COLLECTIVE MADNESS
“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
CAIR are shills for Hamas...
ReplyDeleteDo you understand?
They are Islamic TERRORISTS...
The Ft Hood SHOOTER?
An ISLAMIC TERRORIST...
It's JIHAD STUPID....
Attorney General to speak to Hamas-linked CAIR despite FBI ban
ReplyDeleteRight after Dawud Walid of CAIR-Michigan was defending the jihadist imam who was killed in a shootout with the FBI. Yet another Which-Side-Is-Obama-On Alert: "Despite ban, Holder to speak to CAIR-linked group," from Politico, November 9 (thanks to all who sent this in):
Attorney General Eric Holder has agreed to give a keynote speech next week to a Michigan group which includes the local branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations even though the FBI has formally severed contacts with the controversial Muslim civil rights organization.
On Nov. 19, Holder is scheduled to speak in Detroit to the first annual awards banquet of Advocates and Leaders for Police and Community Trust, a coalition of several dozen law enforcement and community groups. An online registration form for the event includes the Council on American Islamic Relations-Michigan on a list of "official & participating organizations."
A spokeswoman for ALPACT confirmed that CAIR is a member of the coalition.
"CAIR has been involved for a while," said Chandra McMillion, community development facilitator for ALPACT. "CAIR is listed as an official member."
The funny thing? All those ultra left liberals that support are dont understand that the CAIR types (hamas etc) hate the gays...
ReplyDeleteand yet the ultra left gays support CAIR...
too funny when the gays will be targeted by the islamic groups for execution...
it's like "queers for palestine"
47. buddy larsen:
ReplyDeleteThe Russian strategic rocket forces (as they style them) have to be the sum of all our fears –’fears’ in the sense not that we tremble in our boots but that we include among the topics we raise with our our (*cough*) office of the CiC is just that particular item –Putin’s spending on massive civil defense, his new generations of rockets and warheads, his crash (or nearly so) modernization of the entire military, his new doctrines of winning a nuclear war, all while we do nothing but watch president Buster Keaton fret about how best to throw away our (deteriorating) deterrent without our (wee the people) much noticing.
SecDef Gates, for example, has over the last year or two made some rather stunning remarks about the shifting-against-us balance of strategic weapons power –and the reports get buried on page 31 and have a hour’s legs if any legs at all.
Urge selecting the Russian nuke titles in JR Nyquist’s archive archive and scanning a few of ‘em. Mavbe emailing one or two to Aunt Sally and Uncle Jim.
After all, dropping the ball in this area would be uniquely bad –remember what you heard about your folks and theirs, how they felt on Dec 06, 1941? Or our own attitude as of 9/10/01? –that it was American complacency that encouraged the bad entity to try the attacks. And those attacks were nothing compared to what could happen if we don’t wake up.
Anyone know approximately how many Muslims are in the service.
ReplyDeleteReason I ask, is that the grenade guy at the outset of OIF, plus this guy, constitute a pretty goodly number of our guys taken out by "our guys."
Wondering how that would graph out,
statistically.
49. Mr. X:
ReplyDeleteBuddy Larsen or Luddy Barsen whoever, your claims are a joke. The sea based Bulava missile has failed in the last ten tests and the land based Topol ICBM is just slightly more reliable.
But I know, you think it’s all an elaborate ruse, like in that Simpsons episode “Homer Tide” where the Russian ambassador pushes a button at the UN, switching his title to “Soviet Union” and says “Nyet, vats vat ve vanted you to think! Bwahahahahahaa!” and the Berlin Wall comes back up, Lenin crawls out of his tomb going “grrrerrrrerrr”.
A Brief History of Islam in the United States
ReplyDeleteAt present, the number of Muslims in the United States is estimated to be ... are now approximately 9000 Muslims on active duty in the U.S. armed services. ...
OK, how many in service, total?
"As of February 28, 2009 1,454,515 people are on active duty["
ReplyDelete---
So, you
(those still sober enough to do the math)
compare 9,000 to 1,454,515, and figure out how many fratricidal deaths we would have suffered over the last 7 years if we had a million or so more Muslims in arms...
So that happy guy was blessed by Bush admin.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt due to that big Muslim booster lady that was W's confidant.
Karen Hughes.
Hughes got terrorism supporters into the White House.
ReplyDeleteWe, as a country, are victim to many multiple casualty events each year. Many of these are job stress related.
ReplyDeleteWhy it is even referred to by the term "Going Postal", in reference to the Federal Socialist employees in that agency that "go off" on the job.
Now we have a case where a Muslim Army officer "went off", and it is an indicator that we will all die in a Russian thermonuclear storm?
Give it a break.
Get real.
doug wants to take two incidents and build a statistical case against Islamic soldiers in the US military.
Well, the statistics are such as to indicate that the religious sect of the shooter is insignificant, to the total scheme of things as they relate to friendly fire casualties.
BULLSHIT.
ReplyDelete...and Buddy's post on missiles is totally unrelated.
Divide 9,000 into one and a half million, DUMBASS!
ReplyDeleteBack on at the end of the October, a mosque was raided here in the Detroit area and an imam was gunned down. It took place in Dearborn, a Detroit suburb with the highest Muslim/Arab population in the US. Terrorist related stuff like his happens all the time around here because of the area's crime statistics, the muslim population, and easy access to Canada.
ReplyDeleteAt any rate, CAIR and other muslim organizations have been calling for an investigation ever since the shooting.
Abdullah Shooting
The funny thing was that for the first couple of days after the shooting, Freddy was mentioned more often in the local papers than Abdullah. Freddy was the FBI dog that Abdullah shot before being gunned down himself.
Evidently, after Abdullah shot Freddy, the dog was air-lifted to an emergancy vet located in another Detroit suburb where he eventually died. There have been stories of reporters trying to worm their way into the vet through "unscrupulous" means to check on Freddy. One of the FBI agents pointed out that Freddy was a decorated member of the FBI and that these dogs "become like family." (By the way if you would like to contribute to Freddy's memorial, see the following:)
Freddy
Detroit's a tough area. (I was given a t-shirt a few years back, Detroit: Where the Weak are Killed and Eaten), but we do like our dogs (wolves too).
My advise to CAIR is don't mess with PETA. You are out of your league.
They represent 6 tenths of one percent of the services, and have murdered how many folks in 7 years?
ReplyDeletePlace would be a bloodbath.
So, we would have had approximately 3,000 on base murders if our guys killed at the same rate as the muzzies in arms.
ReplyDelete...don't think that was the case.
If all goes according to plan, John Allen Muhammad will discover in the next hour how that whole 72 virgins thing plays out…absolutely Baberahamic…
ReplyDeleteCan anyone think of a case of murder (mass or otherwise(?) involving the US military where a Christian, Jew, Hindu or Buddhist killed his fellows as an article of faith?
191. Bob Smith:
ReplyDelete“Well your 100X guestimate could approach infinity, no? Besides, that’s only the qualitative. If just 1% are infected with SJS, there’s between 25,000 and 60,000 jihadis ready to explode right here in River City. Of course, if the percentage of Muslims ready to explode is actually 10%, then we have a really big problem, no?”
“Explode” can have several definitions. I think the first “explosion” we’ll see isn’t an outright bombing, but a declaration (implicit or explicit) that somewhere in the US is now inviolable Muslim territory. Ethnic cleansing is already effectively going on in portions of Dearborn, Philadelphia, and Minneapolis. I think it a matter of only a few years before those areas become no-go zones, in the current European sense, for infidels. That will prove they are invaders, not immigrants, but like the Europeans we will do nothing about it.
"Bob Smith" posted in this thread
ReplyDeleteShe used to post here.
Habu:
ReplyDeleteHappy Birthday Marines
Semper Fidelis
at ten shun!
http://tinyurl.com/cava46
BOOT_BLOUSING_BANDS_Keep_your_pants_tucked_neatly
ReplyDeleteBOOT BLOUSING BANDS Keep your pants tucked neatly
[906198] $0.99
Click to enlarge
These old fashioned, standard Blousing Garters are used to secure pant bottoms inside the tops of your boots. Two pieces per card. One size fits all!
---
Uh, I did mine OUTside.
...thot my comrades did too?
Would that be a treasonous offense for a WASP?
starling:
ReplyDeleteBatman @ 58 said “The obvious is that political correctness most certainly was part of why Hasan was not disciplined or removed from his responsibilities.”
I’m inclined to agree.
And it makes me wonder: if we were talking about a white-supremacist member of the World Church of the Creator (http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/wcotc.asp, would there be even one second of hesitation in disciplining and/or removing this person from his responsibilities?
This is not a rhetorical question.
I have no knowledge of how the military handles such matters but I suspect they’d come down on such a person like a ton of bricks.
Members of the group have carried out aggressive leafleting and recruiting campaigns in various cities across the United States, including Sacramento, California, the site of three cases of synagogue arson in June 1999.
ReplyDelete---
Damn Joos are running an
Insurance Scam!
"Even though he is not yet 30, Hale has a long history in the right-wing extremist movement. In 1992 Hale proclaimed himself "National Leader" of the National Socialist White Americans' Party. "
ReplyDelete---
The post now held by Nancy Pelosi.
Since the powers that be have settled the Major Hasan embarrassment to their satisfaction, the burning question of the day will be "How do we get the Carrie Prejean tape”? (In the case of bobanomalous, "for free".)
ReplyDeleteOnanObob will perservere,
ReplyDeletetape, or no tape/
This is kinda strange
ReplyDeletePosted on a BC thread.
Well, if Mormons are morons, they are also the happiest American citizens, says the poll. West Virginians are the least happy - easy to understand (With interstates and bridges to nowhere, who wouldn't be?)
ReplyDeletelink to "Happy" poll
"persevere"
ReplyDeleteHey!
ReplyDeleteIn DR's book, Mormons are second only to Joos.
In the "race" to the bottom.
doug,
ReplyDeleteRe: Every farm a fortress
...every barn a bastion...every camouflaged coop controlling a kill zone...
57. Habu:
ReplyDeleteAdding an endorsement to Whiskey #10
The ability by our enemies to make atomic weapons is rolling at a rate much faster than any of our intelligence agencies initially predicted.
Whiskey #10 points out a number of important truths, the bottom line I read is that a nuclear war will happen sooner rather than later. What shall be done?
I have advocated preemptive strikes on islam given it’s aggressive anti-everyone else philosophy and it’s desire to spread to enemies of the USA nuclear technology as well as completed nuclear systems.
It is the only rational course in the face of 16th century cultures armed with nukes.
But stand by because CONUS will be eating a few nukes in the easily foreseeable future. Preemption can slow this progress.
Next to that you’d better learn to be a survivalist and begin anew the shelters, now overgrown or filled in, we built in our backyards in the 1950’s.
To those who doubt all this I say wonderful for you will be one less person to care for who was ill prepared and totally naive.
---
No Muzzie of Pootie is gonna waste a Nuke on Maui, Right?
I'm home free!
No diggin for me.
OR pootie.
ReplyDeleteShould be a tickertape parade for that lady cop.
ReplyDeleteThe Worst "Tragedy" I can think of would be if that demented old motherfucker kept his job.
ReplyDeleteWe have the video. It will not be posted.
ReplyDeleteStudents Sue Texas College Over Holsters
ReplyDeleteFORT WORTH (CN) -
Two students say their college violated their constitutional rights by prohibiting them from wearing empty holsters on campus, to protest the college's prohibition of concealed weapons. The students want to participate in what they say will be a nationwide protest on Monday, Nov. 9, by handling out leaflets on campus
"and by wearing empty holsters on their hips."
Think the ACLU is on the right side!
2164th said...
ReplyDelete"We have the video. It will not be posted."
huh?
Video of what?
Miss Prejean. Someone posted it on limewire. It has since been taken down. I feel sorry for her.
ReplyDeleteShe dropped her $ Million Dollar law suit to keep them from releasing it, and it's up, anyway.
ReplyDeleteInteresting times..
ReplyDeleteToday we execute an islamic f*cktard who murdered many as an assassin....
All the while the news stories are about why an islamic f*cktard who murdered many in Ft Hood should be not thought as an "islamic" person..
A few months ago... In little rock AR, an islamic f*cktard murdered a couple in front of a recruiting office (that story disappeared)
and the list goes on and on...
but today our attorney general (e holder) will address an islamic conference that includes CAIR (a shill for Hamas, an islamic f*cktard group)
I am sure Rat enjoys the hole his head rests in... But i refuse to drink the kool-aid
"Well, the statistics are such as to indicate that the religious sect of the shooter is insignificant, to the total scheme of things as they relate to friendly fire casualties."
ReplyDeleteI would hardly consider this "friendly fire". More like guerrilla warfare from an infiltrator.
**
"Should be a tickertape parade for that lady cop."
Agreed. How perfectly fitting was it that the brave Mujahid was brought to his knees by a … gasp, woman.
Ones and twos, while the open border policy is good for forty thousand deaths a year.
ReplyDeleteYou guys have an obsession with religion, which is quaint. But that you all project it upon everyone else, that's comical.
Now perhaps this US Army Major that was about to deploy to a war he thought unjust, had a religious obsession, too.
Birds of a feather flocking together, but doug is going back a decade to find an incident to use as a dot.
Such is the desire to connect them.
While there are areas of LA that are already "no go" zones. No need to wait on the Muslims to create that social phenomena.
All I've ever said about Mormons, doug, is that Mr Romney could not be elected because of his religion. The GOP base sees him as a Christian in Name Only.
I just consider him to another devoted Abrahamic.
But even if this Major was a religious radical, if that is a given, it does not indict the other non radical Abrahamics in the whirled. No more so than the crimes of Yaakov "Jack" Teitel indicts all Isrealis.
ReplyDeleteNovember 2, 2009 12:34 p.m. EST
Jerusalem (CNN) -- An American-born Israeli man, described by police as a "Jewish terrorist," is mentally unstable and in need of psychiatric help, his attorney told CNN Monday.
Israeli authorities Sunday announced the arrest of Yaakov "Jack" Teitel, 37, a West Bank settler who was arrested last month.
Israeli police and security forces say he has been charged in connection with a string of attacks and murder plots over the past 12 years against Arabs, homosexuals, leftists, messianic Jews and police forces.
Allen asks:
ReplyDeleteCan anyone think of a case of murder (mass or otherwise(?) involving the US military where a Christian, Jew, Hindu or Buddhist killed his fellows as an article of faith?
Well I can't. I'd add on the happy Mormons (this doesn't surprise me, by the way, if you know them, most do seem quite happy with the world), our homegrown American religion, and the Native Americans.
Come to think of it, I know only one group that does this sort of thing.
Nor Taoist, nor Confucian, nor Shinto, nor Wiccan.....
ReplyDeleteand you know this chap went postal as an article of faith how?
ReplyDeleteThe problem isn't the unfair labeling of Islam as violent based on the aberrant, violent actions of a few. No, the problem is Islam itself, which ennobles and, thereby, encourages such behavior.
ReplyDeleteMoreover, a survey of violent struggles globally will show the vast majority have Islam as the operating model of at least one of the combatants.
Islam has, does and will continue to act as the progenitor of violence. Avoidance and denial provide no defense.
One can hope that John Allen Muhammad’s executioner is a woman. Consider the impotent rage Muhammad (a lifelong serial abuser of women) will experience in knowing that he is being sent into eternal darkness at the hand of a “she”.
background music courtesy of Mr. Yankovic
Well, ash, unless all the witnesses were mistaken, he did NOT quote John 3:16 while shooting. Think about it for mere minute, ash, it is not that hard to grasp conceptually: A man born, named and bred on the model of Abu Nidal acts like Abu Nidal. Why, ash, even his own family don't disagree with his religious motive. So, ash, why is it so hard for a multi-culti-guy like you?
ReplyDeleteAsh,
ReplyDeleteYou avoided the question, by the way. Name an event, as asked, if you can. Take your time...you will need it.
doesn't
ReplyDeleteand Judeo-Christians as the other "operating model". So?
ReplyDeleteAsh, by depriving Major Hasan of his cause de guerre (death to infidels), you deprive him of his Constitutional right of religious choice. That is not very sporting or tolerant of you, old bean.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us/10post.html?_r=1&ref=us
ReplyDeleteThat article gives accounts of murder and all sorts of mayhem at the hands of US military folk allen. You've avoided the question of how you know the Fort Hood murders were done as "an article of faith"?
and allen, those orthodox jews could give equal cause to paint all jews like many do Islam. Heck, even the British government is now considering whether there is racism at foot over the 'jew must be born to jewish mother' requirement.
ReplyDelete"In an explosive decision, the court concluded that basing school admissions on a classic test of Judaism — whether one’s mother is Jewish — was by definition discriminatory. Whether the rationale was “benign or malignant, theological or supremacist,” the court wrote, “makes it no less and no more unlawful.”
The case rested on whether the school’s test of Jewishness was based on religion, which would be legal, or on race or ethnicity, which would not. The court ruled that it was an ethnic test because it concerned the status of M’s mother rather than whether M considered himself Jewish and practiced Judaism. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/world/europe/08britain.html?scp=1&sq=jewish%20school&st=cse
The article doesn't address the question, as you well know. I did not deny that military folk commit murder. My point remains intact: they do not do so as articles of faith.
ReplyDeleteThe British government will not change hundreds of years of Jewish practice. What has this to do with the violence advocated by Islam with reference to the US military? You are obfuscating...You will now have to do so on your own.
ReplyDeleteOh excellent, Ash old sport shows up to argue the impossible and the absurd. Excellent.
ReplyDeleteThe Russian government does not consider itself Judeo-Christian.
ReplyDeleteNeither the Indian or Pakistani governments consider themselves Judeo-Christian.
The struggles Sri Lanka have no Judeo-Christian element.
The Chinese government does not consider itself Judeo-Christian.
The Saudi government does not consider itself Judeo-Christian.
The Lebanese government does not consider itself Judeo-Christian.
etc...etc...etc...
"to see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."
___George Orwell
Looks who's ducking the questions here allen, it is you. I've simply asked how you know Hasan murdered those soldiers as "an article of faith"? In addition I'll also ask How does this differ from other folk going postal? Even if he did kill as an article of faith should we condemn all Muslims for it? Should we condemn all Jews for the actions of the orthodox Jews?
ReplyDeleteAs to your question as to others murdering on "articles of faith" I can only point to many of the wars throughout history fueled by religion.
By the way, the weather in Hilton Head was lovely last week.
neither - nor
ReplyDeleteOkay...From its beginning, Islamic warriors have gone into battle screaming "God is great."
ReplyDeleteFrom its start Islam has fielded armies and operatives (e.g. assassins) to press its articles of faith as described within the Koran.
These articles demand the surrender of infidels to the word of god, as set out in the Koran through the intermediary, Mohammed.
Major Abu Hasan attacked a US military facility while shrieking, "God is great!"
His attack followed several years of documented statements antithetical to both the US and its military mission, based upon his considered view of the teaching of the Koran.
His actions, by the way, are being applauded worldwide by his fellows, who believe he acted to advance the articles of faith, set forth in the Koran by Mohammed.
Did you duck hunt on Hilton Head?
Nope, golfed.
ReplyDeleteSo, if we accept he did the deed as an article of faith, so? Does this tell us much? How do you go from this deed to a condemnation of all who practice that faith?
how you know Hasan murdered those soldiers as "an article of faith"?
ReplyDeleteO let us count a few of the ways.
He dresses up in a special religious uniform goes forth to his hoped for martyrdom
He yells Allahu Akbar, begins firing
He had given an hour long power point talk to other shrinks, frealing them all out, in which he rants about all things islamic, saying the infidels should be burned
He attends a mosque, which has had a reputation of being a radical mosque
He harangues others constantly about islam, even his patients
He gives away his koran
He is reported to have tried to have gotten in touch with Al Qaeda
He buys a gun and ammo, showing planning
He gives away his belongings, showing planning
His business card says 'soldier of allah SWT'
He didn't 'go postal, he 'went muslim'.
Cause the faith says that is what you are to do. The Medinan passages having been abrogated by the Meccan ones, if I have that right.
ReplyDeleteYou can take a similar view of Christianity bob if you accept the old testament literally.
ReplyDeletebob wrote, "he went Muslim"
ReplyDeleteBravo! That is exactly right.
The president was right to say today at Fort Hood that the act was "twisted logic". That is the fundamental, ignored flaw of Islam, itself - twisted logic.
For some reason, "Islam", "the prophet", "Koran" etc went unmentioned by the president. Yep, just another off the farm Amishman gone bad.
Fort Hood link
I may have that backwards. Anyway, the later violent passages abrogate the earlier, more peaceful ones. Like a
ReplyDeleteSupreme Court decision.
Reason: Mo wasn't in control earlier, later he was.
Ash wrote:
ReplyDelete"You can take a similar view of Christianity bob if you accept the old testament literally."
But we don't, ash, as you are discovering as you search for that elusvie contradiction to my hypothesis.
Neither do we take Robert Heinlein seriously about having sex with our mothers. And????
If a military tribunal gives him the death penalty, as they certainly should, I'm dang near ready to bet Obama Won't Carry It Out
ReplyDeleteallen, it brings us back to your propensity to condemn all of Islam for the actions of a few. Similarly many condemn all Jews for the actions of a few of them.
ReplyDeleteAs both Allen and WiO have pointed out many times, Judaism is a long, long evolving tradition.
ReplyDeleteIslam however, the koran, came direct from the mind of allah, never to be changed. Perfect.
Hence it has been resistant to efforts to soften the edges, so to speak.
Henry Kissenger's definition of a moderate muslim--"One that's out of ammo."
Tain't funny, either.
Ash, someone put up somewhere some days ago, that I have seen before, a listing of the 200 plus conflicts around the globe in the last decade or so, large and small, and damn near all of them had to do with muslims in one way or other.
ReplyDeleteFancy that.
"Yes, how many deaths will it take till he knows
ReplyDeleteThat too many people have died?"
On that day they shall beat their swords into plowshares...Amen
Here's a good comment--
ReplyDeletePosted by: just curious Nov 10, 12:38 PM
It seems to me that Islam is a kind of mental rabies that attacks a persons central nervous system.....a kind of invasion of the bodie snatchers
It's true that most moslems are not radical jihadists , as most germans were not nazis in 34 , but as they say , nothing succeeds like success and by the time of the great victories in France , very few germans were not nazis
Most moslems are not radical , but they could become so , if Jihadists are percieved to be successful
They are , as of now placid ....like gasoline is , waiting for a spark
Major Hasan was placid last week before he ignited ....987654321 ....IGNITION !!
Furthermore....it seems to me that Islam is a primitive warrior religion...a kind of desert Vikings , with their promise of valhalla and contempt for women
They are moderate, until they pick up the gun, like gas before the match.
Furthermore they also have this idea of subverting a society from within, and demographic conquest.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to all the fundies in all the worlds religions. Righteous assholes!
ReplyDeleteMary, Mary
ReplyDeleteGorby Advises Leaving Afghanistan
ReplyDeleteYou can take a similar view of Christianity bob if you accept the old testament literally.
ReplyDeleteThat's ignorance and obstinence.
And, this is interesting--
ReplyDelete13. Trent Telenko:
Wretchard,
You need to go read and comment on these two posts by AJ Strata:
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/11268
Note how two investigations were initiated. My guess is the first JTTF was out of New York which handles most terrorism cases. But when it hit the JTTF in DC (and got close to the political winds of the new administration) it seems to have discovered some interesting and politically correct reasons to stop the investigation.
and
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/11256
The NSA clearly intercepted Major Hasan communicating with a well established al Qaeda supporter and/or agent. The FBI was alerted and for some unknown reason decided not to investigate this. Under President Bush there would be no doubt as to what to do – ensure our safety and monitor this man.
The Obama administration either dismissed the threat or stopped the FBI from doing more investigation. Given the lameness of the excuses being floated I am thinking the latter, but the former is just as bad.
Nov 10, 2009 - 9:13 am
All the Abrahamics feel justified using violence to expand their religion, or the territory it requires.
ReplyDeleteEach and every one, and each called upon God for assistance while killing the non-believers of the day.
That the Christians have conquered the New World and it no longer is news that warrants being above the fold, does not make it less of a reality.
The "that was then, this is now" argument does not wash, either.
If we look at all the "major" conflicts around the whirled, in the last 300 years, Anglo-Saxons were in the midst of most of them.
A propensity for violence and an active foreign policy is all it took. That and a believe that believing in Christ would save the heathens from themselves.
While making it easier to exploit their resources.
Good grief, if the FBI was on to him in 2008, and it was known he had tried to contact al-qaeda, and D.C. or Holder or Obama nixed it.....jeez
ReplyDeleteLieberman's right, hearings must be held.
Whether the conflict was in Africa, Asia, the sub-continent, the Americas ... where ever, the Anglo-Saxons were there.
ReplyDeleteBy today's dumbed-down standards, the Founding Fathers would be considered fundamentalist Christians. They would be seen as a threat to the rights and liberties that we enjoy as Americans.
ReplyDeleteThe ignorance of history and animosity toward Christianity in America is very disheartening bodes ill for the future of our nation.
...and bodes ill...
ReplyDelete2008 was Bush, Cheney, and his host of bureaucrats.
ReplyDeleteNot Obama and Holder. That would have had to have been in 2009.
That's were the fault would lie, with regards the Army Major, Team Bush.
But of course it's much more complex than that.
ReplyDeletefrom 'Life After Death: The Evidence' D'Souza
In my New York debate on "Is Christianity The Problem?" with Christopher Hitchesns, one of the most interesting questions came from a man from the island nation of Tonga. For centuries, the man said, Tonga suffered from terrible vendettas, tribal wars, and even cannibalism. Then the missionaries came with their doctrines of God, universal brotherhood, and the afterlife. Then, turning to Hitchens he said, you have given us some interesting theories, but what do you have to offer us? Hitchens was mementarily speechless. What struck him and the audience was the sheer simolicity of the question. The man wasn't debating the fine points of doctrine; he just wanted to know, at the end of it all, which approach made things better for him and his people.
And
ReplyDeleteThe reason for the debates in Spain was the clash of views between the conquistadores and the Christian missionaries. Almost immediately following the establishment of colonies in the Americas, the conquistadores and their successors began to enslave the native Indians. (who of course had slaves themselves) The missionaries protested to the Spanish Crown and to the church in Rome, asseting that such enslavement was immoral and unjust. The enslavers appealed to the usual arguments: the native Indians are not like us; they are not Christian; they are not even civilized. Juan Gines de Sepulveda, a distinquished scholar of Aristotole, sided with the slave owners. Citing Aristotle's term, he insisted that the Indians were 'slaves by nature.'
Tonga is not Europe of the Americas, but an isolated community.
ReplyDeleteIt is not a tiny version of the whirled.
And it was not converted to the multiple sects of Abrahanmics, but only one. So peace and tranquility can reign.
It is only when the sects converge that the intolerance of the other sects is brought to the fore front.
But Francisco de Vitoria, a Dominican theologian at the University of Salamanca, did not agree. He argued that it made no difference if the slaves were not civilized. It didn't even matter if they were not Christian! That's because God has made all human beings, Christian as well as non-Christians, in His image. Since God is immortal, humans have immortal souls that represent our likeness to God. And since we are God's creation, only God, not man, has ultimate claims on us. To enslave the Indians, Vitoria contended, was to reduce immortal souls to tools of material advantage. Whatever the utility of such a practice, whatever the benefit to Spain and the Spanish Crown, it should be outlawed because it is an offense against God.
ReplyDeleteThe Pope agreed with Vitorian, and in 1536 issued the encyclical Sublimus Deus which declared that 'Indian and other peoples who may later be discovered by Christians are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ.' A few years later, the Spanish emperor Charles V suspended all further expeditions to the Americas.
whit,
ReplyDelete1) In Leviticus 25:44-46, the Lord tells the Israelites it's OK to own slaves, provided they are strangers or heathens.
2) In Samuel 15:2-3, the Lord orders Saul to kill all the Amalekite men, women and infants.
3) In Exodus 15:3, the Bible tells us the Lord is a man of war.
4) In Numbers 31, the Lord tells Moses to kill all the Midianites, sparing only the virgins.
5) In Deuteronomy 13:6-16, the Lord instructs Israel to kill anyone who worships a different god or who worships the Lord differently.
6) In Mark 7:9, Jesus is critical of the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as prescribed by Old Testament law.
7) In Luke 19:22-27, Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him.
The United States has hundreds of denominations and sects of Christians, yet, for the life of me, I cannot think of a single war caused by the "convergence" of these groups.
ReplyDeleteNope, not even the great Methodist - Baptist Dipper/Dunker War of 1822.
"For some reason, "Islam", "the prophet", "Koran" etc went unmentioned by the president. Yep, just another off the farm Amishman gone bad."
ReplyDelete---
Allahpundit called it a good speech!
Now I'll have some specifics for my outrage, even though I have not read it, and probably never will.
Never before, writes historian Lewis Hanke, had a powerful empire "ordered its conquests to cease until it was decided if they were just." In 1550, the emperor convened a great debate at a monastery in Valladolid on precisely this subject: the moral legitimacy of the Spanish conquest. Sepulveda argued for the colonial interests. He contended that the Indians were barbarians without souls who should be ruled by the Spanish for their own good. On the other sided was a passionage advocate for the Indians, the Spanish friar Bartolome de Las Casas. Las Casas argued that the Indians, as all human beings, have immortal souls that confer on them a special degree of dignity. He also dramatized the abuses that the Indians were subjected to "for their own good." Although the Spanish Crown sided with Las Casas, and passed a series of laws seeking to protect Indians' rights, those laws were largely ignored in the Americas, where the great distance from Spain made enforcement almost impossible.
ReplyDeleteAlso, we should remember, the folks in a lot of the Spanish Americas were savages by our current definitions. With their Flowery Wars, slavery, and the perpetual tearing the hearts out of living flesh on stepped pyramids to restore the flow of energy in the universe.
So, it's a complex subject. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of a really big subject.
the great Methodist - Baptist Dipper/Dunker War of 1822.
ReplyDeleteHeh :)
Hadn't heard of that one, but off the top of my head, I'm betting it was some dispute over baptism.
I'm with the historian Paul Johnson. Has the West been better off with the coming of Christianity?
Yes, marginally, he answered. (and he's a committed Catholic)
Those that criticize Christians and others for 'falling short' just don't get the Augustinian theology.
Have we become so fearful of asking such questions that even a Hasan, with his record for hate-preaching, is not just allowed to serve in the US military, but is promoted to the rank of major by people apparently too scared to seem racist to object?
ReplyDeleteAnd can you trust journalists to even tell you the facts you need to reach the right answers?
Ash, obviously that's a hurried cut and paste job. Go read the verses for yourself but read the full context. Not just the single verse. Some of your citations are simply wrong, others are specific to a period in Jewish history. The claim that Jesus was advocating child murder outrageously misinterprets the verse. Admittedly, the last verse cited is harsh but Jesus had a real problem with the Pharisees (or religious establishment). He could get "heated" and there's no evidence that he meant that his disciples were to literally carry out his orders.
ReplyDeleteTaking cultural relativism and PC to its logical conclusion, where all cultures are equal in value, it was a crime against the human spirit when the human sacrifices on the pyramids of meso America came to an end, along with the flowery wars, and their captive slavery.
ReplyDeleteYes, marginally, he answered.
ReplyDeleteMarginally better off? Marginally?
What a moron.
What was the great Dipper-Dunker War of 1822?
ReplyDeleteWell, he's not a moron, whatever else he might be. He's got a book out now about the history of the USA, which I'm slowly plowing through. Well written.
ReplyDeleteThe Protestant/Catholic wars nearly depopulated parts of Europe for awhile, for instance.
Shows the lack of your historical background, in regards the United States, allen.
ReplyDeleteBut does not change history.
The Utah War, also known as the Utah Expedition, Buchanan's Blunder,[1] the Mormon War,[2] or the Mormon Rebellion[3] was an armed dispute between Latter-day Saint ("Mormon") settlers in Utah Territory and the United States federal government. The confrontation lasted from May 1857 until July 1858. While it had mainly non-Mormon civilian casualties, the "war" had no pitched battles and was ultimately resolved through negotiation. Nevertheless, according to historian William P. MacKinnon, the Utah War was America's "most extensive and expensive military undertaking during the period between the Mexican and Civil Wars, one that ultimately pitted nearly one-third of the US Army against what was arguably the nation's largest, most experienced militia."[4]
Discounting, of course, the riots and rampages that accompanied the Mormons in Illinois and Missouri.
ReplyDeleteAll were religiously motivated.
Then you discount the religious aspects of the Texican War and the Mexican-American War.
ReplyDeleteCatholic v Protestant, but the Irish immigrants that had been drafted into the US Army, deserted and fought for Mexico, to them it became a religious war.
So again, allen, your historical ignorance is bliss.
Is slavery a religious issue?
ReplyDeleteCatholic v Protestant, I really do not know, but slavery was illegal in Texas and that rubbed the Anglo-Saxons raw, to the point they created a rebellion and insurrection.
Ultimately founding a Republic of Texas which allowed for slavery of lessor humans to be legally and morally acceptable.
the "war" had no pitched battles and was ultimately resolved through negotiation
ReplyDeleteHere's something I found interesting:
In his book Human Accomplishment, Charles Murray asks what common feature connects the great achievements of the West. He concludes that it is the sense of the transcendental that animates. even if implicitly, our sense of "the true, the beautiful and the good." Murray gives the revealing example of the nameless medieval stone masons who carved gargoyles on the great Gothic cathedrals. Often, he notes, their most detailed carvings were at the very top of the structure, concealed behind cornices and out of public view. Murray writes: "They sculpted these gargoyles as carefully as any of the others, even knowing that once the cathedral was completed and the scaffolding was taken down, their work would remain forever unseen by any human eye. It was said that they carved for the eye of God." The Gothic masons, like many other great artists, did their work sub specie aeternitatis, i.e., under the aspect of eternity. D'Souza
Then, of course, you discount the Abrahamic assault upon the pagan religions of the indig peoples.
ReplyDeleteThat was almost 200 years of religious persecution and violence, here in America.
We can all rest easy, another Illinoisian has come to the rescue. The fault for the massacre at Fort Hood is America's love of guns. Guns made him do it!
ReplyDelete“Unfortunately, America loves Guns. We love guns to a point where that uh we see devastation on a daily basis. You don’t blame a group.”
Got that? You, instead, blame ALL your fellow Americans...a chip off the old chip...
It was not that they held high personal standards and would not do less than their best, even if only they knew of it?
ReplyDeleteEasy to ascribe motive to the works of folks long dead, but not easily accurate.
The work is of the highest caliber, without question. The motivations of the sculptors, well that will be questionable for an eternity.
DR,
ReplyDeleteI started to waste valuable time responding to your Texas rant, but decided otherwise. Since you alone are the only person I've ever heard advance a religious dynamic to the war for Texas independence, it just wasn't worth the time.
Fear and loathing, then and now
ReplyDeleteIndeed, polygamy was roundly condemned by virtually all sections of the American public who accused the Mormons of gross immorality. During the Presidential Election of 1856 a key plank of the newly-formed Republican Party's platform was a pledge "to prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism: polygamy and slavery".[17] The Republicans plausibly linked the Democratic principle of popular sovereignty with the acceptance of polygamy in Utah, and turned this accusation into a formidable political weapon.
Popular sovereignty was the theoretical basis of the Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Basically, it held that the Territories should be free to regulate their own "domestic institutions" without the interference of Congress. Originally, this concept was meant to remove the divisive issue of slavery in the Territories from national debate and transform it into a local choice, thus forestalling armed conflict between the North and South. But, Republican polemics denouncing the theory held that if popular sovereignty protected the "domestic institution" of slavery in the territories, it must also protect the practice of polygamy. Many Americans who were morally or politically prepared to accept slavery viewed polygamy as deeply immoral, and were strenuously opposed to its practice in Utah. Thus, leading Democrats such as Stephen A. Douglas, formerly an ally of the Latter-day Saints, were forced to denounce Mormonism and polygamy just as harshly as the Republicans in order to save Popular Sovereignty from public disrepute. In a public address on June 12, 1857, Douglas declared the Mormons to be "alien enemies" and urged that the "loathsome, disgusting ulcer" of Mormonism that dominated Utah had to be removed from the body politic.[18]
the great Methodist - Baptist Dipper/Dunker War of 1822.
ReplyDeleteBaptism?
I assumed it had to do with Doughnuts.
The Texas War perspective from the Mexican side, allen.
ReplyDeleteIt was all about slavery.
That you do not know of the Irish conscripts and their actions in the Mexican War, that, again is your shortfall of knowledge, not that of the history.
Again, your ignorance of how others see US is quaint and comical.
Is slavery a religious issue?
ReplyDeleteIt would seem so.
"Go down, Moses, go down to Egypt land. Tell old Paroh, let my people go"
I think it's been pretty well established that, even accounting for all the meanderings of the stream of history, the Judeo/Christian outlook has been at the forefront of freeing people up. That and the Enlightenment.
I know, I know, even the Jews had slaves. Their slavery though was of lessor severity than in surrounding areas. And was gone long ago.
The Bible is a book of liberation.
Slavery was everywhere, now it's mostly gone.
There was slavery in the Nordic countries, then serfdom, gone now.
Slavery seems to have vanished from Europe 400Ad - 800AD, according to Souza, replaced by serfdom, an advance.
D'Souza says, if you have a choice between being a slave, and being a serf, be a serf. :)
As predicted, being Muslim sheltered Major Hasan from military justice and the demands of good order and discipline. He was given a license to kill.
ReplyDeleteAll that remains is to find someone low enough (and dumb enough) on the foodchain to feed to the wolves.
link
In the 1820's and 1830's, Mexico, newly independent from Spain, needed settlers in the underpopulated northern parts of the country. An invitation was issued for people who would take an oath of allegiance to Mexico and convert to Catholicism, the state religion. Thousands of Americans took up the offer and moved, often with slaves, to the Mexican province of Texas.
ReplyDelete...
So, the State Religion of Mexico did not play a significant role in the country, but the State Religion of Iran, it does?
Dubious about why they were fighting a Catholic country and fed up with mistreatment by their Anglo-Protestant officers, hundreds of Irish, German and other immigrants deserted Taylor's army and joined forces with Mexico.
ReplyDeleteLed by Capt. John Riley of Co. Galway, they called themselves the St. Patrick's Battalion (in Spanish, the San Patricios) and fought against their former comrades in all the major campaigns of the war.
The history of the San Patricios is a woeful tale of angry, bewildered, naive, or calculating young men, from varied backgrounds, who deserted for a myriad of reasons and paid a fearful price.
The San Patricios, in the words of one Mexican general, "deserved the highest praise, because they fought with daring bravery." But eventually, Mexico surrendered, ceding almost half its territory to the United States.
Each San Patricio who deserted from the US side was interned after the war in Mexico and subsequently given an individual court-martial trial. Many of the Irish were set free, but some paid the ultimate price. Roughly half of the San Patricio defectors who were executed by the US for desertion were Irish.
There are ceremonies there twice a year, on September 12 which is the anniversary of the executions, and on Saint Patrick's Day.
It also clarifies the reasons for the war, and the active participation of immigrant people (most notably Irish but also Scots and Germans) who joined the Mexican side and paid for that decision with their lives.
Heroes
The Saint Patrick's Battalion in the US-Mexican War, has placed the Irish as a revered race in Mexico; even to this day, an Irish person in Mexico will be told a countless number of times about the famous 'Irish Martyrs' who defected from the US Army and gave their lives trying to save Mexico from US aggression from 1846-1848.
The reason it's a religious issue is the perception that behind the scenes we are all one, a religious perception.
ReplyDeleteGo on, then, just say it, Amerika is a evil nation founded by evil Abrahamics.
ReplyDelete"He was very vocal about being a Muslim first and holding Shari'a law above the Constitution," this officer recalls. When fellow students asked, "How can you be an officer and hold to the Constitution?," the officer says, Hasan would "get visibly upset - sweaty and nervous - and had no good answers."
ReplyDeleteSo, as to your questions about US Army troops killing their own. It happened, by the hundreds, in a religious war, in Mexico.
ReplyDeleteThe US-Mexican War is the pivotal chapter in the history of North America. It is the war that sealed the fates of it's two participants. For the United States, the War garnered huge amounts of territory and wealth, bootstrapping the fledgling democracy onto the world stage. For Mexico, the War sent the emerging nation into a tailspin that it is still reckoning with today, one hundred fifty years later.
In the United States the US-Mexican War is virtually forgotten, and for good reason, as it is the clearest example of historical hypocrisy. The US-Mexican War was waged upon Mexico out of pure greed and moral righteousness. The remarkable part of the story is that at the time of this unjust invasion of a peaceful Catholic neighbor, Irish immigrants fresh off the coffin-ships from the Famine identified with Mexico's plight.
Over a hundred years before the conscientious objectors of Vietnam, the 'San Patricios' were true heroes who fought and died for their religion, their convictions, their brethren, and their adopted homeland Mexico. While Henry David Thoreau invented civil disobedience in Massachusetts, refusing to pay his taxes to support this unjust invasion of Catholic Mexico, and while Abraham Lincoln stood in opposition to President Polk's scheme in Congress, the 'San Patricios' fought to the death in the front lines against the invading Yankees.
As the war progressed, the Irish grouped in the San Patricio battalion, under a green banner with St Patrick and the Mexican eagle, distinguished themselves as artillery specialists and inflicted heavy casualties on the US invaders at the battles of Monterey and Buena Vista. But the Mexican forces were being pushed back towards the capital as Santa Anna made a series of tactical blunders. The US army now under the command of a tough Virginian, General Winfield Scott (Old Fuss and Feathers), landed at Veracruz and marched on the capital.
The San Patricios, whose bravery and skill were noted by the Mexican officers, fell back with their allies on Mexico City. Those who survived the Churubusco battle and were captured were soon court-martialed for desertion. The historian, Michael Hogan, author of The Irish Soldiers Of Mexico, says the punishments inflicted on the Irish went beyond what was allowed by the military code of the day and that the whole episode was denied for years by the US army and still remains deeply hidden in USA history to this very day.
The hangings and brandings were particularly brutal. Thirty of the condemned were forced to wait for hours with the noose around their necks until the final Mexican surrender at Chapultepec Castle. This mass hanging, according to Robert R. Miller, author of "Shamrock and Sword," was the largest group execution ever carried out in U.S. military history. Those few who were spared received 50 lashes and had their faces branded with hot irons.
And the traitorous actions were based upon religious beliefs and convictions, Catholic v Protestant.
ReplyDeleteThe Hasan blame game has begun
ReplyDeleteIt was those damned evil Abrahamics that wrote the Amerikkan Constituiton.
ReplyDeleteThey buried the Arkansas Killing so deeply, I forgot to include it.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget Fort Dix.
No, whit, you viewed the history and you said it.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe it to be the case, that ours is an evil empire, but do not deny that it is an empire.
I would also not deny that any of what we are seeing today is bizarre, abnormal or new.
It is just more of the historical norm.
All that ink
ReplyDeleteAnd not a link
Amazing
But none of it was relevant to my question, since the participants were not memebers of the US military.
"Go on, then, just say it, Amerika is a evil nation founded by evil Abrahamics."
ReplyDelete---
Right On!
Right On!
Right On!
And Amerikkka's Chickens are comin home to roost!
All kinds of queer ducks are raising a clatter as well, I might add.
The Abrahamics and the Free Masons, bob.
ReplyDeleteMost all of the Founders were both.
A few were not Free Masons.
. An invitation was issued for people who would take an oath of allegiance to Mexico and convert to Catholicism, the state religion. Thousands of Americans took up the offer and moved, often with slaves, to the Mexican province of Texas.
ReplyDeleteThe lesson of the Mexican War, for us, and the Mexicans too, ought to be, be careful who you invite into your country.
Just make sure that the historical accounts you are reading are credible. There's a lot of revisionsim out there. Many lies made up out of whole cloth.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying the accounts of the Catholic defections to Mexico are untrue. The problem there is man.
All the Irish were members of the US military, while fighting for the Mexicans, allen.
ReplyDeleteThat was why they were court martial-ed and hung, or branded.
They were enlisted in the US Army at the time they were killing US soldiers.
And their desertion and subsequent combat against US troops, motivated by religion.
ReplyDeleteThat was the question posed
And now answered.
US soldiers killing hundreds of fellow US soldiers over their religious beliefs, while deployed in a war.
Making that fragging in Kuwait tame by comparison.
ReplyDeleteI suppose if you wanted to take it to extremes you could bring up the Civil War, where the military split, and people on all sides were killing their 'brothers in arms'.
ReplyDeleteBut it's a little far flung from the point being made.
Small potatoes, from a comparative historical perspective.
ReplyDeletestill awaiting that critical link...
ReplyDeleteAnd 120 years later there were still many who believed a Catholic could not be elected President.
ReplyDeleteBut JFK proved the doubters wrong. Religious diversity became our strength.
It has to again, we won't kill 1.2 billion Muslims.
But I'd say that religion was not the motivating factor, in 1860, as it was in the Mexican affairs.
ReplyDeleteSlavery became a pragmatic card for Lincoln to play, as the War progressed.
Bruce Catton laid the causation of the Civil War on tariffs and protectionism, more so than slavery, and I think he is right.
John Riley deserted the British army and joined the American army. Subsequently, he deserted the American army to join the Mexican army. Each desertion garnered much higher rank and pay. Such a man used to be known as a mercenary.
ReplyDelete...still waiting...
ReplyDeleteCzar Anita Dunn is done under the bus--
ReplyDeleteOBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
White House communications chief to step down
WND report documented Anita Dunn boasting of 'control' over media Posted: November 10, 2009
1:20 pm Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Anita Dunn
White House communications director Anita Dunn, on whose comments about President Obama's "control" of the media WND reported, is slated to step down from her post at the end of the month, according to sources talking to the Washington Post.
Dunn had been leading a campaign against Fox News Channel, slamming the top-rated network as an "arm of the Republican Party" and "opinion journalism masquerading as news."
Last month, WND posted a video of Dunn in which she disclosed to the Dominican government that President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled."
"Miller states that the religious bond was [NOT] a main reason why many defected. The attractive offer of [HIGH PAY] in the Mexican Army and the [PROMISE OF LAND]grants to defectors after the war outweighed the fraternal bond over religion, according to Miller."
ReplyDelete"Those Irish who were released by American authorities did not return to the US; some stayed in Mexico while most returned to Ireland, including John Riley who, surprisingly, was spared execution."
"During World War I, Roger Casement toured German POW camps and recruited some 50 Irish prisoners--captured as members of British units--to form the nucleus of an Irish Brigade fighting on the German side. So the fact that 200 or more Irishmen deserted and changed sides during the US war with Mexico should not surprise us.
Indeed, in the political and religious climate of the time, we could legitimately ask why the number was so small."
So, we are supposed to believe that a small group of mercenary, non-citizen Irish answer my question. Well, I will give you an A for effort. You did have to scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Again, the Irish were NOT even US citizens. To become US citizens, they were required to fulfill honorably a term of military service. This they failed to do, when promised big bucks and big farms.
Therefore, the question remains unanswered.
Big bucks and big farms--often a big temptation, for sure.
ReplyDelete"Many", but not all, allen.
ReplyDeleteThat is the point, NOT ALL were unmotivated by religion.
That is the link.
Ones and twos is all it takes.
The Catholics had hundreds.
You are looking for specific motivation, while I am looking for the crime.
ReplyDeleteBoth are available in the histories.
The secularists always playing down the religious aspects of US political actions.
It's part of our gift to the whirled.
Were all Catholics to be branded, or just the specific traitors?
ReplyDeleteWhy that's simple, we prosecuted the guilty traitors, but not all the Catholics in the whirled.
Same applies, today.
You made my point, well.
Just like with our Jewish traitors, today.
ReplyDeleteWe only prosecute the guilty, not their social, religious or ethnic group.
The work is of the highest caliber, without question. The motivations of the sculptors, well that will be questionable for an eternity.
ReplyDelete"Many", but not all, allen.
That is the point, NOT ALL were unmotivated by religion.
The motivations of the deserters, well that will be questionable for eternity.
Not all were unmotivated by the air between their ears either...
ReplyDeleteand...
Again, they were NOT even US citizens...moreover, most were not even Irish...give it up already...
Give us something from the Zulu war.
Obama: "Ich bin ein Beginner!"
ReplyDeleteUS soldiers, sailors and Marines, allen, are often not US citizens.
ReplyDeleteDoes that disqualify them as being soldiers sailors or Marines?
You did not qualify your statement as to US military members killing their own, over religion.
Now that reality is laid bare, you want to change the standards.
Fuck off, loser.
"All that remains is to find someone low enough (and dumb enough) on the foodchain to feed to the wolves."
ReplyDeleteYou're going to be delighted, allen. No one's going to be fed to the wolves. No misconduct, criminal or otherwise, nor actionable negligence, either on the part of agencies or military units/functions.
Re: "fuck off loser"
ReplyDelete"Can anyone think of a case of murder (mass or otherwise(?) involving the US military where a Christian, Jew, Hindu or Buddhist killed his fellows as an article of faith?"
The question had to do with "murder", the "US military" and "article[s]" of faith.
You have provided unlinked alleged quotations of a war involving the US military, and its punitive measures against some non-citizen mercenaries following hostilities.
I asked for a duck; you answered with an avocado and profanity. You are a genius.
DR: Bruce Catton laid the causation of the Civil War on tariffs and protectionism, more so than slavery, and I think he is right.
ReplyDeleteThe Confederate president and vice-president said BEFORE the war the chief cause of secession was slavery, and AFTER the war it was really state's rights (unless a state wanted to keep a runaway slave, that's when the southern states were ALL about federalism). Since then all sorts of people said it was really caused by this or that, but slavery was the elephant in the room ever since the founding days of this country.
allen, you are grasping at straws. You try to narrowly define the parameters but even then the examples can be found. Simply put, man fights, kills, and his faith is often the justification for what he does.
ReplyDeleteIf you are correct, trish, a lot of guys have today wasted much time doing CYA; but what would they know...
ReplyDeletenaw Ms. T. Slavery was the justification post hoc. At the time the issues were more prosaic.
ReplyDeletegood night...I leave the bar to the drunk and dull.
ReplyDeleteIn other words Ms. T. - no, the war was not about the noble cause of freeing the poor black slaves but rather who controlled what.
ReplyDeleteIt has also come to my attention that the current promotion rate to MAJ is...
ReplyDeleteOh, I'll let you guess.
Night, allen.
ReplyDeleteSomeone said a few years ago that the exodus of CPTs (especially command qualified) was going to hurt us down the road. This incident is probably not what they had concretely in mind.
The promotion rate to MAJ is 98%. You essentially have to disqualify yourself. If you don't have a DUI, you're good to go.
I agree with Miss T. And I'm going to the Casino.
ReplyDeleteIt's cold enough here to snow. brrrrr.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnd Allen too, I agree with Allen.
ReplyDeleteHere in Canada we call that an "idiot tax" bob - the government owns the casinos (share with the natives in some instances).
ReplyDeleteThe coffee is free Ash, and the talk is cheap.
ReplyDeleteSome of the take here is supposed to go to schools, but I never see any improvement in the schools.
They got their free money Wampum program back to working.
A friend of mine won a Harley-Davidson motorcycle recently, in a drawing. Can't beat that.
Here is the slide presentation that Hasan gave at Walter Reed Hospital in 2007 to his colleagues. Courtesy of the Washington Post.
ReplyDelete