Senator Joe Lieberman says that the Fort Hood shooter (you know, the one who shouted Allahu Akbar!) is an Islamic terrorist.
Actual Muslims agree that this was an Islamic attack on the United States. The Revolution Muslim website calls the incident a “pre-emptive attack,” and states that the massacred soldiers “are in the eternal hellfire.”
I really really hope that the US doesn't cravenly refrain from seeking the death penalty against this joker.
Posted by: sabril | November 08, 2009 at 06:56 PM
Yea, Joe Lieberman is so politically incorrect. The way he supports the homosexualists, butch feminists, Mexican invaders and black nationalists.
What makes this enemy of the nation so different?
Can anyone think of anything? I'm totally stumped.
[HS: Homosexualists, feminists, and Mexican immigrants didn't massacre a bunch of soldiers. I haven't heard that Lieberman supports black nationalists, but I haven't followed his career that closely.]
Posted by: Richard Hoste www.hbdbooks.com | November 08, 2009 at 09:44 PM
By the way Sigma, I can't believe you missed this part of the story
---
[The army's top army officer George Casey] expressed concern that speculation about the shooting could result in a “backlash” against Muslim soldiers. “What happened at Fort Hood was a tragedy, but I believe it would be an even-greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here,” he said. “We have a very diverse army. We have a very diverse society. And that gives us all strength.”
---
http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/questioning-diversity-worse-than-death/
Posted by: Richard Hoste www.hbdbooks.com | November 08, 2009 at 10:12 PM
Although I don't think it is fair to portray the Muslims behind "Revolution Muslim" as typical, I think that Hasan's act was Islamically justifiable. He wounded and killed dozens of enemies of Islam before they could kill Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, so most honest Muslims will consider his act heroic. 9/11 is much more difficult to justify because most of the victims were innocent civilians. Fort Hood? Not so much.
Posted by: John Standos | November 08, 2009 at 11:02 PM
"Homosexualists, feminists, and Mexican immigrants didn't massacre a bunch of soldiers. "
How many days does it take for illegal immigrants and their citizen anchor babies to pile up thirteen dead bodies? Two or three?
I know it's a separate issue, but it's quite a convenient time to get "politically incorrect."
[HS: Mexicans, to their credit, don't hate the United States the way Muslims do. The social problems caused by unskilled immigrants is a different issue.]
Posted by: Richard Hoste www.hbdbooks.com | November 08, 2009 at 11:16 PM
George Casey failed upwards to the Army Chief of Staff job (he was the theater commander in Iraq before Petraeus took over), partly, I think, because his father was a well-respected general who was killed in Vietnam. I think his being nominated to the chief spot in the first place was an example of George W. Bush's compassionate conservatism. Bush could have used more competence and less compassion with his generals though. Franks, Sanchez, and Casey were all thoroughly unimpressive.
Posted by: DaveinHackensack | November 08, 2009 at 11:42 PM
I'm not 100% convinced that Muslim Revolution is run by revolutionary muslims. It could very well be false flag or just a bunch of trolls.
Then again, people preaching to flock always sound like parodies of themselves.
Posted by: rob | November 09, 2009 at 01:18 AM
Hoste -
"homosexualists"? seriously?
Posted by: jkl | November 09, 2009 at 07:37 AM
Did he say the guy didn't belong in the military? Or that if he were a soldier wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan he wouldn't want to be treated by a muslim doctor? If not then he's not nearly politically incorrect enough.
Posted by: eh | November 09, 2009 at 08:46 AM
[Mexicans, to their credit, don't hate the United States the way Muslims do.]
It's not a contest, and I'm not sure if "hate" is the right word, but I think you're a little naive about that. There's a reason why the US national soccer team never plays matches against Mexico in southern California anymore. (They now play important competitive matches against Mexico in places like Columbus, Ohio.) At the least, many Mexicans hold the US in contempt.
And living in Manhattan, I don't imagine you have a lot of contact with typical Mexicans; not a critical mass anyway (i.e. enough to form a nearby 'barrio', aka a suburban Hispanic slum).
Posted by: eh | November 09, 2009 at 09:00 AM
The best part: The reason why other soldiers didn't complain about this guy's strange behavior to authorities? They were afraid of appearing discriminatory. This is a problem at every workplace in America. Before raising any issue about any female or minority, you first have to brace yourself for the inevitable attribution of bigotry. Especially if the problem is directly related to their group membership.
American's are afraid of Muslims because they are a religious group that takes their religion way, way too seriously, and they are now firmly associated with a pattern of terrorist and just plain crazy suicidal violence. Most Christians simply do not take their religion all that seriously, it is mainly a social outlet. And while many Christians love warfare and bloody nation-building, they don't walk into hospital lobbies and start gunning people down. Some Muslims, on the other hand, don't seem to be able to tell the difference.
Posted by: James | November 09, 2009 at 09:52 AM
"Joe Lieberman not politically correct"
He's Jewish, an ethnic, and accordingly held to a far, far lower standard than white people are. He's not cool enough, to be blunt, to be politically incorrect. That's a white guy thing.
Posted by: Heck | November 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM