@Moose

Where do we go from here? Do we continue the same approach or do we try, on this one issue to responsibly deal with this tragedy, and work together, or gain political advantage at the expense of American lives?

Again, I think I’ve made that fairly clear…we stop it with the tip-toeing around with those who espouse violent means to an end. But maybe you needs specifics…

-Bring the criminal and civil laws we used against the Klan to bear.

-Publicly “call-out” the wolves in sheep’s clothing, like CAIR.

-Emphasize and support the peaceful groups like the American Islamic Conference.

-Assure the rank and file within the FBI and other government agencies that they will be vigorously defended from lawsuits, if they have good evidence and followed protocol, instead of throwing them under a bus to make the “problem” go away.

-Stop it with the government-approved foot-baths and other Islam-only accommodations.

I’ve listed some others in the previous posts.

Part of the difficulty I think you may be having, is that you see this as something only the government can “fix”. While they can certainly to a lot, there are those OUTSIDE the government that can do just as much, in-fact more, but won’t! For example:

-The next time CAIR bitches about a movie or TV script, tell them to bug-off, AND QUIT GIVING THEM THE DAMN SCRIPS!

-Colleges need to treat all religious group the same, and stop making excuses for the the Islamist-groups. I live near SanFran, and watching the PLO run roughshod over everyone at the university is sickening. If you debate with them, the college takes their side and calls it a hate-crime.

The bottom line, is that our modern culture is run by leftists, and all I want is for them to treat Islam as they treat Christians, (well maybe not that bad.)

Looking forward, I see our business arraignment with the Saud-boys as terrible as you do, but at least it’s an “arms-length” araignment which is very different than have a sharia-law supporter as an advisor to the president. The stranglehold we’ve put ourselves into with them should be broken. We will never do that as long as we refuse to drill our own oil and gas, and shun nuke-plants…yet another quandry the left has forced us into.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Patvan: There is plenty of criticism and blame being leveled in all directions, and has been for some time. We could debate the politics and blame game forever and get nowhere.

http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm

It is a hard claim to make to state that it has not been known for a very long time the nature of the Islamic extremists, the Presidents and policies that have enabled and partnered with them and our involvement in funding, supporting and arming the Freedom Fighters, who “morphed” into the Taliban. (they always lived and believed and WERE the Taliban) As long as the snake we helped feed would only bite our enemies, the nature of the snake itself was no problem. The snake has turned on us and we hate the snake…..but we have always known the snake for it’s true nature.

The Saudis are not our friends, just business partners, and business and staying in power for the Family of Saud trumps ideology…for now. They do their work for Allah under the table. We currently need the relationship to exist too so we can maintain our standard of living. Bush embraced the Saudis, Obama has his advisers, should have Bush and now Obama spurn any and all Islamic countries and believers, or engage them? Is either option a good one?

Where do we go from here? Do we continue the same approach or do we try, on this one issue to responsibly deal with this tragedy, and work together, or gain political advantage at the expense of American lives?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Patvann:

And why does the MSM always ask them for their views pertaining to Islam, when they only represent less than 1% of the nations Moslem’s?

Because CAIR is the Rainbow Push Coalition for all Muslims.

@mooseburger:

My fear of reducing our freedoms stems from intrusion into emails, internet and library usage, and related snooping. It is understandable that some action is indeed warranted, but it is akin to opening up and reading all the US mail to ferret out who might be a terrorist, or aiding a terrorist.

I seriously doubt the Federal government cares one wit that you’re dialing up 1-800 FON-ESEX. They don’t have the manpower nor the interest to pour through everything. What they zero in on, what they are sifting for, are those calls, those emails, those messages that are related to communications between Islamic radicals who wish to do us grave harm.

If you can’t trust FBI agents to wiretap professionally and ethically, why trust them with carrying weapons?

Btw, 5 years after the enactment of the Patriot Act, for all the scare-mongering over “library usage”, the number of searches of charge-out or computer records at libraries under the business records provision was ONE.

I just think there is a fine line between what should be done to combat legitimate threats and crossing into territory that could tomorrow be used in the wrong way and not as it was intended in the pursuit of “justice” by Government. Today I may be in agreement with the ends justifying the means, tomorrow, I may regret how laws are used against future now unknown perceived threats the Government deems justified.

moose,

Anything can be taken to the level of abuse. Do you accept law enforcement officers being privileged to carry firearms in states with stiff gun control laws? Couldn’t the citizenry be victimized by officers abusing their authority? It does happen, after all. But the frequency isn’t such that it negates the system we have in place; and violators get punished.

I’m not sure it is a fair statement to lay all the blame for multiculturalism at the feet of Liberals. The history of our country for the last 130 years has been to allow and embrace immigrants, and they bring their culture and traditions with them.

I’m not sure if you understand where conservatives are coming from when they denounce “diversity” and “multiculturalism”. In the hands of liberals, these concepts aren’t about celebrating ethnic pride and heritage, but in promoting a sense of “all cultures are created equal”. It’s a mindset that says, “Well, every culture needs to have equal representation”; as if all cultures contributed equally in the shaping of our nation’s history. Multiculturalism, as practiced by liberals, promotes “out of one, many” rather than “out of many, one”. Instead of appreciating assimilation and the virtues of shared language and shared cultural traditions, diversity-minded multiculturalists encourage separatism and segregation of cultures that says “you don’t need to assimilate”, equating assimilation with being “white-washed”. They promote bilingualism as a good thing. There’s nothing wrong with knowing as many languages as possible; however, English needs to remain the predominate language- all else being secondary or tertiary to its mastery.

The multicultural “crap” has gone on for a long, long time, we have just absorbed it into our culture and call it our own in a generation or two. If folks can make money from it, it becomes acceptable. Italians, Irish and St. Patrick’s Day, Germans and Oktober fest, Native American traditions and lookout for Cinco De Mayo…you name it, it is not in and of itself a bad thing.

It is very American to absorb the best of all cultures and make it uniquely American. However, blending other cultures into the predominate “native/established” “American” culture is a lot different than setting up a bunch of rival cultures alongside it. What we end up with is a bunch of mini nations within a nation. Immigrants need to adopt our values and traditions or not call themselves American. It’s the difference between the concept of a melting pot and a salad bowl.

So I will ask you: What should be done? Should all Muslims be condemned, cast out, because of the ones who are radical and kill others?

No. But it shouldn’t be anything more alarming to be scrutinized all the more closely than a non-Muslim. It shouldn’t warrant offense. Our society is so hypersensitive to issues of race and religion, that we’ve become docile to the point of stupidity. It’s what leads us to treating grandmother on the plane as a potential terrorist with the equal amount of scrutiny as we would the 20 year old Middle Eastern-looking male student. Grandma might well be a terrorist, but the percentage probability is astronomically low in comparison to the young Arab-looking male.

If we were at war with a cult whose tradition was to wear white t-shirts and Nikes, would that mean because we scrutinized every person wearing a white t-shirt and Nikes that we were being unreasonable in our inquiry? Violating civil rights? Being prejudiced? The majority on the planet who wear white t’s and Nikes aren’t terrorists; however, it remained that those committing terrorist acts belonging to this particular cult can be readily identified by their tradition of white T’s and Nikes. It’s just one on a checklist of traits to look for. Profiling is good. It is sane. It is normal.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Moose

As eloquent as your comment is, I believe most if not all of your concerns have already been answered by my initial post, and my subsequent comments. I’ve given examples on where to start, and you’ve already agreed with them. Equating Islamists with St. Paddy’s Day has almost made me bring back the “Bat”, and I never talked about opening anyone’s mail.

But here are some things to think about…

Our present “Top Cop”, (the highest-ranking prosecutor) formerly worked under Clinton to pardon Puerto Rican terrorists. After that he worked to free the Gitmo boys, while leaking info to the press.
What has he done in his career that make you think he’s up to the task of protecting us?

CAIR is still in business, and uses Saudi money to intimidate everyone, and make excuses for even the radical ones. They even browbeat the TRULY moderate Moslem groups who refuse their backing and money. After their shenanigans were exposed, Bush shunned them.

Why are they allowed back in the White House? And why does the MSM always ask them for their views pertaining to Islam, when they only represent less than 1% of the nations Moslem’s?

Read around the Lefty sites…Koz and his commenter’s are on the WRONG side, and are deflecting this toward being the fault of a war the killer was never in. DU is even worse.
Why do they do that?

Where is the outrage and sadness “pouring forth” from the Hollywood elites?
*crickets*
Why do they keep making movies showing Islam a “victim” of America, even though they lose money doing it?

Why does a tax-paid-for “artist” place a crucifix in piss, but will NEVER do that to a Koran?
Why didn’t the newspapers show the Mohammad cartoons?

Why did Acmadinajad(sp?) get invited to Yale, but Robert Spencer get chased away?
Why isn’t the ROTC allowed there?

The adviser to the president for Islamic affairs is a staunch supporter of Sharia law. 95% of American Moslem’s HATE sharia law, and list it as one of the main reasons they left their home countries.
Why is she advising our president? Why did the president hire her?

Why did Obama hang out with Rashid Kalidi for so long?

Why is ANYONE from Somalia allowed in?

Do you have any clue how long I could make this list of obvious questions highlighting where we are going wrong, and HAVE gone wrong in this country under presidents of both party’s? (Yes the Liberal mindset has infested many Repubs, too.)

What ever your guess is, triple it, then triple it again, but I’m hoping you get the hint.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I think I’m in the spam filter…..could someone dig me out? Thanks.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Patvann: Bright lights are the best deterrent, and we as a country should not be afraid to shine the light where it is needed. My fear of reducing our freedoms stems from intrusion into emails, internet and library usage, and related snooping. It is understandable that some action is indeed warranted, but it is akin to opening up and reading all the US mail to ferret out who might be a terrorist, or aiding a terrorist. I just think there is a fine line between what should be done to combat legitimate threats and crossing into territory that could tomorrow be used in the wrong way and not as it was intended in the pursuit of “justice” by Government. Today I may be in agreement with the ends justifying the means, tomorrow, I may regret how laws are used against future now unknown perceived threats the Government deems justified.

I’m not sure it is a fair statement to lay all the blame for multiculturalism at the feet of Liberals. The history of our country for the last 130 years has been to allow and embrace immigrants, and they bring their culture and traditions with them. Most Americans, including Conservatives have taken pride in the fact that many of the religious beliefs folks brought here from oppressed countries resulted in these immigrants being more free to practice their faith here in America than they could in their own country. Business leaders also love the cheap labor they provide, and this was true even in the first big wave of immigration thru Ellis Island at the turn of last century during the Industrial Revolution.

The multicultural “crap” has gone on for a long, long time, we have just absorbed it into our culture and call it our own in a generation or two. If folks can make money from it, it becomes acceptable. Italians, Irish and St. Patrick’s Day, Germans and Oktober fest, Native American traditions and lookout for Cinco De Mayo…you name it, it is not in and of itself a bad thing. What is very bad is to have an enemy who can wait for hundreds of years if needed, doesn’t mind killing themselves, women and children, sending young children out to suicide bomb and die, just plain and simple not adhering to the normal rules that sane people would live by, even in war. If the Soviets had no problem dying and going to their own 20 Virgins Gulag in the sky, then mutually assured destruction would not have been an effective deterrent. It is the nature of the enemy we have that takes advantage of the freedoms, and takes advantage of our embracing of people who want to be free that is the real problem.

So I will ask you: What should be done? Should all Muslims be condemned, cast out, because of the ones who are radical and kill others?

Is the next step for Conservatives now, since this Ft. Hood attack is probably a terrorist act, to try and figure out how to stop this type of carnage and senseless loss of life, or is it just going to be to loudly trumpet that the President has allowed a terrorist attack on American soil for political gain and offer no input or solutions to prevent this from happening again?

You said: “I suggest that you talk with you buddies in the Nutroots, and in the Democrat-Socialist party, and make them see that their refusal to see the zit on their collective noses, will get them killed by those they now protect and give excuses for”

Here is where I see part of the problem: in administering Justice, the process matters greatly. It is all well to convict someone of their guilt in a Murder, and meet out justice, it is not well at all if the process involved sets a precedent that would also allow an innocent person to be convicted under the same investigative and trial procedures. This is why it is imperative that even guilty rotten scum like the Ft. Hood shooter gets his day in court, is defended, and the requirements of the prosecution proving it’s case is upheld. Sad but true, protecting the guilty traitor scum’s rights is required in order to maintain the protections that law abiding citizens need to prevent intrusive government in the future from investigating, detaining or convicting them with less than the legal standard of proof that Humanity is entitled to and our Country stands for.

So your characterization of “protecting and give(ing) excuses for” terrorists by Liberals is off the mark, and Conservatives have in the past and should now be able to rally to the cause of preserving due process and protection of the average citizen from abuse of intrusive loss of freedom and due process. I think this issue, as much as the terrorist threat we face is what is really being grappled with.

I would be interested in hearing what you think should be done regarding the terrorists who live among us and how to deal with them and maintain the good citizen’s rights and freedoms….

If we allow the enemy to fundamentally change who we are and what we stand for in our efforts to protect our citizens and to defeat them, then they still “win” by default.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hard Right, you are probably correct. The last one took 6 years from sentencing to execution. Still faster than most civilian courts and follow on processes. But a lot has changed since 1961 too. I certainly hope Obama will not still be in the Whitehouse in 6 years. However, if the American people do not throw off this PC cancer, we well could have someone else in the driver’s seat, post Obama, who also would not want to incite the muslims by putting one prominent in the news to death. Having served 3 years in the middle east before the current unpleasantness, I can think of little that would send a better message than having the Ft. Hood shooter’s head on a stick at the front gate of post into perpetuity as his legacy. That seems to be the only kind of message that would get through without obfuscation. Our actions are often beyond comprehension in many quarters of the sandbox. For example, why has not KSM assumed room temperature yet? It makes as much sense there as would any hesitancy in slitting the throat of the goat they had for dinner the night before. Inconceivable to the workaday Ahmed.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Mooseburger.

I see I’ve made a slight inroad with you, (our resident Lefty ) with my proposal to treat religious extremist like we treat the Klan. At least you can acknowledge that there is a legal/moral pathway to mitigating this threat to all of us. As I said in first paragraph, the 20%’ers can be made useful.

As to your second paragraph, warning of the hazards of going too far as to reduce our freedoms, I believe you are warning of something that is not a threat. Nobody BUT the Klan is talking about running roughshod over our collective Rights, let alone me. Not even the most vociferous among us (Pam Geller/Robert Spencer) is calling for the things you “warn” of. Bright lights can sometimes be one of the best deterrents against these radicals. For example, those SOB’s calling for jihad in NY, would shut up and find a different hobby if everytime they came out, 2 local cops, and 2 FBI agents, all fully uniformed, (with backup at the ready) also came out with cameras to film them close up…I mean REALLY close…2ft in front of them close. It would be further helpful if the local media outlet did the same thing at the same time and publicly juxtaposed them with the counter-words of the local Imam on that evenings newscast. They could also film those who pick up their vile literature, and interview them.

The same thing goes for websites. If everytime they posted something hateful, the FBI called up or posted a comment congratulating them on their use of the First Amendment, they might watch what they say, or find something else to do.

As you see, there are many things we’ve yet to try, that can marginalize them without having to pass one law, or reduce what’s left of our Constitution. As I made quite clear in my essay, I am calling for a small expansion of present laws that have been around for 40 years. Hasan’s actions was expected and obvious to anyone who paid attention to his prior words and behavior, and went far beyond the rantings of the NY/Dearborn/college bunch. Had he been confronted 5 years ago, instead of being rewarded with rank and privilege, he possibly would have never gotten this far. Your third paragraph shows that you understand this point.

It is your 4th paragraph that I find I need to wield my Cluestick of Doom ™

It is the Liberal Left that has let this get this far.

There is no “middle-ground” because the Left has gone so far off the deep-end with their multicultural crap, that to meet half-way is still so off mark, as to remain suicidal to us all.

I will loudly and vociferously “frame the terrorism issue in term of Liberal VS Conservative” because the Liberal has done NOTHING to mitigate this “issue”, and in fact has been HELPING make the situation worse for over 30 damn years! The evidence is laying in 14 drawers in a morgue in Texas, along with the instantly-cremated bodies floating in the air over New York.

You are right in that this shouldn’t be political…so to that end, I suggest that you talk with you buddies in the Nutroots, and in the Democrat-Socialist party, and make them see that their refusal to see the zit on their collective noses, will get them killed by those they now protect and give excuses for. Assure them that we on the Right will be the first to be on their side with our support, our guns, and indeed our prayers should they ever choose to wake the f**k up. Hell, we might even want to vote for a couple of ‘em.

Remind them that we on the Right want, and need them to be just as “accepting” of the Islamists, as they presently are for their present boogyman, the dreaded Bible and gun-holding Christian.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The terrorist act at Fort Hood has me in doubt of my own personal safety.
The obvious failure of the authorities, given the unambiguous job of keeping us safe, to do their jobs has convinced me that terrorist actions in the United States will not be deterred.
One has the choice: either stop the terrorist act before it takes place (military) or wait until the terrorist act has happened (civilian).
Subsequent actions (finger-pointing, recrimination, false news reports) have only made the situation worse.
The ultimate insult was conveyed by President Obama. His false assertion that there is no religion which approves of the terrorist act of Major Hassan displays a total lack of historical understanding. Obama is speaking falsehood when he denies the existence of the Wahabi branch of Islam, as amplified by Qutb and the Muslim Brotherhood and then Al Khaida. He is denying the written history of the spread of Islam by the sword. He is explicitly refusing to admit the teaching that jihad is obligatory on all Muslim males, a teaching central to the Wahabis.
He is refusing to countenance the teaching that those who die in jihad, in the act of slaying infidels (non-Muslims), receive immediate admission to Paradise, accompanied by 72 virgins. There is more, but you will have to discover the rest of the story yourselves, as I cannot bring myself to post the remainder of the teaching here.
My impression of Obama’s speech is that it was written in some back room, and that Obama did not even see the speech before he gave it. The speech expressed noble sentiments; they were not the sentiments of Obama or of any of his coterie of closest advisers.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Patvan: Thoughtful and well written post, I’m impressed with your suggestions for evening the treatment of Islamic extremism along with other hate groups like the Klan, that is really only being evenhanded and fair. Hate, Threats and Death should be seen for what they are and any mask removed to expose it for what it is. There is too much politically correct culture war crap going on, and as Americans, we have more in common than we do in disagreements with each other. The big issues require some agreement on the facts and common cause in terms of dealing with them. It is hard to get past the fact that radical Islamic extremists, like the Klan, have and do want to do harm. We should all be able to agree with that.

The hardest part about home grown terrorists (Islamic or otherwise…Tim McVeigh) is knowing what is in peoples hearts, and as humans and not God, we can search, suspect, and draw conclusions, but warning signs often don’t rise to the level of pre emptive action being taken towards just a citizen, unless we are willing to further surrender our privacy and some freedoms to Government and enforcement agencies for the good of society. Not to mention the sheer number of people or groups who could be viewed as “extreme” for one subjective reason or another, which would result in an unbelievable increase in personnel to monitor suspected individuals or groups. This in effect results in a “win’ for the terrorists because either way, they either inflict terrible damage, or cause us to fundamentally alter who we are as a people in order to deal with them, which of course we must. What raises alarm or suspicion can often fall short of actionable unlawful acts, and changing our laws to allow subjective detainment of citizens for potential beliefs and threatening talk and writings, while assuming said law entities are playing it straight and fair and just in their actions is a place America and liberty was never designed to go. Add to that the sharp and sometimes bitter division among Americans themselves in regards to dealing with the FACT of terrorist threats and consequences, sometimes I think the terrorists are very happy to see us turning our anger and exploiting ours own divisions against each other in context with having to deal with them.

The shooter Hasan, being in the Military, should have been under close eye and drummed out for many of his statements that were on record before he ever had the chance to kill our Soldiers. I have to agree that Political Correctness contributed to the tolerance of his espoused hate and sympathy for suicide bombers. The military has always had a stricter and higher standard of conduct for good reason. Politically correctness in the military is not a good thing, and perhaps contributed to the terrible loss of life.

One of the things I told my Mom on the day 9/11 happened (that was also her birthday) was that the world will be changed and things will be different from now on. I will gladly argue politics and defend my views, but one of the bitter side effects of the age of terror in America is the division between political schools of thought and a lack of common ground we as a nation engage in regarding how we are to deal with it. If ever common ground as Americans was required, this would be the issue and the time. We are all too willing to vilify each other to satisfy a political base or gain advantage politically. Both sides of this issue are guilty and no better than the other, and contribute to to a lack of unified and sustained effort to deal with the threats. Why frame the terrorism issue in term of Liberal VS Conservative and American VS American, it only helps the terrorists achieve their goal of destroying our Country. It is time for all Americans to get it together, if only for this issue, lest our other sharp differences seem trivial someday in hindsight.

Like or Dislike: 0  0