Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 137

Thread: Gunmen attack Fort Hood, Texas

  1. #81
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,169

    Default Constitutionally protected crap

    On another note, I am really starting to dislike the less than subtle undertones of the reporting of this case. The USA Today, for instance, mentioned several times how many soldiers at Fort Hood had served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan even though that has absolutely nothing to do with Hasan, who never even served one tour. On NPR a guest host who was filling in for Diane Riehm asked some expert that she was interviewing if he thought that this would effect President Obama's decision on how many troops to send to Afghanistan, because clearly our soldiers are way overstressed, again, even though Hasan had never deployed. All this kind of rhetoric lends undeserved credence to the idea that some have that every soldier is a ticking time bomb. It never ceases to amaze me how many people already believe that every servicemember who has been to Iraq or Afghanistan is emotionally destroyed.
    Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media? If the overwhelming market share is truly conservative and it is a business driven by profit, then it seems to me that we could unite (maybe on twitter) to boycott stations and/or shows that continuously misrepresent the truth. Opposing ideas are encouraged, but what was mentioned above isn't an opposing idea, it is completely misleading. We need a national movement to bring common sense and honesty back to the media.

  2. #82
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by omarali50 View Post
    Now, I dont take that line as much, not because I no longer believe in it but because I can see that it is itself an expression of a certain secular philosophical viewpoint that everyone simply does not share. I still regard it as "correct" but I am less dogmatic about it in debate. I think its better to focus on fair-mindedness. I see Christians whose firmly held beliefs would place them far away from my worldview, yet who are so scrupulously fair-minded I am awed. I want to try to be fair and want others to be the same and I think things can be worked out. Or not. In which case, "the law will takes its course"..not just the law on a small scale, but law as in "natural law".
    Omarali,

    Every religion has its share of radicals that hijack or distort the message for their own personal plight (anger, pride, greed, whatever). Where I'm from, my people used to burn crosses and lynch men and women based on race. Today, extreme radicals attack abortion clinics.

    I heard a good sermon today about Stephen's frustration with "friendly fire." The analysis concluded,

    Therefore he broke off, and by the Spirit of wisdom, courage, and power, sharply rebuked his persecutors. When plain arguments and truths provoke the opposers of the gospel, they should be shown their guilt and danger. They, like their fathers, were stubborn and wilful. There is that in our sinful hearts, which always resists the Holy Ghost, a flesh that lusts against the Spirit, and wars against his motions; but in the hearts of God's elect, when the fulness of time comes, this resistance is overcome. The gospel was offered now, not by angels, but from the Holy Ghost; yet they did not embrace it, for they were resolved not to comply with God, either in his law or in his gospel. Their guilt stung them to the heart, and they sought relief in murdering their reprover, instead of sorrow and supplication for mercy.
    Bottom line is one of the wonderful things about our country is religious freedom, and we cannot let hate, fear-mongering, or radicals take that away.

    Mike

  3. #83
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media? If the overwhelming market share is truly conservative and it is a business driven by profit, then it seems to me that we could unite (maybe on twitter) to boycott stations and/or shows that continuously misrepresent the truth. Opposing ideas are encouraged, but what was mentioned above isn't an opposing idea, it is completely misleading. We need a national movement to bring common sense and honesty back to the media.
    Bill, would you regard FOX as a generally honest network, brimming with common sense?
    In my opinion, the rot runs deeper than conservative or liberal. I dont want to start an endless argument, but I can think of many areas where Rush Limbaugh is not an honest reporter and shamelessly spins the news to suit a particular agenda...and I do think his agenda is NOT Christian or conservative, at least not in the sense in which either Christianity or conservatism have been understood by many of their most fervent and sincere adherents (of course, my own point about there being no reference version, only versions, comes in the way of my making too much about how this or that person is not "really Christian"..).

  4. #84
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media? If the overwhelming market share is truly conservative and it is a business driven by profit, then it seems to me that we could unite (maybe on twitter) to boycott stations and/or shows that continuously misrepresent the truth. Opposing ideas are encouraged, but what was mentioned above isn't an opposing idea, it is completely misleading. We need a national movement to bring common sense and honesty back to the media.
    I find it funny that you seem to correlate political conservatism with ethical behavior or journalism.

    Also the idea that PTSD had nothing to do with this shooting incident is likely true, it does not appear to be the same with this case, which oddly has not been commented on at all in the media in the wake of the recent shooting.

  5. #85
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4

    Default

    I do not agree poor marksmanship is excusable.

    There is a widely accepted practice of limited and sporadic live-fire and situational training for law enforcement.

    To volunteer for a profession where it is known there is a high probability of returning fire in close proximity to civilians brings with it the obligation (both of the department and of the officers) to train and prepare for it.

  6. #86
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,169

    Default Exchange conservatism for non-bias reporting

    Bill, would you regard FOX as a generally honest network, brimming with common sense?
    In my opinion, the rot runs deeper than conservative or liberal.
    Fair comments, actually I dislike Fox News spin as much as I dislike the spin on MSNBC and CBS. Instead of debating left and right wing politics I need to do a better job at framing my actual argument.

    I find it funny that you seem to correlate political conservatism with ethical behavior or journalism
    Based on the way I wrote that post I guess you wouldn't have much choice but to make that correlation, but that wasn't my intent. My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?). In this case recent polls indicate that most Americans are conservative (what does that really mean?), so why do leftist shows tend to garner most of the market? Seems to be a disconnect there.

    In Iran and Indonesia we have seen recent social movements against the government/media on twitter and facebook. Social movements that in the U.S. could allow the market to mandate more honest reporting, undo excessive political correctness laws (such as tossing a kid out of school because he brings a pocket knife to school), pushing books into our grade schools that promote certain types of behavior, etc. The majority react in shock to this type of Nazi like thought control, but they don't organize to counter it.

  7. #87
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?).
    Because the target audience for those programs is largely composed of people who are willfully ignorant or dishonest. Lots of left-leaning individuals are happy to have a blatantly biased left-leaning "news" source. Lots of right-leaning individuals are happy to have a blatantly biased right-leaning "news" source. Most of the people who don't have strong left or right views just watch their local news to stay abreast of weather, local construction, sports scores, and other non-alarmist issues.

    There was a great quote in a recent Wall Street Journal opinion piece criticizing Glenn Beck (but it is applicable to all jerk-offs on the left and right, on radio and cable news, on network news and in the pages of various rags)...

    These are postulates that it is only possible to believe after you have utterly closed yourself off to conventional ways of knowing, after you have decided that the reporting and analysis and scholarship on these subjects are not worth reading, and that you will choose ideological fairy tales over reality...

    ... a new kind of ignorance, a coming high-tech dark age in which people can choose to blow off professional standards of inquiry; in which they can wall themselves off with cable TV and friendly Web sites, dismiss what displeases as ... bias...

  8. #88
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    In Iran and Indonesia we have seen recent social movements against the government/media on twitter and facebook. Social movements that in the U.S. could allow the market to mandate more honest reporting, undo excessive political correctness laws (such as tossing a kid out of school because he brings a pocket knife to school), pushing books into our grade schools that promote certain types of behavior, etc. The majority react in shock to this type of Nazi like thought control, but they don't organize to counter it.
    Bill, you make an important point here.

  9. #89
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ops-n-Intel View Post
    I do not agree poor marksmanship is excusable.

    There is a widely accepted practice of limited and sporadic live-fire and situational training for law enforcement.

    To volunteer for a profession where it is known there is a high probability of returning fire in close proximity to civilians brings with it the obligation (both of the department and of the officers) to train and prepare for it.
    This is Sgt Todd's account (officer with Sgt Munley) of the incident:

    http://www.policeone.com/active-shoo...-Hood-shooter/

  10. #90
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by omarali50 View Post
    Bill, would you regard FOX as a generally honest network, brimming with common sense?
    In my opinion, the rot runs deeper than conservative or liberal. I dont want to start an endless argument, but I can think of many areas where Rush Limbaugh is not an honest reporter and shamelessly spins the news to suit a particular agenda...and I do think his agenda is NOT Christian or conservative, at least not in the sense in which either Christianity or conservatism have been understood by many of their most fervent and sincere adherents (of course, my own point about there being no reference version, only versions, comes in the way of my making too much about how this or that person is not "really Christian"..).
    For the record:

    Rush Limbaugh is not a part of Fox News. (Rush's agenda is Rush.)

    Please define really Christian.

    Whatever they are talking about on TV/Radio, they are talking about money.

    The Bible speaks to money more than any other topic.

    Whatever turns out to be Hasan's core motivation, there should zero tolerance for those who "sleep in the bunk house, but won't ride for the brand."

  11. #91
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?).
    No backlash?
    see
    Freerepublic
    Lucianne
    From the Right

    Democrat Underground
    Daily Kos
    From the Left

    You'll find plenty of backlash.

    Also the Blogasphere (both left center and right.

    I would also point out there's a reason why subscription rates, advertising revenues for all major newspapers (with the exception of the WSJ) are falling like a rock.
    People are voting with their feet

  12. #92
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default Why good people do nothing.

    Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?). Seems to be a disconnect there.
    Bill

    Here's some interesting articles sent from a group that conducts micro-conflict resolution with Jews and Palestinians that address your questions. This research is important for small wars as well. It shows that the people rising up is not solely based on the perception of security.

    Why do good people do nothing, in the presence of that which breaks their hearts, violates their souls, threatens the planet and our children's children? And why do some people step forward to dazzle us with awesome vision and heroism? Weakness in numbers
    DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY


    October 29, 2009, National Public Radio hosted Harvard's Professor Mahzarin Banaji to explain why good people have bystander behavior -- passively observing unspeakable violence and other tragedies.
    What Bystanders Do When They Witness Violence
    STORY
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=114287592
    AUDIO
    http://www.npr.org/templates/player/...92&m=114287588

    DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY occurs in larger groups of people when responsibility is not explicitly assigned. With more people present -- caught in group-think -- one is less likely to identify that there is a problem or feel a sense of responsibility to respond. With more people in a group, the individual becomes less responsiblle. Women and men are equally passive or brave in responding to emergencies, showed researchers Latane and Darley.

    Their study revealed a 75% chance one observer would respond to a crisis dropping to a 10% likelihood of intervening with six onlookers gathered around.

    Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility B. Latane and J.M Darley
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383. 1968.
    http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_...s/ps/ps19.html


    ILLUSION OF COURAGE

    People falsely imagine that others have more courage and are less vulnerable to social embarrassment. This ILLUSION OF COURAGE in others strongly diminishes individual social responsibility. Also related fear of embarrassment is a potent determinant of in non-intervention in emergency situations. Sadly, inaction is often perceived as the safer personal choice of bystanders to tragedy.

    THE ILLUSION OF COURAGE IN SOCIAL PREDICTIONS:
    Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people

    Leaf Van Boven a,¤, George Loewenstein b, David Dunning c
    Published in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 96 (2005) 130–141
    http://sds.hss.cmu.edu/media/pdfs/lo...nOfCourage.pdf



    We are learning about our human fears and courage.
    1. In large groups, individuals are less likely to feel responsible.
    2. Smaller groups encourage individual participation and creative initiative.
    3. People who are bystanders project onto others exaggerated courage and less fear of social embarrassment.


    Great courage is required for a person to step forward from the group -- beyond embarrassment and old, collective thinking. Beneath embarrassment is terrifying fear of exclusion -- social or even physical death. This begins to explain why good people do nothing, and why people find it easier to disengage, blame, and kill -- including risking their physical lives in battle -- than to step out of their clan to engage an adversary face to face. Let us each overcome the "diffusion of responsibility."
    Last edited by MikeF; 11-09-2009 at 02:55 PM.

  13. #93
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ops-n-Intel View Post
    For the record:

    Rush Limbaugh is not a part of Fox News. (Rush's agenda is Rush.)

    Please define really Christian.

    Whatever they are talking about on TV/Radio, they are talking about money.

    The Bible speaks to money more than any other topic.

    Whatever turns out to be Hasan's core motivation, there should zero tolerance for those who "sleep in the bunk house, but won't ride for the brand."
    I think I tried to hint that based on my own previous comments, I couldnt really take this "really Christian or not" argument too far.
    True, Rush is not on Fox. I should have picked on O'Riley or (god forbid) Glenn Beck.
    I agree one thousand percent with your last comment. All murders are murders, but this particular outrage is ESPECIALLY outrageous because the bastard put on a uniform, served with these people and then turned around and killed them in cold blood. That is just heinous, dishonorable, totally f-ed up and utterly unexcusable. I am generally not in favor of the death penalty, but in this case, that would be the minimum punishment.

  14. #94
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Slowly gaps are filling in.

    In 1998, MAJ Hasan's dad died with funeral services held at the funeral home. In May 2001, his mother died with funeral services held at the Dar Al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church. See this post for the parents' obits. Nothing much in this, in and of itself - the family had found a mosque.

    What is of more potential import is that Anwar al-Awlaki became the imam of that mosque in Jan 2001. He was a very young Yemeni immigrant to the US and is well educated in secular studies as well as Islamic studies. He holds a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Colorado State University, an M.A. in Education Leadership from San Diego State University and was working on a Doctorate degree in Human Resource Development at George Washington University. During his tenure as imam, two of the 9/11 conspirators were members of the congregation; and he was well acquainted with one of them in both San Diego and Virginia. After 9/11, he was investigated by the FBI, but no charges re: 9/11 or any other jihadist activities were brought against him. He then departed for Yemen, where he now lives.

    Today, he issued a tribute to MAJ Hasan, Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing, in which he explains at length why MAJ Hasan should have done exactly what he did. Imam al-Awlaki has written extensively about jihad and has summarized his views in a pamphlet, 44 Ways to Support Jihad.

    As I've said, we must keep this event in perspective - and recognize that we are dealing with an American Muslim minority. That fact, al-Awlaki was forced to admit in these two paragraphs (JMM emphasis added):

    The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.

    The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.
    and so it goes in the media from our enemies' side of the ledger.

  15. #95
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,186

    Default Two contrasting UK Muslim views

    FRom:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6907136.ece

    Asked his views on the killings at Fort Hood, he said: “Killing military members is all right. If you are killing people who are fighting against Muslims then that’s okay.”
    I prefer the following viewpoint:
    If an individual walks into a facility where people are unarmed and opens fire indiscriminately, that’s an act of terrorism.
    Mr Zeeshan Hashmi said most Muslims would react to the atrocity with horror, but also with concern that it would be used to sow division.
    “People will feel they’ve got to justify their existence all over again and that’s not fair. Remember Columbine? That was terrible too, but it didn’t make us distrust all schoolchildren, did it?”
    Mr Hashmi is the brother of the Jabron Hashmi, from Birmingham, who was the first UK Muslim soldier to be killed in Afghanistan.

    davidbfpo

  16. #96
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    310

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
    Omarali,

    I have been considering your comments over the last several days, and I can only think of the damage that Major has done for American Muslims and Islamophobia in general. Last night, clips of radical Islamists in NYC were shown over and over praising this idiot.
    Three years on from 9/11, almost half of Americans favored curtailing American Muslim civil liberties to some extent. Doesn't tell us much about undecideds on this matter, but as a matter of political practicality Hasan could hardly do much more damage than Islamic jihadists have already done.

    My suggestion to Islamic leaders would be to have an IO message clearly stating to it's followers what a selfish and unIslamic act that major did.
    Problem is there is no leadership per se, particularly in the foreign-born Muslim community, and what national organizations there are have tainted reputations stemming from ties between their staffs, affiliates and terrorist organizations. Moreover, Islam world-wide today has a heavy investment in a number of matters of a political nature; analogous to the pro-life movement but tarnished by activists with a far worse capability and reputation for malevolent violence. I fear that we've seen the politics here crystallize to the point where we've a zero-sum game between the West and the landscape of Muslim aspiration.
    PH Cannady
    Correlate Systems

  17. #97
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Presley Cannady View Post
    [url=http://arabsandterrorism.com/resources/Restrictions_on_Civil_Libe.pdf]
    Problem is there is no leadership per se, particularly in the foreign-born Muslim community, and what national organizations there are have tainted reputations stemming from ties between their staffs, affiliates and terrorist organizations. Moreover, Islam world-wide today has a heavy investment in a number of matters of a political nature; analogous to the pro-life movement but tarnished by activists with a far worse capability and reputation for malevolent violence.
    Excellent point, and it leads into the on-going debate between centralized/de-centralized efforts in COIN. Studying through gangs and insurgencies, even when the national level efforts are failing, local leaders can influence their people on the village level. In this case, local imams or respected leaders in the community must emphasize to population that these actions are murder and illegal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Presley Cannady View Post
    I fear that we've seen the politics here crystallize to the point where we've a zero-sum game between the West and the landscape of Muslim aspiration.
    I don't think we're there yet (at least I hope not). We haven't seen the masses protesting in the street or significant anti-Muslim violence.

  18. #98
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default 2007 PowerPoint Slides

    The slides mentioned in today's WP article, Fort Hood suspect warned of threats within the ranks, are here - The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military.

    Please note the last slide (p.50).

  19. #99
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    For all the Soldiers, Police, Family and Friends at Ft. Hood who weren't afraid to face the devil.

    Go Rest High On That Mountain by Vince Gill
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRyKg5xMaXA&feature=fvw

  20. #100
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    88

    Default ?

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
    Bill

    Here's some interesting articles sent from a group that conducts micro-conflict resolution with Jews and Palestinians that address your questions. This research is important for small wars as well. It shows that the people rising up is not solely based on the perception of security.
    One of the points of the research mentioned is that people will disengage due to fear of embarrassment etc. I have observed that cops and soldiers will sometimes engage in a face to face confrontation fearing embarrassment if the don't.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •