- Joined
- Mar 22, 2009
- Messages
- 4,324
- Reaction score
- 915
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Fort Hood shooting: Nidal Malik Hasan 'said Muslims should rise up'
Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who allegedly killed 11 people before being shot and wounded by police at Fort Hood, had said Muslims should "rise up" and attack Americans in retaliation for the US war in Iraq, a former army colleague said.
"He was making outlandish comments condemning our foreign policy and claimed Muslims had the right to rise up and attack Americans," Col Lee told Fox News.
"He said Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor and that we should not be in the war in the first place." He said that Maj Hasan said he was "happy" when a US soldier was killed in an attack on a military recruitment centre in Arkansas in June. An American convert to Islam was accused of the shootings.
Col Lee alleged that other officers had told him that Maj Hasan had said "maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Time Square" in New York.
Fort Hood shooting: Nidal Malik Hasan 'said Muslims should rise up' - Telegraph
Anyone still want to argue that this wasn't religiously motivated and that he wasn't a jihadist?
Anyone still want to argue that this wasn't religiously motivated and that he wasn't a jihadist?
Who cares what his motivation was? Does it change the fact that he's a nutjob and killed several innocent people? Obviously, his behavior doesn't bespeak of the majority of peaceful Muslims across the world. Rather than blaming Islam, perhaps we should...i don't know...blame the guy who was shooting people? :doh
Anyone still want to argue that this wasn't religiously motivated and that he wasn't a jihadist?
No I think I'll blame Islamism and the global jihad, this is just one incident in a concerted global initiative of Islamist Imperialist Expansionism through offensive jihad.
He's def. got a great case of Jihadist mentality in him, but I don't see the main stream Islamic notation that you claim is in the rhetoric; he wouldn't fit in with 99% of the Muslim population.
Point of Clarification: Was he saying these remarks BEFORE he began shooting? Or once put into custody? If the former then I have some questions regarding the chain of command.
FNC just played Col. Lee's comments again and I got the impression he said these things before the shootings as Lee hasn't had contact with Hasan recently.
Anyone still want to argue that this wasn't religiously motivated and that he wasn't a jihadist?
It certainly looks bad for the CAIR crew.
....
I'm not one to criticize our military efforts, but... really? No one could hear the Time-Bomb's ticking in the room?
Anyone still want to argue that this wasn't religiously motivated and that he wasn't a jihadist?
K, and what do we do about it? This is one guy doing insane things maybe...maybe based on religion, we don't really know at this time. What is proper recourse for one of our soldiers going crazy and shooting up an army base? Do we invade a country? Which one? Do we outlaw Islam? What's the proper course of action should this event be as you think it to be?
Just out of curiosity... what % of Muslims do you think are 'peaceful'?Who cares what his motivation was? Does it change the fact that he's a nutjob and killed several innocent people? Obviously, his behavior doesn't bespeak of the majority of peaceful Muslims across the world.
Just out of curiosity... what % of Muslims do you think are 'peaceful'?
Just out of curiosity... what % of Muslims do you think are 'peaceful'?
Sorry that I wasn't clear; I was speaking world-wide.In the US? Probably 85%+
What about you?
I asked for -your- estimate. I'm not even going to ask you to substantiate that estimate, though I will ask for your reasoning.What is your point? There's no way to give an exact percentage.
Sorry that I wasn't clear; I was speaking world-wide.
I was going to say 99%.
At 99%, that still leaves >10,000,000 non-peaceful Muslims.
Perpspective: That's larger than population of New Jersey
If 85% of the muslims in the US are peaceful, that leaves >420,000 that are not.
Perspective: That's about equal to the population of Miami, and 80% the size of the US Army
How exactly does this look bad for them? Was he a board member? Did he scream "Allahu CAIRbar" as he went on his rampage? Or do you mean to say that because you've concluded that this was Islamic terror, all muslims are somehow responsible? Furthermore, would you say that the shooting in Orlando "looks bad for the [insert Hispanic organization] crew?
Please advise.
That's fine, and that's probably why I have a higher %, as I was thinking about the % that think things like killing civilians is a legitmate means to their ends (which would obviously be much much smaller than those simply not opposed to it).I think it depends on how we're defining peaceful. From my perspective, I was looking at what percentage of people would be strongly opposed to things like killing civilians in order to achieve some larger purpose. The fact that 85% would be strongly opposed doesn't mean that the other 15% are all for it or are going to do anything about it, but rather than they could be sympathetic to that perspective in some situations.
Anyone still want to argue that this wasn't religiously motivated and that he wasn't a jihadist?
That's fine, and that's probably why I have a higher %, as I was thinking about the % that think things like killing civilians is a legitmate means to their ends (which would obviously be much much smaller than those simply not opposed to it).
Of that 1%, if 1% are of a mind to attack the US, and a mere 1% of that 1% succeed, that's 1000 attacks.
And so, while the huge majority of the Muslims in the world might not ever even cosnider it, the threat is still very real.
And if you think that 1% of the total seems to large.... Nader pulled ~3% in the 2000 election
Who cares what his motivation was? Does it change the fact that he's a nutjob and killed several innocent people? Obviously, his behavior doesn't bespeak of the majority of peaceful Muslims across the world. Rather than blaming Islam, perhaps we should...i don't know...blame the guy who was shooting people? :doh
He's def. got a great case of Jihadist mentality in him, but I don't see the main stream Islamic notation that you claim is in the rhetoric; he wouldn't fit in with 99% of the Muslim population.
K, and what do we do about it? This is one guy doing insane things maybe...maybe based on religion, we don't really know at this time. What is proper recourse for one of our soldiers going crazy and shooting up an army base? Do we invade a country? Which one? Do we outlaw Islam? What's the proper course of action should this event be as you think it to be?
Actually no -- that 1000 is if the 1% of the 1% of the 1% succeed.You're saying that throughout the world, there are 1,000 muslims who will attack the US? I don't think anyone would disagree with that.
I'd agree with this. It does, however, recduce the argument that Muslin extremism isnt a legitmate threat beause 'so few' Muslims are willing to commit acts of terrorism to achieve their goals.Where that analysis runs into problems is when people (not saying you) try to use calculations like that to support their arguments that we should put muslims in internment camps, expel all non-second generation Americans from the military, etc.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?