Was It His My Pet Goat Moment?

There was a terrible incident at Fort Hood today where a soldier opened fire with several weapons and killed 11 people while wounding 31 others. The post was locked down as emergency services responded to the scene. A civilian DOD police officer shot and wounded the assailant, identified as Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who was initially reported as killed in the gunfight.

Let me start by saying the thoughts and prayers of the Big Dog family go out to those affected by this terrible incident. May God give you strength and comfort and may he welcome with open arms those brave souls who were taken from us.

Barack Obama was informed of this and he spoke to it at a conference on Native American issues being held by the Department of the Interior. I think the words that he spoke were heartfelt and appropriate but I do have a problem with how he addressed the issue.

He arrived at the conference and thanked people for attending and then he had a “shout out” to someone there. He then discussed how important the issues were blah, blah, blah. Then he spoke about Hood.

Perhaps, and maybe it is just me, he should have mentioned the Fort Hood incident first. Would it have been too difficult to say something like; “Before I address the conference I want to talk about the incident at Fort Hood. By now you have heard about the horrific incident where 11 soldiers were killed by a fellow soldier. Let me say a few words about what has taken place.” Then he could say the words that he spoke and then move on to the shout outs.

It seemed to me that the soldiers involved in this incident and the people of Fort Hood were second in his mind and that he gave the shout outs a higher priority. He is supposed to be the Commander in Chief and that role should have guided him to speak of the issue first. Perhaps he is not as qualified for the job as he led us to believe.

Was this incident Obama’s My Pet Goat moment? He was more interested in addressing the attendees of the event than actually addressing the tragedy at hand. Kind of like when the left said Bush was more interested in reading a book to children than responding to the 9/11 attacks.

In any event, there will be lots of questions over the next few days and weeks and perhaps we can sort out what went wrong.

Particular attention will likely be paid to statements Hasan has reportedly made about Muslims rising against occupiers as well as other statements allegedly made with regard to his opposition to the war. His radical views were of concern to others who worked with him in the past.

I am glad he was not killed. We need some answers from him. I also hope he is the first soldier to get the death penalty in quite some time. Nothing would be better than saving this coward from death only to make him face his accusers and then have to contemplate his demise.

Prayers to Fort Hood.

Big Dog

gunline

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.



Print This Post

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.

86 Responses to “Was It His My Pet Goat Moment?”

  1. Adam says:

    I don’t think the left said that Bush was more interested in reading the book than anything else. It was mostly Michael Moore and it was that the deer in the headlights look for 7 minutes made him seem indecisive in their opinion.

    Either way, this is more of a mountain out of a molehill moment than a My Pet Goat moment.

    Obama had perhaps 3 options here:

    * Skip the purpose of the closing remarks entirely and mention only Ft. Hood.

    * Mention Ft. Hood first and then go into his closing statements about the meeting.

    * Briefly mention the closing of the meeting and then dedicate the remainder of the speech to the attack instead.

    Obama clearly chose #3 and I think it was more appropriate, but maybe I’m biased.

    Or maybe you wanted Obama to have finished his remarks, “So we are going to stay on this. But I hope in the meantime that all of you recognize the scope of this tragedy, and keep everybody in their thoughts and prayers,” only to finish by giving a shout-out to Dr. Joe Medicine Crow?

    With that you would probably just said he hurried through the Ft. Hood remarks so he could get back to business a usual because he doesn’t care about the troops.

  2. Big Dog says:

    No Adam, I think I made it clear that that I thought he actually said heartfelt words and that they were appropriate. I just felt hat given the gravity of what happened it seemed inappropriate to come in all smiley and doing the thank yous and then going somber. It sort of reminded me of Clinton at that funeral yucking it up until he saw a camera and then he got somber.

    I think Obama has the priorities wrong and that it would have been more appropriate for him to pick option 2.

    As for the Bush thing, I don’t think he had a deer in the headlight look for 7 minutes. Obama did not mention Hood for hours after it happened because he needed information and there is not really anything he could do about it. The people on the ground at Hood were handling it.

    Same goes for Bush. He was told and he decided not to dash right out and scare the children and read to them while he awaited information. It is not like he could have done anything about it. The people on the ground and in the military were doing their thing and he was being kept informed. He left when it was appropriate.

    I think the criticism of Bush was ridiculous and I wrote this post partly to see reaction.

    I believe he has little respect or use for the military and his inability to effectively lead them comes from that belief. And don’t tell me that he says good things about him. He never would have been elected if he did not pretend to be a supporter of the troops.

    • Adam says:

      I think the Bush goat stuff is stupid partisanship for sure.

      You’ve cut to the heart of it now though: You think Obama has little respect for the military and cannot effectively lead them. You use anything Obama says or does related to the military to reinforce your belief. The truth is no matter how Obama handled yesterday you would have found a way to denigrate it.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “As for the Bush thing, I don’t think he had a deer in the headlight look for 7 minutes.”>>

      DAR
      Then you demonstrate once again that you prefer fantasy to reality.

      Bush sat and listened to a reading of My Pet Goat for seven minutes after being informed of the second plane hitting the Trade Center. He was informed of the first one hitting before he began this very important photo-op.

      That he couldn’t excuse himself from this event because it would “scare the children” is RIDICULOUS on it’s face. He would have sat longer but his handler, Andy Card, came up and told him it would be best to get off the pot.

      Incidentally, Andy Card was on vacation when Katrina hit so here is what Bush was doing on August 30 while New Orleans drowned.

      Oops.

      And you are trying to make a cheap political point out of the fact that you think Obama did something out of order in an address?

      D.

      • In on it not says:

        Actually, George Bush is not a deer, so I must conclude that DAR is the one living in a fantasy-word world.
        I guess your wonderful M.N. Leader of the Ages of Hope and Audacity would have;
        1. Stopped the second plane in mid-flight
        2. Evacuated all the poor and down-troden after the levy broke but before anyone died or got hungry.
        3. Not scared the children.

        Like his blue lips aren’t enough to scare the kids every time he is on color TV…
        Mark my words, he’ll steal the silverware, just like the Clintons did.

      • Darrel says:

        INON: “I guess your wonderful M.N. Leader of the Ages of Hope and Audacity would have:”>>

        DAR
        Probably excused himself by telling the children something very important had come up and he was needed elsewhere at the moment. As much as I like a good goat yarn, considering that Bush was informed that America was at that moment *under attack,* reading this important story probably… could have waited for another time.

        D.

  3. Big Dog says:

    I should say the words “sounded” heartfelt. I imagine he was truly sad but if he had said something to console the families before the shout out maybe he would have appeared as if he were actually concerned and empathetic.

    • Adam says:

      Obama has handled every issue with the military with respect and carefulness, including the tragedy at Ft. Hood.

      He hasn’t caved to uniformed liberal voices on the direction of the war and GITMO. When his administration has made wrongheaded policy decisions, like with veterans healthcare, he’s changed course after listening to military experts. He’s appointed very qualified people to positions related to the armed forces each time.

      What more can you ask him to do? His lack of respect for them is entirely in your head because you cannot stand a Democrat as commander-in-chief. This is why you view even his Ft. Hood remarks in the lens of your own lack of respect.

      • In on it not says:

        Well, I notice he wants to allow faggaloids in the military. And he called this terror attack aeverything but what it is; a muslim terror attack on our soil!
        Again!
        You can say what you want, kliberals have a free pass, but Bush has not been out of office for a year and the Moose-limbs are already at it again.

        If Obama (Organization of Burka am Mussy-wear Associates)wasn’t a pussy-in-cheif, the 7th century throw-backs wouldn’t have pulled another homicide attack.
        They would be dead.

        Yeah. I blame Obama for Ft. Hood.
        His weakness enables terrorists. The muslims play him like a cheap violin, and the music doesn’t please me.
        So DAR.

  4. Blake says:

    No Adam, he has had a lack of respect that extends to all facets of this admin.- He let the Ranking General, one who HE appointed, swing in the wind while he holds Latin dances in the WH and trips to NYC. He is a narcissistic SOB who respects no one who can’t do him some good. He is a good politician, but that’s a low compliment, if one at all.
    Personally, I wonder about this shooter- as we can once again see, it wasn’t a swede who attacked us- it was a muslim- and I just hope I can hang around long enough to piss on his grave. That is as good as he deserves.

    • Adam says:

      You wonder? If it had been a Christian (like for instance Seung-hui Cho in the Virginia tech murders or Timothy McVeigh in OKC) that attacked those men would the religion matter? Shouldn’t we figure out if it was motivated by radical Islam before you state simply being a Muslim as being significant to the attack?

      • Big Dog says:

        Well, shouting Allah Akbar while killing and making statements about Muslims standing up to the occupiers as well as taking glee in soldiers being killed in Little Rock would lead me in that direction just as it would if a Christian had been shouting that he was killing in the name of Jesus.

        • Adam says:

          Are we even sure those things happened? How many times has the story changed since this thing happened? I saw folks blaming Islamic Jihad the minute they saw this man’s name. The level of Islamophobia in this country is shameful and the number of conclusions jumped to so far would embarrass any rational person.

      • In on it not says:

        Hold on, mud-head.
        McVeigh didn’t attack people because he was a Christian. And in fact, he wasn’t even a Christian.
        Muslims attack because they ARE muslims.

        This nut-bag was screaming Allah Akbar.

        Now, if you, Adam want to schlarve Muslim dode, go right ahead.
        But don’t insist we die for your pleasure.

        • In on it not says:

          The only thing shameful inthis country is you, Adam. There is no bottom to the pit of mud you will swim in, and the amount of appeasing you will perform.
          Too bad you aren’t a girl, I am sure you would be great fun on “date a liberal night.”

          Or, are you a girl??

  5. Big Dog says:

    Katrina, failure of local government. Ineptitude at the federal level. End of sotry.

    What should Bush have done? Possibly found a phone booth and changed into Superman and saved NO and ended 9/11.

    He continued to listen to the story while getting updated.

    He acted appropriately. It is unfortunate you hate America so much you can’t see it.

  6. Big Dog says:

    I’m not the only one:

    Did the president’s team not realize what sort of image they were presenting to the country at this moment? The disconnect between what Americans at home knew had been going on — and the initial words coming out of their president’s mouth was jolting, if not disturbing.

    It must have been disappointing for many politically aware Democrats, still reeling from the election two days before. The New Jersey gubernatorial vote had already demonstrated that the president and his political team couldn’t produce a winning outcome in a state very friendly to Democrats (and where the president won by 15 points one year ago). And now this? Congressional Democrats must wonder if a White House that has burdened them with a too-heavy policy agenda over the last year has a strong enough political operation to help push that agenda through.

    If the president’s communications apparatus can’t inform — and protect — their boss during tense moments when the country needs to see a focused commander-in-chief and a compassionate head of state, it has disastrous consequences for that president’s party and supporters.

    All the president’s men (and women) fell down on the job Thursday. And Democrats across the country have real reason to panic.

    Link

    • Adam says:

      Just scan the comments on that post to see the kind of out of touch vacuum Obama’s critics are living in. If only Obama did everything the way that his critics wanted, then maybe he wouldn’t have critics at all…

      • In on it not says:

        Critics? Obama has critics?
        Scan the critics?

        Coming from Adam, that is price-less! I mean Adam! You are the living proof of “liberal in a vacuum,” and if it were not for criticism, you would cease to exist!

        Hold the press! What a great idea! Oh, Big Dog! Big Dog!

  7. Big Dog says:

    Witnesses claimed that this is what he said. They were there.

  8. victoria says:

    http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/06/the-massacre-at-fort-hood-and-muslim-soldiers-with-attitude/

    “The level of Islamophobia in this country is shameful and the number of conclusions jumped to so far would embarrass any rational person.”
    No the level of intentional stupidity on the part of the politically correct should embarrass any rational person.

    • In on it not says:

      I think it does embarrass rational people, but the problem is that PC has suplanted rationality.
      Just look at Adam; he can’t say S*** but his mouth is full of it!

  9. Adam says:

    Most details come from the statements of retired Army colonel Terry Lee. You can watch the interview on Fox where Lee admits many of the things he says are hearsay.

    As for whether Hasan shouted Allah ackbar?

    “Did he say anything as he was carrying out this act?” Smith asked Cone.

    “There are reports, unconfirmed, that he was saying, ‘Allahu Akbar,” ‘ [Lt. Gen. Robert Cone] replied.

    My point is not that these things didn’t happen or that I know Hasan wasn’t motivated to kill based on Islam or whatever, but that to say these things happened for sure is at this point speculation.

    The minute some folks like Malkin saw his name they were trashing Islam and comparing it to every other case of Muslim violence without justification.

    Apparently Victoria thinks that it’s political correctness not to smear a man on hearsay evidence, but I thought that was pretty important to our justice system.

    • Big Dog says:

      But Adam, you think it is perfectly OK to smear a person with the label of racism because they happen not to agree with Obama. You never consider that they just oppose the policies and not the man. You use the word racist for everything and then smear Malkin for doing basically the same thing.

      • Adam says:

        Find me one example where I’ve called somebody racist because they happen not to agree with Obama. You always say that when I catch people being racists and it’s a tired old excuse. Don’t lie to cover up the fact that you are such an islamophobe that you’ll run with any unsubstantiated garbage to smear the religion some more in the aftermath of a tragedy.

        • Big Dog says:

          You never catch anyone being a racist, you just accuse them of it based on YOUR definition.

          I am no Islamophobe, that too is a charge leveled by you that has no substance.

          Show me where I used unsubstantiated garbage to smear the religion of the guy.

          And Islam allows some of its adherents to smear the religion everyday. Why is it you excuse those who use that religion to do terrible things as radical but call those of us pointing out the radicals as Islamophobes.

          The problem with you Adam is that you grew up being told you were a victim of one thing or another and learning that there are classes of victims. So when someone says something you don’t like they are labeled racist or Islamophobic based on your world view of victim mentality.

    • Big Dog says:

      And Lee admits that many are hearsay but there are a few he witnessed as he himself said he had to tell Hasan to knock it off.

      There are also the web postings with his name on them. The FBI will determine if it is him but others have already said it is.

      Don’t know but you cannot discount the religious aspect of this. That does not make anyone an Islamophobe.

      • Adam says:

        I discount anything that at this point in time is unsubstantiated.

      • Adam says:

        When you find out the motive behind this attack then you can accuse me of incorrectly discounting something. Otherwise the fact that he is a Muslim is about as important as any other detail about his life.

        • Big Dog says:

          Why don’t you write to the Post and tell them to stop speculating about stress or PTSD or other things associated with military life? Discount that until it is proven.

          The MSM jumped through hoops to ask if it is stress over multiple deployments (he has never been deployed) or other things but danced around the fact that he is Muslim.

    • In on it not says:

      Correct me if I am wrong, but this is not a court of law, and YOU, Adam, are not the judge.
      And I think Victoria was refering to you when she said, “…the level of intentional stupidity on the part of the politically correct…”
      Read it again. Put your Big Brian to another use besides holding your ears apart.

  10. victoria says:

    You know what–if this guy instead of being Muslim would have even had a hint of Christianity and yelled something about Jesus–everybody in the press would be all over this and run with it as a religious fanatic killing.

    • Adam says:

      And that would be just as unsubstantiated at this point in time as well. But I wonder which kind of person you’d be more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to? The Muslim or the Christian?

      • victoria says:

        Christians are not taught in their Bibles to kill infidels so it would make someone who did something like that a crazy lunatic. But that would not stop the LSM from thinking the worst or trying to pin it on Christianity. However who is taught in their Koran to kill infidels? And who was talking about Muslims rising up against the aggressors etc. etc? But you know what I am just like that Col. because I am sick of Oh poor Hasan and maybe someone might say the wrong thing to offend someone. There are dead soldiers and devastated families and wounded. They deserve the attention and not all this PC bullcrap–I mean what more do you need. Benefit of what doubt? I mean this is you–http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/06/chris-matthews-we-may-never-know-if-religion-was-a-factor-at-fort-hood/

        • Adam says:

          Christian murders are lunatics but Islamic murders are just following the word of the Koran? Oh give me a break. That’s some garbage and you know it. Let me remind you once again for the record, you have absolutely no substantiated evidence to prove that Hasan’s religious beliefs played any role in the shooting.

          Sorry, but refusing to speculate on hearsay and 2nd hand accounts? That is not called PC, that’s called common sense. You may think that spreading possible falsehoods is justified because the man murdered people in cold blood but let’s live in reality and deal only in the things we can verify and collaborate.

        • Adam says:

          Or corroborate rather, instead of collaborate.

        • In on it not says:

          Allah wants Adam for her brains.

    • Big Dog says:

      Sure, if a person who happens to be Christian blows up an abortion center or kills an abortion doctor guys like Adam are all about telling us how the radical Christian did it.

      • Adam says:

        I don’t recall ever speculating on the motive behind an abortion clinic bombing without knowing the details. Don’t lie, and don’t say “guys like” just to make up a story and then accuse me of it indirectly.

  11. Adam says:

    Disgruntled Ex-Engineer Suspected In Fla. Shooting

    Reports are a guy heard from a friend that read something about a guy who knew this guy that said the shooter was a Muslim.

    • Big Dog says:

      No, an eye witness identified him a a Hispanic.

      Will you call that unsubstantiated because it was an EYEWITNESS?

      Eyewitnesses, those who were at the scene, said he screamed Allah Akbar. The General can say that they unsubstantiated but he was not there. The eyewitnesses were.

      • Adam says:

        You can pretend all you want but given the lack of detail about the said witnesses, the chaos of the situation, and the fact that Lt. General Cone could not confirm such a thing, how are you still insisting that such a thing for sure happened?

        On the other hand how does shouting Allahu Akbar mean he was it was terrorism or motivated in any way by his Islamic faith?

        We’ll know more things soon enough and you may all be right, but it’s funny that you continue to defend so ardently your right to speculate and assume based on sketchy details and unconfirmed hearsay.

      • Darrel says:

        Bigd: “Will you call that unsubstantiated because it was an EYEWITNESS?”>>

        DAR
        Bigd. Eyewitness testimony is *notoriously* inaccurate and unreliable. Especially so when it involves an intense stressful incident. Adam is certainly right to be prudent here.

        As I remember, in a rather famous example… the Titanic was a rather big boat, it was a clear night, yet the survivors in the life boats were about split on whether she went down in one piece or two.

  12. victoria says:

    This was written in an article by “Dr. Tawfik Hamid is the author of “Inside Jihad.” He was a former associate of Dr. al-Zawahiri (second in command of al-Qaida) and currently he is a reformer of Islam. For more information, visit http://www.tawfikhamid.com. Hamid’s writings in this blog represent only his thoughts and not the views of the institute where he works.”

    *Muslims must stop blaming Westerners who link violence to Islam as normal human mind tend to link events together. Thousands of terror attacks, including Sept. 11, all over the world, beheadings in the name of Islam, and many other barbaric atrocities are all conducted more commonly by people who are identified as Muslims. It is virtually impossible to stop people from linking violence to Islam unless violence in the name of Islam stops.
    *Should the Muslim world continue blaming the West for “Islamophobia” and for linking violence to Islam or should it work on changing itself to stop producing generations that accept violence as integral parts of their religious teaching? (Please see my ABC’s test for radical Islam.)
    *Senior officials in the military, intelligence, Homeland Security, and others need to learn how to detect early signs of Islamic radicalization among their employees. Failure to do so can lead to a disaster.

    • In on it not says:

      Prejudging an individual by their group identity (or presumed group identity) is not only unethical, it is blatantly irrational, since group identity reveals absolutely nothing about a person. Every individual should be judged only on the basis of their own words and deeds.

      Don’t judge Islam by the Muslims that you know, and don’t judge the Muslims that you know by Islam.

      Don’t judge Christianity by the Christians that you know, and don’t judge the Christians that you know by Christianity.

      But were I to be judged, I would rather it be by Christians than Muslims, or athiests like Adam.

  13. In on it not says:

    2009.11.06 (Merca, Somalia) – A 33-year-old man is brutally stoned to death for adultery. The execution takes about seven minutes.
    2009.11.05 (Ft. Hood, TX, USA) – A Muslim psychiatrist yelling ‘Allah Akbar’ murders thirteen unarmed U.S. soldiers on their base in Texas.
    2009.11.05 (Zamboanga, Philippines) – Two people are killed when suspected Islamists fire into a commuter bus.
    2009.11.04 (Bajaur, Pakistan) – Two female schoolteachers are brutally shot to death by Taliban extremists.
    2009.11.03 (Helmand, Afghanistan) – A Taliban gunmen disguised as a policeman suddenly opens fire at a police base, killing five British soldiers in cold blood.
    2009.11.03 (Jazan, Saudi Arabia) – Islamic rebels gun down a security officer “with the support and assistance of Allah.”

    • In on it not says:

      See Adam, it is very easy to believe that Ft. Hood was a Muslim terrorists action because they are doing it every day! Every day!
      I dare you to find any case in your lifetime where Christians, in the name of Christ or because God told them to do so, did any more than hand out leafletes or knock on your door and ask if you want to talk about The Lord.

      And that is the difference between Them and Us.
      A clear, defined line.

      • Adam says:

        You can list a thousand terrorist attacks, 10,000 maybe. Does that change the fact that at this point in time we do not know the motive behind this attack and that simply because the attacker is a Muslim you assume it was Islamic terrorist? It’s sickening and irrational.

        • victoria says:

          It was terrorism, stupid. He caused terror and death and carnage. Mass murder causes terror. And the shooter was a devout Muslim. And it was planned. It takes some time to get the guns. Because I know you would probably rather think that this poor harrassed Muslim just snapped due to PTSD. Except that he has never been deployed before so no PTSD and there is some speculation on PTSD by proxy. (Hearing horror stories from over there) except his main concern which he voiced was Muslims should not be fighting Muslims. There is just one slight problem because “Americans are fighting Islamic extremists.” But maybe if he would have strapped a bomb to his back instead of shooting people it would make it easier for your brain to process.

        • Adam says:

          I’m sorry you feel the need to insult me just because I keep reminding you that we still do not know the motive behind the attack. Speculate away though. Your hatred of Muslims is pretty clear at this point anyway so it’s not like it matters either way.

        • Blake says:

          Adam- The shooter was a muslim- he committed a terrorist act. He is a muslim terrorist.
          You are white- you are liberal, ergo, you have no spine.

      • Darrel says:

        INON: “I dare you to find any case in your lifetime where Christians, in the name of Christ or because God told them to do so, did any more than hand out leafletes..>>

        DAR
        Oh, that’s easy:

        “…I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jews, I am fighting for the Lord.” –Adolf Hitler

        “Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews…. The work that Christ started but could not finish, I — Adolf Hitler — will conclude.” –Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

        etc.

        D.
        —————–
        “It may be truthfully recalled that Christian churches, throughout the ages, have always consented to bless war, troops, and arms and that they prayed in a very unchristian for the annihilation of their
        enemy.”
        –Martin Neimoeller, a Protestant church leader who actually did go to a Nazi concentration camp.

        Oh, and if you have a Bible, may I recommend you check out the largest part of it, the Hebrew Scriptures. It has hundreds of examples of mass genocide/slaughter and people killing people, for your god.

        • victoria says:

          Darrel, I believe In on It said “In your lifetime.” Someone besides Hitler, who we all know was a lunatic. And just because Hitler used Christs name doesn’t make him a Christian.

        • Darrel says:

          VIC: “Darrel, I believe In on It said “In your lifetime.”>>

          DAR
          Yes he did. Would you like more modern examples? I think most of these anti-abortion terrorists would qualify.

          VIC: Someone besides Hitler, who we all know was a lunatic.>>

          DAR
          Isn’t someone who kills people “for god” sort of by definition a lunatic?

          Incidentally, the Bible heroes of the Old Testament provide many examples of such folks. See King David for instance. Most of the others too.

          VIC: And just because Hitler used Christs name doesn’t make him a Christian.>>

          DAR
          I let people label themselves, within reason. Of the long list of reasons I could provide supporting the claim that Hitler was a Christian, using “Christs name” wouldn’t even make the list.

          D.

  14. Big Dog says:

    Adam, you know what you have said about abortion clinic bombings.

    And yes, people like you.

    I notice your tact lately. You play like meathead who just accuses everyone of lying. That is one reason he hardly gets visits to his website. It is sad to see you lie as your retort. You are much more intelligent and eloquent that meathead to play like him.

    • Adam says:

      You’re lying to accuse me of lying now? Are you serious? What have I said about abortion clinic bombings?

    • Adam says:

      Your defense of telling lies: “Oh, you just accuses everyone of lying.”

      Your defense of ignoring and sometimes engaging in racism: “Oh, you just accuse everyone of being racist.”

      • Big Dog says:

        I don’t lie and I don’t engage in racism. That is the plain fact.

        A lie is a deliberate act designed to deceive. I engage in no such acts.

        I am not a racist, do not engage in racism and hold no racist views.

        I refuse to bow down the the accusations of a snot nosed kid who thinks he is the arbiter of what is and what is not racism in this country. I have life experiences and a history to show the opposite of your assertions.

        You have nothing but your inexperience and mush filled brain which allows you to somehow believe that your youth and relative lack of world experience gives you some superior insight when compared to my experience.

        But it matters not how you see it. Just quit being dishonest about it.

        • Adam says:

          Who is being dishonest here? I’m not the one who accused you of drawing premature conclusions about abortion related terrorism when you have done no such thing.

    • Adam says:

      But really is this your new defense? “It’s OK for me to speculate on the motive for the attack and smear Islam…and you can’t say thing contrary because…in imaginary situations you did it too. OK, I guess, but that’s pretty weak.

  15. Big Dog says:

    And I have not speculated on this. I only said that the religious angle could not be discounted, just as the stress angle or any other angle.

    We cannot discount that this might have been an act of terrorism.

    As I recall, my post dealt with Obama’s response, not the motive of the murderer.

    • Adam says:

      You have not speculated on this? Not even when you said:

      Well, shouting Allah Akbar while killing and making statements about Muslims standing up to the occupiers as well as taking glee in soldiers being killed in Little Rock would lead me in that direction just as it would if a Christian had been shouting that he was killing in the name of Jesus.

      Or does that no count? Afterwards you stated you “cannot discount the religious aspect of this.”

      There wasn’t much to argue about with the Obama angle on this post though if you do indeed want to stay on topic. Obama tried his best to speak respectfully about the situation but there are some of you that cannot believe for an instance that Obama may actually care about the troops. There’s no sense in debating with you about that.

      • Blake says:

        Well, I think that if you shout Allah Akbar, and all the rest, you can conclude reasonably that the man was a muslim terrorist- if you cannot, after all that, you are stupid to the point of being brain dead, or a raging liberal.
        Which is it here?

  16. Big Dog says:

    Of course eyewitness testimony is unreliable but it is more reliable than what people who were not there say.

    As for the Titanic, imagine that most folks were trying to stay alive to notice the other details.

    Take for instance 9/11. We saw planes fly into buildings. A lot of us were eyewitnesses to this.

    There are plenty of people who say it was an inside job and controlled detonation.

    Now, the specific accounts fo that day might vary from person to person but who will you believe, the eyewitnesses who tell you planes flew in or those who were not there but say that the government demolished the building.

    I am not saying that it is improper to be prudent. I don’t know, nor do I care, what his motivation was. But it is just as prudent to NOT speculate on stress or harassment or anything else. The MSM is pushing that angle and no one is telling them to be prudent. Adam instead attacks those who see it another way.

    The truth will come out in the wash but the soldiers are just as dead. Let us honor them and let authorities focus on Hasan. Once we know the truth, then we can address it.

    • Adam says:

      So you feel justified to push your angle because the “MSM” is pushing one? Who cares? The media fails us daily in so many ways. You’re both wrong.

      You say “I don’t know, nor do I care, what his motivation was” yet you were quick to call out all the assumptions about this case.

      “Let us honor them and let authorities focus on Hasan. Once we know the truth, then we can address it.”

      I 100% agree with that, yet why are so many conservatives playing the terrorism angle, yourself included, without knowing the truth? Never have I said it was one thing or another, just that it was way, way too early to say for sure and the jump to blame it on Islamic fundamentalism is Islamophobia.

      • Big Dog says:

        Regardless of whether the terrorist act was related to his Islamic beliefs, what he did was an act of terror nonetheless. You seem to have equated any mention of terror with Islam.

        I believe I pointed to many issues in this case that were being discussed such as his religion, his past statements (the ones that were verified first hand, not the hearsay), and stress. None can be discounted.

        I don’t see where the post discusses his religion. Perhaps this part of it was misleading:

        I am glad he was not killed. We need some answers from him. I also hope he is the first soldier to get the death penalty in quite some time. Nothing would be better than saving this coward from death only to make him face his accusers and then have to contemplate his demise.

        As for any comments I merely pointed to items that were in the news that allowed people to address his religion as at least part of the issue.

        So, was the post misleading on this issue?

        • Adam says:

          Religion as a topic started on Blake’s comment. He starts the speculative ball rolling by bringing up his religion:

          Personally, I wonder about this shooter- as we can once again see, it wasn’t a swede who attacked us- it was a muslim…

          To this I replied:

          Shouldn’t we figure out if it was motivated by radical Islam before you state simply being a Muslim as being significant to the attack?

          And then the right-wing, anti-Islamic feeding frenzy began…

        • Blake says:

          I spoke the truth here- it WAS a muslim, was it not?
          And by shouting his little muslim AA, he confirmed it.
          There is no feeding frenzy, just an attempt to make stupid-ass liberals see common sense- probably a failed task, as you haven’t seen it before.
          Religion is a component of this and other MUSLIM attacks- do they have to kill your family before you see this?
          One of the big problems we have in this country and elsewhere is the muted response of other muslims, as if they condone this, and there will come a time when people are going to demand that they choose a side and be resolute in their decision, rather than act like mealy mouthed liberals.
          Sometimes there is a black or white position, and you will be known for your actions.
          There is a time for mercy, and a time for retribution. That time is coming, and they will have brought this on themselves with their indecision.
          Fence sitting is not an option.

  17. Big Dog says:

    Adam, you should search some of your past comments to see what you wrote about Christians and abortion bombings. Look at your old site as well, it might have been there too.

    • Adam says:

      What are you getting at though? My point is simply that I cannot recall a single time when without knowing all the details I swore by an assumption that a violent attack was motivated one way or another based on persona biases.

  18. Big Dog says:

    My hatred of Muslims? Now who is speculating?

    I hate the radicals who bastardize the religion and I think the ones who refuse to stand up to that element are cowards. I work with Muslims, have worked with them in the hospital, and deal with them in business every day.

    I have had no problem with any of them nor they with me. Perhaps it is because the ones I deal with are not radicalized elements and just want to live their lives in safety like the rest of us do.

    So don’t pretend you know anything about me in this regard. I have no hatred for normal people who lived decent lives no matter what color they are, what religion they are or what nationality they are.

    If they are not decent I don’t care what demographic they fit in, I will speak against them and will show little tolerance.

    Your speculative nature and stereotyping of conservatives does not allow you to see it any other way.

    As for insulting, I find it insulting that a person half my age would think he has the experience or knows me well enough to decide that I am racist or otherwise.

    • Adam says:

      I was referring to Victoria on that one, not you. She may not consider it “hate” but whatever it is, it’s sure not love so I don’t know what it is that makes her so angry about Muslims.

      I’m sorry though, age has nothing to do with detecting racism. I’ve lived around racists all my life, even if it’s apparently not enough years for you. But I don’t think you are a racist so much as you tend to disregard or look the other way about the countless numbers of racist or bigoted attacks by the right in this country.

      • Blake says:

        What may make victoria mad is what makes me mad about some muslims, and that is their ambivialence toward what happens- when you condemn an act with whispers, you will be counted among those who did not speak up- and far too many muslims whisper their condemnation.

  19. victoria says:

    http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/11/06/is-fort-hood-a-harbinger-nidal-malik-hasan-may-be-a-symptom-of-a-military-on-the-brink.aspx
    You want to talk about stupid irresponsible speculation but it comes from your ilk Adam. The left is going to twist themselves into pretzels to paint this picture because Obama is thinking about sending more troops to Afghanistan.

  20. Adam says:

    But there’s certainly no need for us to keep making this personal and I apologize for any of my part in that.

    My stance on your post was and still is that Obama treated this with respect it was due even if you and now the right wing media wish to run it as him having shown disrespect but giving a “shout out” first instead of last.

    My stance on the role of Islam in this attack is that we still do not know. We have scattered accounts, hearsay, conflicting details, and a whole lot of stuff in between. Many right wing bloggers and commenters on this site clearly think that is enough to label it terrorism, and even Islamic terrorism. We do not know the motive and we can prove neither true at this point, and I think that’s pretty much all I should say on this.

  21. Big Dog says:

    Funny Adam, because I don’t think I look away from racist acts. It just differs on what we consider racist.

    But I do notice you tend to look away from the racist acts of your party.

  22. Big Dog says:

    There is no doubt it was an act of terror. Whether it was Islam motivated remains to be seen.

  23. Big Dog says:

    America was under attack in Texas, Obama gave a shout out to a Congressional Medal of Honor winner who never won that award.

  24. victoria says:

    So you feel justified to push your angle because the “MSM” is pushing one? Who cares? The media fails us daily in so many ways. You’re both wrong.

    The MSM is not pushing this because they are just as blind as you in their “lets don’t rush to judgement.”
    There is another good article up http://michellemalkin.com/
    “The Beltway Sniper and the Fort Hood Killer:
    Peas in a Jihad Inspired Pod.”
    I didn’t know any of this stuff because it didn’t get reported anywhere that I saw. Just because they weren’t plugged into Al Qaida doesn’t make them any the less terrorists.

  25. victoria says:

    Here is another good article on this subject-

    http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2009/11/why_obama_doesn.html
    She states:
    “Tell me something: in a moment of national tragedy is it really too much to expect the President of the United States to forego the “shout outs”? Is it too much ask that he learn the difference between the Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Medal of Honor?”
    “As so many have noted, our Commander in Chief finally visited the wounded at Fort Hood the other day. Unfortunately, it wasn’t this Commander in Chief:”
    “Obama doesn’t “get” the military because with every step they take, whether it’s on prosthetic legs or the steely sinews of a combat hardened Marine, their strength and independence give the lie to his defeatest rhetoric. All those unbowed shoulders, unbeaten spirits and uplifted heads make him profoundly uncomfortable.

    As well they should. Americans don’t need to be rescued by the government. We have each other.”