2009

Insight

Moe,

Thank you for your insight and service.

People out here are so ignorant as to how the militarty operates.

Retired, Army

 

JOSEPHS

2:19 PM ET

November 21, 2009

Muslims about to explode

The authors seem to be saying that, despite 9/11 and all the baggage that brings with it, Muslims in America (unlike anywhere else in the world) ought to expect little to no scrutiny from the broader American public. It's a nice pipe dream, but not realistic or even desirable in the current environment. This same argument has been implicated as a cause for the lapses that lead to the mass murder at Fort Hood in the first place. The victims aren't those murdered at Ft. Hood, the logic goes. No, it's all the Muslims out there who stand to be made uncomfortable by silly ignorant Americans who should know better than to let 9/11 or Ft. Hood sway them from living the ideals of a faceless, post-reality society.
A good question is, whose version of Islam do you believe? The American-born or converted Muslim who likely has a very individualistic approach to his or her spirituality, who sees Islam as one more intriguing spiritual ingredient among many others, who maybe doesn’t even know there’s a rift between Sunni and Shiite, who goes through the motions of daily prayers and partakes in the various Islamic holidays but whose doctrinal approach to Islam is vacant but for a few appealing lines from the Koran? -
Or, the Muslim raised and indoctrinated from a very early age in a madrasa in Iraq or Saudi Arabia, who has been reciting the Koran from the time he could speak, whose understanding of freedom is “enslavement to Allah,” who understands that when Mohammad speaks of peace among brothers, he is talking about peace among Muslim brothers, not unbelievers, who views women as property, who possibly has no problem (never questioned) the propriety of honor killings or putting gays to death for being gay, who sees apostasy as punishable by death, and who believes that slurs against God and the Prophets, not to mention Islam itself, should be outlawed.
I view the former as uninformed about the latter. It’s no wonder so many American Muslims think their religion has be hijacked. And their American Muslim organizations are being run by foreign-born Muslims who speak glowingly about America here but denigrate America back home?
Muslims in America aren’t besieged, they aren’t running for the hills or leaving the country. Aside from a few incidents here and there (no more than are happening to any other group, often much less), Muslims aren’t living a life of daily discrimination. As Ayaan Hirsi Ali once said when interviewed, the notion that Muslims in America were being persecuted is exaggerated.
Americans have every right to understand Islam for what it is and not be cowed into looking the other way, especially when “Allahu Akbar!” sets the stage for 13 deaths at Ft. Hood.

 

USMCEXP

3:55 PM ET

November 24, 2009

Traders in our army

anyone who thinks this guy needs some simpathy,
is also a trader to this country.
this guy should be shot in full view of the public.
If he did this in a muslim country he would already be dead.
At least here we will let him say his pease.
this is all he deserves.
nothing more!

 

BELLA

10:45 PM ET

November 26, 2009

Thinking like "The Mentalist"

The very very interesting thing about the article and all of the responses is that no one noticed the major "Elephant in the Living Room" so to speak.

THIS GUY WHO OPENED FIRE AND SHOT OUR AMERICAN SOLDERS WAS A PSYCHIATRIST.

This is the one group (along with the pharmaceutical companies supplying them with these harmful and dangerous drugs) in the US and across the world that has increased the incidents of violence, carnage, homicides and mass murders.

Question: What drug or drugs was he taking? Question: Was he coming off of them?

Research and factual evidence has shown time and time again that school shooters, assassins and those committing homicide right in our neighborhoods have been on psychotropic mind bending drugs. And the side effects are horrendous.

The most well researched DVD I have seen recently is called MARKETING OF MADNESS and it has interviews from former pharma sales reps, doctors, psychologists and psychiatrists describing the violence directly connected to these drugs. Check out www.cchr.org for this data.

And stop putting our soldiers and our citizens in harms way by creating ticking time bombs amoung the population and saying nothing about the massive psych med drugging of our soldiers and the general population.

 

GJTRYON

11:12 PM ET

December 11, 2009

the public's misunderstanding of Islam quote unquote

"... the public's misunderstanding of Islam..." I'm sorry, but this is just too droll! Isn't Foreign Affairs a publication that we expect to go beyond the usual mainstream banalities into substantial analysis? If indeed just 28% of Americans believe that Islam condones violence, then, yes, a gross misunderstanding exists. For not only does Islam, i.e., the Koran, "condone" violence, it actively and repeatedly exhorts its followers to acts of violence. (See the Geert Wilders film "Fitna." ) Every time a journalist starts to query us on our "intolerant" attitudes vis a vis Islam, we should ask the simple question, "Have you read the Koran? Are you familiar with the Hadith?" Most journos don't WANT to know what the Koran teaches, because this allows them to carry on with the job they do best, i.e., public relations or crowd control. Had the Koran been written last year it would be branded as hate literature and its adherents denied entry into civilized societies.