Islam Was Hasan’s Motivation
by Big Dog on Nov 19, 2009 at 20:15 Political
The call for restraint came out just after Nidal Hasan murdered soldiers at Fort Hood. Barack Obama told us not to jump to conclusions because jumping to conclusions is only reserved for Obama when he is referring to cops who arrested his buddy.
Of course we can’t forget that we need to be careful so that diversity in our military does not become a casualty. That would be the real tragedy, according to some.
There is no doubt, regardless of what anyone says, that Hasan was motivated by his Islamic ideology. He communicated with a known terrorist recruiter and he inquired about innocents being killed in suicide attacks, a feat he failed to master when he was wounded instead of killed.
Hasan was inspired by his religion and all of the warning signs were glaringly present throughout his career. Those who witnessed his radical ways did not report them out of fear of being labeled as anti Muslim. That is correct, people in the military did not report this maggot because they were worried about how they would be perceived or treated. This is political correctness run amok.
Because people were afraid to report this terrorist and his radicalism, people were murdered.
Hasan told his terrorist buddy Anwar al Awlaki, I can’t wait to meet you in the afterlife.
Looks like Hasan will have to wait a bit longer for his part of the meeting because he did not die in the attack. He will have to wait until he is convicted and put to death before he can set a table and wait for his spiritual adviser who appears to be none to eager to actually die himself.
Hasan was motivated by his religious beliefs and he was allowed to fester because political correctness kept those who saw his evil from reporting it.
But forget about those murdered as long as our diversity does not suffer.
Source:
ABC
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: diversity, hasan, islam, political correctness, terrorist
“That is correct, people in the military did not report this maggot because they were worried about how they would be perceived or treated. This is political correctness run amok.”
I’d love to see your sources for that conclusion.
Would you? Really?
Why? You think that you can convert them to the Dark Side?
Or is it Broke-Back Sheep Mountain thing, for you?
Or would you like to “Pull The Pin” at that moment, and join your Islamic Brother Hasan?
I coin a new word today, for people like Adam; Politically Incorrect.
Oh, it has been done already? Oh well.
Adam! You are politically incorrect, and your post is hate-speech against humanity and in particular against white people that don’t suck the Muslim Dode.
Now, ask you God to forgive you.
Even if you did see his sources you would still not believe it or acknowledge it. It is all over the blogosphere and in the news. It was in congress today and it was admitted that it was a terrorist attack.
I want to see the sources proving somebody who knew Hasan was off his nut failed to report it because of “fear of being labeled as anti Muslim.”
Come on, as much as you conservatives repeat that idea there HAS to be some hard evidence somewhere right?
Now Victoria says it was admitted it was a terrorist attack? Where? Show me a source.
I have heard 3 interviews where they guys interviewed said they did not report it because they were worried they would be seen as anti Muslim.
I’ve been looking for such a thing all morning and can find nothing.
What are you saying, Adam? That no one suspected he was dangerous or that there was a different reason for not reporting him. And that reason would be…
The whole sorry mess is so self- evident, that you have to be quite a liberal to need “proof”- he gave lectures about this- he talked to patients and colleagues and tried to convert some- he openly called himself a “soldier of allah”- what more do you need, Adam?
There are none so blind as refuse to see.
If it is so clear, so available, so self-evident…then show me one piece of evidence to back up the claim. You are all asserting that the warning signs with Hasan were not reported because of political correctness, the fear of being seen as anti-Islam. So prove it. Again, it should be easy right?
How about this?
Link
Adam, you still have not answered my question. What are you saying? That no one suspected he was dangerous or that there was a different reason for not reporting him. And that reason would be…
Big Dog:
You cite the former U.S. Homeland Security adviser who recalls instances of possible over-sensitivity in the military in general and but yet has no ties to the Hasan case itself? You then apply this to the Hasan case through pure speculation.
Mike Radigan:
In my opinion only the real investigation will reveal what warning signs were there and if or why they were missed. I see no need at this point to speculate on it and I wonder why conservatives do see that need.
We could call it something other than speculation if only someone here could present some sort of evidence on which to base such assumptions.
You have to remember- not all muslims are terrorists, but so far, all terrorists have been muslim.
When the warning signs are there, you have to be a cretin, or a liberal not to recognize it and act on it- he should have been restrained, not PROMOTED.
Well, the raghead terrorists are coming to NYC- just goes to show how idiotic Holder is-we should keep them in a compound that houses pigs, and feed them boloney past the expiration date- Holder too, just for being a traitor to the US.
Blake:
All terrorists have been Muslims? By what definition of terrorism? I know you hate Muslims and you have a fetish for death and torture, but can you please try harder to stick to the facts?
I’m still waiting for some sort of evidence to prove the assumption that soldiers and doctors did not report Hasan out of fear of being labeled as anti Muslim.
Big Dog wrote the post but can’t back it up with actual evidence.
Victoria says it’s “all over the blogosphere and in the news” but yet can’t provide me a single link for some reason.
Blake calls it “self-evident” so he doesn’t have to provide any real evidence.
Anybody else want to weigh in on this?
On the other thread you wrote:
If you heard it in interviews certainly somebody else did too? Why can we not find it? Why, if it’s so clear to you folks can’t you find me 1 single verifiable piece of information? Because you know things that aren’t public yet? What about Victoria and Blake? Do they know things that aren’t public yet or are they just speculating too?
Some military people say they didn’t file complaints because they were afraid that doing so would hurt their careers in the increasingly “politically correct” Army bureaucracy. Lt. Col. Val Finnell, Hasan’s classmate at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, MD, told Fox News, “They should’ve confronted him — our professors, officers — but they were too concerned about being politically correct.” Link
National Public Radio reported this week that “some of Hasan’s supervisors and instructors had told colleagues that they repeatedly bent over backward to support and encourage him, because they didn’t have clear evidence that he was unstable, and they worried they might be “discriminating” against Hasan because of his seemingly extremist Islamic beliefs.” Link NPR original
These students, speaking privately because they have been ordered not to speak publicly, say they’re angry that what they view as political correctness led their superiors to ignore the warning signs witnessed by students and faculty at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. Two of them expressed a willingness to testify about Hasan’s conduct in the 2007-08 school year but also expressed concern that the military’s political sensitivities could compromise any Pentagon investigation. Time
What more do you need?
Finally you cite something worth reading for your point. Still, you are basically quoting folks who share your opinion and thoughts on why Hasan wasn’t investigated more.
Lt. Col. Val Finnell is not admitting he could have reported Hasan and didn’t, he’s saying leadership saw it and didn’t report it because of political correctness. Where is his proof? Simply being there? Maybe that’s enough, I don’t know.
One article citing NPR isn’t even arguing for political correctness as a cause.
The third article is the same as the first.
This is a person who thinks something should have been done and is assuming nothing was done because of political correctness. Where is the evidence? This is opinion.
Part of the articles want to pretend people ignored Hasan every step of the way. They didn’t. There were investigations that didn’t go anywhere. Why didn’t they go anywhere? Was it because of political correctness? That would be speculation.
As NPR says, they didn’t report it further because they “didn’t have clear evidence” of what they suspected. So it’s political correctness gone awry because you don’t report something despite a lack of clear evidence?
Granted this is the closest I think you’ll get to the evidence you think is enough. It’s pretty thin if you ask me but at least you’ve finally cited something, anything of quality so I’ll stop harping on it.
I’m awaiting results of a real investigation into what happened so we can stop speculating and passing judgment.
LTC Finnell is saying they did not do it because of political correctness. He does not say how he knows that, just that this is why. Many of these articles say that officers told them but wish to remain anonymous or have been told not to speak publicly.
I do not believe these guys are speculating. It is a good bet that LTC Finnell was told this by the people he said were worried.
Why are you so hard headed about this? Why are you giving Hasan every beneift of the doubt despite people who are saying that it was about PC? You jumped right on board the Bush lied about WMD wagon even though every major intelligence agency in the world said they were there. You ignored that and then went to the Downing Street memo which was inconclusive and taken out of context. You never gave Bush the beneift you are giving Hasan.
Why do you suppose that is.
Adam, once again what names would you consider sexist toward a male? Answer the question. You said nothing cited compares (once again the Adam rules) so tell me.
Don’t you think it is difficult for a male to be sexist to another male? You know, like a black guy is not a racist for using the N word but I would be…
I am demenaing to the (so called) men I disagree with. The words I use you say are not sexist but if I demena a woman then it is sexist.
The words are meant to be demenaing like when your ilk misuses a word for tea party participants. That might just be sexism. Or when you all say Palin’s kid is not hers or that her husband raped his daughters, all sexist acts. Where were you when this was going on?
Oh yeah, it is OK when your side does it. When you defend equally then you will have credibility (though that does not mean you get to decide what is and what is not sexist or racist). I defended Hillary when she was treated badly. You guys allowed Palin to be attacked. Where were the NAGs (National Associalstion of Gals) on this one? Why were they not out defending Palin? Oh yeah, like you they only believe that non liberals can be sexists.
“Or when you all say Palin’s kid is not hers or that her husband raped his daughters, all sexist acts. Where were you when this was going on?”
Seriously? Still? Why is it you are still going on about things I haven’t done to deflect from the things you have done? It’s sad you think you’re making some kind of strong argument here.
And I certainly can’t cite something I was told because like many of those in the stories, they can’t speak on the record. And I wish the interviews I heard had transcripts but I guess local radio does not do this.
In any event, it is obvious that officers are saying that this was a problem and why he was not reported.
You keep saying that it is opinion. If these people did not report it because they were worried about PC then that was the reason. How do you know that thses are even the people’s opinions? They could be stating what they know to have been told to them. One guy asked why he was in the Army and PC squelched any opportunity. He was there. He knows what reasons were given for not being able to confront the issue. He knows what he was told and if he felt that this was the reason then it satisfies the issue. Officers did not report him because they were worried about PC.
It is not that hard but you will do whatever you can to defend this guy. truly amazing. Perhaps instead of worrying about jumping to conclusions with this guy you should look back at all the conclusions you jumped to when Bush was in office (or ask if Barry jumped in the Cambridge police case). Where were you on that one. Oh yeah, socialists like Barry can’t jump to conclusions.
I think you even defended him…
“Why are you so hard headed about this? Why are you giving Hasan every beneift of the doubt despite people who are saying that it was about PC?”
You mean why am I not jumping to conclusions like you are in order to spread a political view point?
“It is not that hard but you will do whatever you can to defend this guy. truly amazing.”
Pointing out your lack of verifiable information to base your assumption and speculation on is defending Hasan? It’s a shame your argument has to stoop to that level in order to deflect from your own faulty reasoning in this case.