Mass shooting at Fort Hood
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
> ..breaking now. Seven dead so far.
At least seven dead, 15 wounded. So far.
Mack A. Damia
<Blackpo...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Nov 5, 3:43?pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Blackpoolji...@aol.com> wrote:
>> ..breaking now. Seven dead so far.
>
>At least seven dead, 15 wounded. So far.
Guns don't kill people, soldiers do?
--
mad
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:45:13 -0800 (PST), BLACKPOOLJIMMY
>
> >On Nov 5, 3:43?pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Blackpoolji...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> ..breaking now. Seven dead so far.
>
> >At least seven dead, 15 wounded. So far.
>
> Guns don't kill people, soldiers do?
> --
> mad
Sounds like soldiers on soldiers.
Worlds in a tangle.
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
12 dead..31 wounded.
Mack A. Damia
<Chippa...@aol.com> wrote:
The U.S. is going to have to come to terms with the Second Amendment
one of these days. Too many guns are available to the wrong people.
Don't understand it. Must be a feature of the American character.
Guns in Canada, but they don't have near the problems of the U.S.
--
mad
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
>
> From ABC: (Shooter) Major Malik Nadal Hasan... was killed and two
> other suspects have been apprehended...The CounterTerrorist Unit said
> they have "no word" yet on whether this incident was terrorism-related.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Horrible story unfolding. I do hope terrorism has not infiltrated our
military. A Major yet.
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
>
> - Show quoted text -
Does sound like an effort to stop deployment from the Soldier
Readiness Center.
Here we go.
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>On Nov 5, 2:26�pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:13:03 -0800 (PST), BLACKPOOLJIMMY
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <Chippandf...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 5, 5:10?pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Chippandf...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> On Nov 5, 4:10 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:45:13 -0800 (PST), BLACKPOOLJIMMY
>>
>> >> > <Blackpoolji...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> > >On Nov 5, 3:43?pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Blackpoolji...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> ..breaking now. Seven dead so far.
>>
>> >> > >At least seven dead, 15 wounded. So far.
>>
>> >> > Guns don't kill people, soldiers do?
>> >> > --
>> >> > mad
>>
>> >> Sounds like soldiers on soldiers.
>>
>> >> Worlds in a tangle.
>>
>> >12 dead..31 wounded.
>>
>> The U.S. is going to have to come to terms with the Second Amendment
>> one of these days. �Too many guns are available to the wrong people.
>>
>> Don't understand it. �Must be a feature of the American character.
>> Guns in Canada, but they don't have near the problems of the U.S.
>> --
>> mad
>
>
>
>As I understand it, soldiers aren't allowed to carry their weapons on
>base. I'll have to google that it seems to hard to believe. Didn't do
>much good. The shooters might have been mowed down more quickly if
>they were allowed to carry, or maybe there would be more incidents
>like this. You can't say definitively.
>
>Later: yes, looks like its true.
>
>
>*****
>
>A comment from a soldier I found from 2005: One thing that irritates
>me greatly about military life is the lack of common sense displayed
>from the top down. For instance � I am trained to be a professional
>killer but I am not allowed to have any personal weapons on base and
>in my possession. Despite the fact that I can carry concealed weapons
>wherever I go in daily life and have been doing so in a responsible
>manner for years now and regardless of the fact that I am trusted to
>manage other soldiers, I am not allowed to carry my pistol around with
>me while on base. Why? It doesn�t make any sense and is merely another
>pointless control mechanism.
>
>If terrorists ever do attack a U.S. military installation stateside,
>they will have plenty of time to attack our troops while the
>bureaucrats scramble around filling out paperwork so bullets and
>weapons can be issued out to troops who need to respond to the attack.
>It�s disheartening that we have such foolish restrictions placed on
>us. There should be a process in place for soldiers to be allowed to
>carry loaded weapons at all times.
Did I hear that a major was arrested along with somebody else? One of
the shooters was killed. I could be mistaken.
Could be a more personal thing - passed over for promotions - hatched
a plan to get even.
I have my doubts that it's terrorist related. Not too well planned to
just open fire randomly.
--
mad
Dale Houstman
>
> Horrible story unfolding. I do hope terrorism has not infiltrated our
> military. A Major yet.
When one realizes that Timothy McVeigh was a first Persian Gulf War
veteran, that "fraggings" occurred at a consistent pace in the Vietnam
War (where Calley and his ilk saw little problem with terrorizing as
murdering women and children), and that killings of soldiers by soldiers
is not really that unusual, it is difficult to state that "terrorism" -
in one form or another - has not always been a potential or a fact in
the military for quite some time. Lots of weapons, killer training, and
the onerous pressures of war and waiting for war: a perfect storm I think...
dmh
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>On Nov 5, 3:31�pm, PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 3:14�pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>
>> > I have my doubts that it's terrorist related. �Not too well planned to
>> > just open fire randomly.
>> > --
>> > mad
>>
>> No idea. The latest is that shooter is a recent convert. That could
>> mean a lot of things. It could be an indication of recent
>> psychological
>
>
>Now he's alive, not dead. Even that wasn't right. I give up. It's
>pointless to try and follow these things sometimes.
Apparently, he flipped out from too much stress. Seems as though the
signs were there, but nobody put them together.
--
mad
The Nice Mean Man
You don't tell us all the facts, James.... You left a few things out.
Here's what AOL news says:
"Two other soldiers taken into custody following the deadly rampage
have been released, Fort Hood spokesman Christopher Haug told The
Associated Press. "They're not believed to be involved in the
incident," Haug said. He said a third person was in custody, however."
What the reality of the situation is:
Muslims HATE AMERICA. They have declared war on us. They mean to
destroy us. How many ways do you people need to see this before you
finally understand? The best place for these sub-human slime is either
A] DEAD (from the barrels of a US Military firing squad, of
course ; ), B] segregated from the rest of us in internment camps like
the Japs were in WWII or C] placed in a nice, far away location (like
GETMO) so they can't hurt anyone else!
What AOL news says:
"It was unclear what the motive was. U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison
said the Army major was about to deploy overseas, though it was
unclear if he was headed to Iraq or Afghanistan and when he was
scheduled to leave. Hutchison said she was told about the upcoming
deployment by generals based at Fort Hood"
What the reality of the situation is:
Radical muslims will NEVER raise a hand against a brother in arms.
Again, this is common sense. I don’t understand what all the confusion
is about. They hate us. They mean to kill us. ONE WAY OR THE FUCKING
OTHER.
What AOL news says:
"Officials were investigating whether Hasan was his birth name or if
he may have changed his name, possibly as part of a conversion to
Islam. However, they were not certain of his religion."
But WE are...! Aren't we....!!!? He's from....The religion of PEACE!
We are at war with ISLAM. Or we should be, at any rate. One thing is
perfectly clear, though... THEY are at war with us.
TNMM
Mack A. Damia
<hithera...@aol.com> wrote:
>What the reality of the situation is:
>
>Muslims HATE AMERICA.
So, based on this logic, Christians hate America. Jews Hate America.
Hindus hate America. Buddhists hate America. Shintoists hate
America. Atheists hate America.
Eh?
They all live and have lived in America for generations and
generations.
That's why we have the First Amendment.
I've personally known several Muslim families in Pennsylvania who LOVE
America and can't get enough of learning its culture. What's that all
about?
--
mad
The Nice Mean Man
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:28:07 -0800 (PST), The Nice Mean Man
>
> >What the reality of the situation is:
>
> >Muslims HATE AMERICA.
>
> So, based on this logic, Christians hate America. Jews Hate America.
> Hindus hate America. Buddhists hate America. Shintoists hate
> America. Atheists hate America.
>
> Eh?
>
When they declare war on us and takes steps WORLD-FUCKING-WIDE to
prove it to us, I think I'll feel the same way about them, too!
Huhh....
> They all live and have lived in America for generations and
> generations.
>
> That's why we have the First Amendment.
>
Ever hear of the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus? Comes in
real handy in war time. I mean, they tattoo themselves with all those
Islamic names. Shouldn't be too hard to track them down and route them
all out.
> I've personally known several Muslim families in Pennsylvania who LOVE
> America and can't get enough of learning its culture. What's that all
> about?
> --
> mad
Yes, but what steps have they taken against their evil radical
brothers? Who cares anyway, when they estimate that one tenth of the
world-wide Islamic population is radical and hates America. That's
over 100 million people. Far too many for the Bill of Rights to do its
job properly. Take it from FDR's actions back in the 40s. After the
jap-blooded 'Americans' were taken to the camps, there was not ONE
MORE ACT of sabotage on the west coast. Get your facts straight, you
little bleeding hearted fool. This is our LIVES we're talking about
here. I don't trust president Jig's judgment on the issue. Why should
I trust yours? We had NONE of these terrorism problems here at home
after 911 like we have just in the last few months. If a Republican
was in there, NONE of these things would have ever happened.
TNMM
Mack A. Damia
You must have been told before that your rants have characteristics of
a paranoid schizophrenic, eh?
You've studied Joe McCarthy?
And, yes, I am a doctor.
--
mad
Bernie Woodham
Fergit mad. You're talking to the resident bigot. He comes out from
under the bridge now and then to mutter his profanities. He soon goes
away grunting.
Mack A. Damia
Maybe I told him what he wanted to hear. Somebody needs to tell him.
People write what's in their minds, and it's a glorious way to
diagnose somebody under some circumstances.
I won't stir the beast again.
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>On Nov 5, 8:46�pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You must have been told before that your rants have characteristics of
>> a paranoid schizophrenic, eh?
>>
>> You've studied Joe McCarthy?
>>
>> And, yes, I am a doctor.
>> --
>> mad
>
>
>
>Oh...you're going to have a lot of fun here. :-)
I've been killfiled before because of my opinions; actually, I'm the
resident troll in one group.
It's as T.S. Elliot said, " Humankind cannot bear very much reality."
--
mad
Dale Houstman
Quoting T.S. Eliot in the midst of a conversation which has rather
pathetically turned to racism is perhaps not the best use of the
literary reference...
dmh
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
We are the hollow men?
--
mad
The Nice Mean Man
And you of the passive little sheep that you are.
Bleat bleat, little sheep.
BLEEEEEEEET……..!!
> You've studied Joe McCarthy?
>
A great man who loved his country and hated the sly, cunning weasels
who were trying to destroy it . Never had the pleasure of meeting him,
though. How about you...? I KNOW that the good Senator would like to
meet you..
> And, yes, I am a doctor.
> --
You're also very insecure. Nobody in here gives a rat's ass about what
you are in the real world. Especially ME.
Now... if you want to argue the points at hand, then by all means
address my last posting in the the manner that I have address yours..
Otherwise, you can SHUT the FUCK UP, doctor WhoeverthefuckUR.
TNMM
The Nice Mean Man
>
> - Show quoted text -
Only when you go away first...
garyb
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 22:27:31 -0800 (PST), Bernie Woodham
>
>
>
> <birnhamw...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 5, 11:46 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:43:18 -0800 (PST), The Nice Mean Man
>
> >> <hitherandyon...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >On Nov 5, 10:37 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:28:07 -0800 (PST), The Nice Mean Man
>
> >> >> <hitherandyon...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >> >What the reality of the situation is:
>
> >> >> >Muslims HATE AMERICA.
>
> >> >> So, based on this logic, Christians hate America. Jews Hate America.
> >> >> Hindus hate America. Buddhists hate America. Shintoists hate
> >> >> America. Atheists hate America.
>
> >> >> Eh?
>
> >> >When they declare war on us and takes steps WORLD-FUCKING-WIDE to
> >> >prove it to us, I think I'll feel the same way about them, too!
>
> >> >Huhh....
>
> >> >> They all live and have lived in America for generations and
> >> >> generations.
>
> >> >> That's why we have the First Amendment.
>
> >> >Ever hear of the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus? Comes in
Todd Ray Keilholz
Date of Birth: 07/21/1963
SS #: 492-80-6401
Mack A. Damia
<gbra...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>Todd Ray Keilholz
>
>Date of Birth: 07/21/1963
>
>SS #: 492-80-6401
Who the hell would want to steal his identity except another
fruitcake?
--
mad
Fattuchus
> On Nov 5, 2:13 pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Chippandf...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 5, 5:10 pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Chippandf...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 5, 4:10 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:45:13 -0800 (PST), BLACKPOOLJIMMY
>
> > > > >On Nov 5, 3:43?pm, BLACKPOOLJIMMY <Blackpoolji...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > >> ..breaking now. Seven dead so far.
>
>
> > > > Guns don't kill people, soldiers do?
> > > > --
> > > > mad
>
> > > Sounds like soldiers on soldiers.
>
> > > Worlds in a tangle.
>
> > 12 dead..31 wounded.
>
>
> From ABC: (Shooter) Major Malik Nadal Hasan... was killed
Last I read, the bastard was still alive. He was shot by a female
police officer who is being called a hero.
Fattuchus
How do you define "terrorism"? The shooter was a devout Muslim,
supposedly of "Palestinian" decent and he resented the fact that the
US was waging war in Muslim countries. He was scheduled to be sent
overseas.
What more do we need to know? Whether you call it "terrorism" or
"Islamo/fascism" or "Muslim fanatacism" it's all the same.
And he was born in the US.
America must wake up . . . . but it won't.
Fattuchus
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:05:26 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
He was a religious Muslim and he resented infidels waging war in
Muslim countries. Period.
His Muslim "brothers" were more important to him than his American
family, and he was willing to kill and, if necessary, die for it.
End of story.
Fattuchus
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 22:58:46 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
I like that saying very much . . . "Human kind cannot bear very much
reality."
The reality is that there are 1 billion Muslims in the world.
The reality is that Islam teaches that the way of Allah is with the
sword and that Islam is a very intolerant religion.
The reality is that Islam is an aggressive religion that over the
centuries has conquored, killed and enslaved millions of people and
taken over vast areas of land including the entire Middle East and
significant parts of Africa, Asia and Europe.
The reality is that while not all Muslims are violent and while not
all Muslims believe that "the way of Allah is with the sword" even if
10% believe it, that's 100 million people.
Fattuchus
> former reader/witness who was there. I post with the caveat that it
> could always be a hoax:
>
> http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/11/fort-hood-letter
>
> Kevin Drum: A former reader emails today to pass along a firsthand
> account of the shooting at Fort Hood on Thursday. It's unedited except
> for paragraph breaks:
>
> Witness/Reader: I was walking into the medical SRP building when he
> started firing (he never made it to the main SRP building....the media
> accounts are understandably pretty off right now). He was calmly and
> methodically shooting everyone. Like every non-deployed military
> post, no one was armed. For the first time in my life I really wish I
> had a weapon. I don't know how to explain what it feels like to have
> someone shoot at you while you're unarmed. He missed me but didn't
> miss a lot of others. Just pure random luck. It's a very compressed
> area, thus the numbers.
>
> I saw a lot of heroism. So many more would have died if this wasn't
> an Army post. We're almost all CLS trained and it made a huge
> difference. Cause the EMTs didn't get there for almost an hour (they
> thought there was a second shooter). I just can't believe one of our
> own shot us. When I saw his ID card I couldn't believe it. After he
> shot the female police officer he was fumbling his reload and I saw
> the other police officer around the corner and yelled at him to come
> shoot the shooter. He did. Then I used my belt as a tourniquet on
> the female officer.
>
> I hate to tell you this but in the course of the day it became clear
> that it was another Akbar incident.1 (Once they convinced them the
> blood drenching my clothes wasn't mine I spent the day being
> interviewed by the alphabet.) Akbar again. God help us. He was very
> planned. I counted three full mags around him (I secured his weapon
> for a while). Found out later that his car was filled with more ammo.
>
> This was premeditated. This wasn't VBC again. That guy snapped, not
> this one. He was so damn calm when he was shooting. Methodical. And
> he was moving tactically. The Army really is diverse and we really do
> love all our own. We signed up to be shot at but not at home. Not
> unarmed. No one should ever see what the inside of that medical SRP
> building looked like. I suppose that's what VA Tech looked like.
> Except they didn't have soldiers coming from everywhere to tourniquet
> and compress and talk to the wounded while rounds are still coming
> out.
>
> No one touched him...the shooter that is...other than to treat him.
> Though I told the medic (and I'm not proud of this) that was giving
> him plasma that there better not be anyone else who needed it because
> he should be the last one to be treated. But I had just finished
> holding a soldier who was critical (I counted three entry wounds) and
> talking to him about his children.... If the shooter had a grievance
> he should have taken it out on those responsible; he wasn't shooting
> people he knew (media reports to the contrary). He was just shooting
> anybody who happened to be present for SRP medical processing, mainly
> lower enlisted.
>
> But please, no one use this politically! The Army is not "broken",
> PTSD doesn't turn people into killers, most Muslims aren't evil, and
> whether we should stay or go in Afghanistan has nothing to do with
> this. I'm babbling...sorry.
>
> 1Hasan Akbar was an Army sergeant who killed two soldiers and wounded
> 14 others in a grenade attack in Kuwait in 2003. He's currently under
> a sentence of death.
>
> There have been several media reports that the Fort Hood shooter
> yelled "Allahu Akbar!" during his rampage, but my correspondent says,
> "He was silent in my presence."
Thanks for the information.
The female police officer who brought the bastard down was wounded
herself. What a hero!
Bernie Woodham
The reality is you are a bigot.
Fattuchus
Bigotry is when Muslim preachers teach in their mosques that Jews and
Christians are comparable to pigs and apes.
Bigotry is when one group of people (i.e. Arabs) conquor, rape and
enslave another group of people (i.e. infidels).
Ever hear of Darfur?
Bigotry is when Muslims impose heavy taxes on non-Muslims for the
privilege of remaining alive in their land.
Bigotry is when Islam destroys other houses of worship and the
statutes and other symbols of other religions like Islam has been
doing for more than 1000 years.
Bigotry is when Islam teaches that non-Muslims can't live in or can't
visit certain places (like Mecca in Saudi Arabia) because it is so
holy, non believers can't go there.
I bet if I substituted the word "Nazi" for Muslim or Arab in the above
post, you'd yell "bigotry." But because these and other terrible acts
have been done by Muslims in the name of Allah, for some reason, well
meaning people are lenient.
You would not know bigotry if it came up and bit you on your butt.
Fattuchus
Read this:
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR01102
Here is just part of the article:
In one of his sermons, Saudi sheikh Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, imam
and preacher at the Al-Haraam mosque – the most important mosque in
Mecca – beseeched Allah to annihilate the Jews. He also urged the
Arabs to give up peace initiatives with them because they are "the
scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts
and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of
apes and pigs."[2]
"Read history," called Al-Sudayyis in another sermon, "and you will
understand that the Jews of yesterday are the evil fathers of the Jews
of today, who are evil offspring, infidels, distorters of [others']
words, calf-worshippers, prophet-murderers, prophecy-deniers... the
scum of the human race 'whom Allah cursed and turned into apes and
pigs...' These are the Jews, an ongoing continuum of deceit,
obstinacy, licentiousness, evil, and corruption..."[3]
In a sermon at the Said Al-Jandoul mosque in Al-Taif, Saudi sheikh
Ba'd bin Abdallah Al-Ajameh Al-Ghamidi explained that "the qualities
of the Jews" were present at all times and in all places: "The current
behavior of the brothers of apes and pigs, their treachery, violation
of agreements, and defiling of holy places... is connected with the
deeds of their forefathers during the early period of Islam – which
proves the great similarity between all the Jews living today and the
Jews who lived at the dawn of Islam."[4]
In an August 2001 sermon, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Palestinian Authority
official and imam of the Sheikh Ijlin mosque, Gaza City's main mosque,
called on the Palestinian people to forget their internal
disagreements and turn all weapons against Jews: "lances must be
directed at the Jews, the enemies of Allah, the nation accursed in
Allah's book. Allah described [them] as apes and pigs, calf-
worshipers, idol-worshippers..."[5]
Seeing Jews as "descendants of apes and pigs" is common also in
Shi'ite Islam. Such statements appear, for instance, in a 1998 speech
by Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah on the occasion of the
Shi'ite 'Ashoura holiday. Nasrallah regretted that the holiday fell
"on the 50th anniversary of the bitter and distressing historical
catastrophe of the establishment of the state of the grandsons of apes
and pigs – the Zionist Jews – on the land of Palestine and Jerusalem."
He closed his speech with these words: "... We reaffirm the slogan of
the struggle against the Great Satan and call, like last year: 'Death
to America. To the murderers of the prophets, the grandsons of apes
and pigs,' we say: ... 'Death to Israel...'"[6]
SNIP
Fattuchus
Would you consider the Arab and Muslim use of genocide, rape and
slavery against non-Muslims to be a form of bigotry?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Sudan
Did you see this paragraph:
"According to the American Anti-Slavery Group, black Africans in
southern Sudan have been abducted for centuries in the Arab slave
trade, but the slave raids by militia armed by the federal government
of Sudan increased significantly after the 1989 military coup led by
Colonel Omar al-Bashir, who is the current President of Sudan.
[5] . . . . ."
Fattuchus
>
> - Show quoted text -
Here is an article on the Arab slave trade. Do you think
that these Arabs were bigots?
Fattuchus
Another article on Arab slavery :
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_9_54/ai_85410331/pg_2/
I am not a bigot.
Indeed, I am the ANTI-bigot.
Bernie Woodham
>
>
> Bigotry is...
when you ascribe a characteristic to a group of people based on
witnessing that characteristic in one person.
Bernie Woodham
"I am not a crook"
R. Nixon
Fattuchus
> On Nov 6, 7:30 pm, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Bigotry is...
>
> when you ascribe a characteristic to a group of people
I've said many times not all Muslims are the same. I'm sure there are
many who reject the harsher teachings of Islam, who are peaceful,
lawbiding citizens.
based on
> witnessing that characteristic in one person.
But I'm not just talking about "witnessing a characteristic in one
person." I'm talking about a religion, a philosophy, a culture, which
advocates and practices conquest, slavery, forced conversion,
discrimination, etc. I'm talking about a religion/movement (or
whatever you want to label Islam) that has not only preached "The way
of Allah is with the sword" but which has actually enslaved,
conquored, raped, killed and otherwise subjugated MILLIONS of non-
believers over the course of more than 1000 years.
IMO Muslims who engage in and/or who teach and preach this terrible
behavior are no different than Nazis. THEY (not I) are the bigots,
just like this bastard who killed the people in Ft. Hood. And the
fact that he is clothed in a religion does not change the bigoted/
racist nature of his belief system.
Crisstti
out from the military becuase other people there would tease him about
being a Muslim.
If that's true, then it'd be more similar to school shootings than
anything else.
Mack A. Damia
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>He was a religious Muslim and he resented infidels waging war in
>Muslim countries. Period.
>
>His Muslim "brothers" were more important to him than his American
>family, and he was willing to kill and, if necessary, die for it.
>End of story.
There is simply no evidence of that at this point.
You won't forget that school children kill, too. What do you have to
say about them?
--
mad
Kia-Ed
Kia-Ed
Mack A. Damia
Not true.
The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
of all.
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
How about the American slave trade?
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I like that saying very much . . . "Human kind cannot bear very much
>reality."
The reality is that we live in a violent society where killing is
epidemic.
We reap what we sow.
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>OFF TOPIC
Go away, you silly person.
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>OFF-TOPIC
You needle (dick) is stuck in a groove.
<*plonk*>
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:10:42 -0600, "Kia-Ed" <Kia...@America.com>
>wrote:
>
>>OFF-TOPIC
>
>Your needle (dick) is stuck in a groove.
>
><*plonk*>
Fucking Internet police. Can't believe my eyes after posting for
almost fifteen years.
There are always those who want to control others.
Sad people. Losers.
--
mad
RichL
Bullshit. God, you just can't wait until all the facts come out to harp
on your favorite prejudices, can you?
You have no idea what was in this guy's mind. The people who are doing
the investigations have no idea, how can you? Are you a flippin' mind
reader? Are you so anxious to latch onto *rumors* being reported in the
news that buttress your preconceptions that you can't do the decent
thing and simply *wait* until we know for sure what's going on?
Keep your fucking racism to yourself.
who?
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:19:03 -0800, Mack A. Damia
>
> >On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:10:42 -0600, "Kia-Ed" <Kia...@America.com>
> >wrote:
>
> >>OFF-TOPIC
>
> >Your needle (dick) is stuck in a groove.
>
> ><*plonk*>
>
> Fucking Internet police. Can't believe my eyes after posting for
> almost fifteen years.
>
> There are always those who want to control others.
>
> Sad people. Losers.
> --
> mad
Yep, and the idea is to never let them. These types of
people are everywhere, as you know.
Jeff
RichL
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:19:03 -0800, Mack A. Damia
> <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:10:42 -0600, "Kia-Ed" <Kia...@America.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> OFF-TOPIC
>>
>> Your needle (dick) is stuck in a groove.
>>
>> <*plonk*>
>
> Fucking Internet police. Can't believe my eyes after posting for
> almost fifteen years.
>
> There are always those who want to control others.
>
> Sad people. Losers.
He/she isn't an internet cop, simply a one-note troll. You made the
right move, anyways.
RichL
You might want to search archives for Fatts' numerous anti-Muslim rants.
They are legion.
RichL
Yes, possibly, but we don't really know at this point what motivated the
guy, if we ever will.
RichL
> On Nov 6, 7:57 pm, Bernie Woodham <birnhamw...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 6, 7:30 pm, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Bigotry is...
>>
>> when you ascribe a characteristic to a group of people
>
>
> I've said many times not all Muslims are the same. I'm sure there are
> many who reject the harsher teachings of Islam, who are peaceful,
> lawbiding citizens.
>
>
> based on
>> witnessing that characteristic in one person.
>
> But I'm not just talking about "witnessing a characteristic in one
> person." I'm talking about a religion, a philosophy, a culture, which
> advocates and practices conquest, slavery, forced conversion,
Shut up, already. When it comes to Muslims, you are bigoted. You
present a highly distorted view of Islam, which not coincidentally you
borrow from bigoted web sites, as factual information. It's not; it's a
product of your own twisted mind and those of the political/cultural
groups that you support.
You're so blinded by your own hatred that you don't see it.
The rest of us see it, unfortunately.
RichL
Fatts' capacity to judge her own bigotry is quite limited, I'm afraid.
who?
You know, Rich, sometimes I hate talking to my own parents.
My dad has this thing about "mid-eastern" people and
"Mexicans" and "blacks". It works like this: The topic
quickly goes into these type of conversations...and I'm
trying to figure out what he's on about...and he gets
angry at me for not immediately taking his side. The
situation totally sucks. And my mom was raised to
not associate with any races other than whites.
Fortunately, I don't have these attitudes myself, but
it does make me feel like I'm going bonkers.
Jeff
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>On Nov 6, 6:12�pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Not true.
>>
>> The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
>> of all.
>> --
>> mad
>
>
>Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers and
>unbelievers.
>
>Context of the passage you quote above:
>
>Quran 5. Al-M�'idah
>
>32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
>anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to
>spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind,
>and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all
>mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear
>proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them
>continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and
>exceeding beyond the limits set by All�h by committing the major sins)
>in the land!.
>
>33. The recompense of those who wage war against All�h and His
>Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be
>killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the
>opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in
>this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
>
>34. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as
>Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that
>case, know that All�h is Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful.
>
>Even if you are inclined to give 5:32 a pass, 5:33 is a bit of a
>problem.
>
>Of course all contradictions are covered by saying that the Quran is
>impenetrable to the unbeliever and only can be understood by the
>believer.
<*mmm*> I was echoing the sentiments of a Muslim holy man who was
being interviewed.
But pretty much the same thing can be said for the Holy Bible. If you
want to live the Old Testament, you'll find a lot of folks with their
eyes plucked out and with no hands.
I guess all religions have their conservative and liberal factions. By
the way, I'm not an expert on religion, but I know a little about its
origin. Anthropology is one of my favorites.
--
mad
RichL
You'll like the song that I plan on posting here next week, then! ;-)
who?
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
Lots of anti-Muslim sentiment among the IGNORANT right about now.
This nation (the U.S.) was founded in large part on religious
toleration, our forefathers left their old countries to escape
religious persecution.
Now, many Americans have become the persecutors.
--
mad
Mack A. Damia
wrote:
>On Nov 6, 7:27�pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:12:48 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Nov 6, 6:12�pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Not true.
>>
>> >> The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
>> >> of all.
>> >Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers and
>Yes.
>
>My comment isn't directed at you or your post in a personal way. There
>is a tendency that I see for people, especially educated people, to
>overcompensate for the kneejerk bigotry that is out there by subtly
>whitewashing the Quran while at the same time cherry picking the Bible
>for, say, the Leviticus line about shrimp being an abomination.
>
>I find this unfair and it sends me running for the context if I have
>free time.
>
>> I guess all religions have their conservative and liberal factions.
>
>Or the literalists vs the mystics.
Or the neurotics vs the psychotics.
Weston LaBarre theorized that religion's origin is a neurotic response
to crisis; hence, the Ghost Dance. Christianity was the ghost dance
of Judiasm in a time of crisis.
I juxtapose this with Julian Jaynes' theory on the bicameral mind:
that early man - say 3,000 years ago (the time of the Old Testament)
listened to voices in his head to tell him what to do. These voices
were his personal gods, and he would not act unless a voice told him
to.
By today's standards Jaynes' bicameral man was schizophrenic- so the
early religions were, in fact, psychotic - an eye for an eye, etc.
The Hebrew Old Testament seems to confirms this while the Christian
New Testament based on love and forgiveness appears liberal by the
earlier standards.
By the time of Christ the locus of control had shifted from an
internal, personal God to an external, universal one controlled by the
more powerful and intelligent and used as a means of social control.
While we think that many of their practices were absolutely barbaric,
(cruxifiction, for example) they were a matter-of-fact to the people.
And slowly, Christianity began to civilize and liberalize the world as
it was at that time.
>Joseph Campbell said the monks of every religion get along because
>they share the same internal experience; it's the priests or
>equivalent that have the disagreements about externalities.
Campbell is one of my heros.
>>By
>> the way, I'm not an expert on religion, but I know a little about its
>> origin. �Anthropology is one of my favorites.
>>
>To bring it back on topic then in a very roundabout way, when googling
>during the whole "Leadership" debate, I discovered it was an
>anthropologist that nominated John Lennon as "Man of the Decade":
I was never too impressed with *The Naked Ape*; it appealed more to
the mass-market than academia.
>***
>When in 1969 three eminent intellectuals were asked to name the "Man
>of the Decade," broadcaster Alistair Cooke chose John F. Kennedy and
>novelist Mary McCarthy chose Ho Chi Minh, but anthropologist Desmond
>Morris opted for John Lennon. It seemed an eccentric choice at the
>time, but Lennon's stature as a cultural icon has only soared,
>especially since his murder by a crazed fan in 1980.
>
>****
Anthropology is the study of man. And what a man!
--
mad
UsurperTom
> You've studied Joe McCarthy?
Yeah. He was a great manager of the Yankees who won seven world
championships.
Fattuchus
> What I read here was that the guy had been finding out about getting
> out from the military becuase other people there would tease him about
> being a Muslim.
>
> If that's true, then it'd be more similar to school shootings than
> anything else.
You raise a point, but the shooter was not an immature 16 year old
teenager. He was a 30+ something adult male who also had been in the
military for a few years and who had extensive training.
Yes, he may have been teased and even harrassed, but that is no
justification in Western society for him trying to kill 100 people.
Fattuchus
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:06:58 -0800 (PST), Fattuchus
>
> >He was a religious Muslim and he resented infidels waging war in
> >Muslim countries. Period.
>
> >His Muslim "brothers" were more important to him than his American
> >family, and he was willing to kill and, if necessary, die for it.
> >End of story.
>
> There is simply no evidence of that at this point.
I'm going by what I read in the press. Of course, I realize the
evidence can change. But the press reports yesterday claimed that was
assigned to deploy overseas, and he objected to the US waging war in
Muslim countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.
>
> You won't forget that school children kill, too. What do you have to
> say about them?
> --
> mad
They are school children. This guy was an adult who had been in the
military for years and who received military training. Big, big
difference.
Fattuchus
Really? Tell that to the Muslim/Arab people in Sudan who are busy
committing genocide against Christians and "pagans" in Darfur.
I've read the Koran, in English. There are certainly parts that
preach violence. Plus, I imagine, Muslims rely on other religious
writings such as interpretations and statements about the Koran.
You should study the history of Islam and the Middle East. It's a
violent and aggressive religion. It started out as the religion of a
few followers in of Muhummed in Arabia in the mid 700's and in just a
century or two, it conquored most of the Middle East. This included
the conquest of Jews, Christians and pagans.
Islam is by far the youngest of the three Western religions (Judaism,
Christianity and Islam). There's a reason why there are 1 billion
adherents in the world today and IMO it's not merely because it
preaches "peace."
I'll repeat what I've said before . . . Does this mean that ALL
Muslims are a threat? No, just like one could argue that not all
Germans were Nazis during WW II. There have even been some heroic
Nazis (i.e. Oscar Schindler). But we should not ignore what Islam
teaches and/or what millions of Muslims have interpreted Islam to
teach.
Fattuchus
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:50:33 -0800 (PST), Fattuchus
>
>
>
>
>
Well, of course, that was horrid, disgusting, awful, etc. and the
people who engaged in it were racist, evil, disgusting, etc.
Fattuchus
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:12:17 -0800 (PST), Fattuchus
>
> >I like that saying very much . . . "Human kind cannot bear very much
> >reality."
>
> The reality is that we live in a violent society where killing is
> epidemic.
>
> We reap what we sow.
> --
> mad
I appreciate that point, but I believe that many f not all of the
people killed and/or hurt at Ft. Hood were innocents. Absent stronger
evidence, I don't believe they reaped what they sowed.
Fattuchus
> > He was a religious Muslim and he resented infidels waging war in
> > Muslim countries. Period.
>
> > His Muslim "brothers" were more important to him than his American
> > family, and he was willing to kill and, if necessary, die for it.
> > End of story.
>
> Bullshit. God, you just can't wait until all the facts come out to harp
> on your favorite prejudices, can you?
I am going by what I read last night just before I made my posts.
>
> You have no idea what was in this guy's mind. The people who are doing
> the investigations have no idea, how can you? Are you a flippin' mind
> reader? Are you so anxious to latch onto *rumors* being reported in the
> news that buttress your preconceptions that you can't do the decent
> thing and simply *wait* until we know for sure what's going on?
>
> Keep your fucking racism to yourself.
The problem with you is that your priorities are fucked up. The
bastard KILLED several people and wounded over 30 more, some very
seriously. He was shooting in a very crowded room. One report I saw
was that it was so crowded, it was like "shooting fish in a
barrel." (that's an exact quote from the reporter) It was hard for
him to miss. If it weren't for the local police who stopped him, he
probably would have killed dozens.
Yet when YOU jump into this thread, the first thing you do is attack
me. Not one word of outrage over what this mother fucker did. That's
the difference between you and me.
As someone who could see and smell the World Trade Center burning on
September 11, 2001, what strikes a nerve with me is when well meaning
people like you and some others here refuse to see the danger the West
faces. What strikes a nerve to me is when a well intentioned person
like you refuses to see that Islam is a bigoted/racist belief system;
yet because it is a religion, you believe, incorrectly, that it is
beyond criticism and that people who complain about it are the bigots.
Bernie Woodham
>
> > How about the American slave trade?
> > --
> > mad-
>
> Well, of course, that was horrid, disgusting, awful, etc. and the
> people who engaged in it were racist, evil, disgusting, etc.
That's quite a change of opinion from the one you had a few months
ago, where you thought slavery wasn't so bad because all the world was
doing it.
And I guess this change of opinion is all for the better. It would
also be more believable if you didn't say "racist, evil, disgusting,
etc.", as though were just saying all the routine politically correct
terms.
Fattuchus
> On Nov 6, 6:12 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Not true.
>
> > The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
> > of all.
> > mad
>
> Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers and
> unbelievers.
>
> Context of the passage you quote above:
>
>
> 32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
> anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to
> spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind,
> and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all
> mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear
> proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them
> continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and
> in the land!.
>
> 33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allâh and His
> Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be
> killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the
> opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in
> this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
>
> 34. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as
> Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that
>
> ***
>
> Even if you are inclined to give 5:32 a pass, 5:33 is a bit of a
> problem.
>
> Of course all contradictions are covered by saying that the Quran is
> impenetrable to the unbeliever and only can be understood by the
> believer.
Let's say I agree with your point that "the Quran is impenetrable to
the unbeliever and only can be understood by the believer." One point
I've tried to make over and over is that all we need to do is open our
eyes and see Islam in action. Just study the history of the Middle
East as I have.
Look at the bloodshed and oppression in Darfur.
Look at the fact that to this day are still Muslim countries that
practice slavery.
Look at how minorities and women were/are treated under Sharia law in
Afghanistan (under the Taliban) and in Iran under the Ayatollahs and
in Saudi Arabia.
Dale Houstman
Where's the attempt to justify his actions? No one is doing that: these
are merely (probably vain) tries at explanation and understanding.
Also, you overrate maturity...Harassment plus the pressure of having to
kill or be killed can unnerve anyone at any age, and part of the problem
(in cases such as this) is that adults are expected to be rational about
irrational demands. They often aren't, but due to the illusion of
"maturity" keep quiet about rather common fears and feelings, leading to
these "he seemed like such a nice, quiet person" scenarios over and over
again. "Mature" men cry and scream and wet themselves silly both in war
and at the thought of having to go.
dmh
Fattuchus
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:12:48 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 6, 6:12 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Not true.
>
> >> The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
> >> of all.
> >> --
> >> mad
>
> >Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers and
> >unbelievers.
>
> >Context of the passage you quote above:
>
>
> >32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
> >anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to
> >spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind,
> >and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all
> >mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear
> >proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them
> >continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and
> >in the land!.
>
> >33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allâh and His
> >Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be
> >killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the
> >opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in
> >this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
>
> >34. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as
> >Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that
>
> >Even if you are inclined to give 5:32 a pass, 5:33 is a bit of a
> >problem.
>
> >Of course all contradictions are covered by saying that the Quran is
> >impenetrable to the unbeliever and only can be understood by the
> >believer.
>
> <*mmm*> I was echoing the sentiments of a Muslim holy man who was
> being interviewed.
>
> But pretty much the same thing can be said for the Holy Bible. If you
> want to live the Old Testament, you'll find a lot of folks with their
> eyes plucked out and with no hands.
True, but you seem to forget that the passages in the Old Testament
were written more than 2000 years ago. Mainstream Judaism and
Christianity have evolved considerably. Islam is much younger and has
not evolved as much. Indeed, under the Taliban and the Ayatollahs in
Iraq as well as other parts of the world, one could argue it has not
evolved at all.
>
> I guess all religions have their conservative and liberal factions. By
> the way, I'm not an expert on religion, but I know a little about its
> origin. Anthropology is one of my favorites.
> --
> mad-
History is one of my favorite subjects, although it's been years since
I've been in school. And yes, I've studied comparative religion and
the history of the Middle East.
Fattuchus
> On Nov 6, 7:27 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:12:48 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >On Nov 6, 6:12 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> Not true.
>
> > >> The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
> > >> of all.
> > >> --
> > >> mad
>
> > >Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers and
> > >unbelievers.
>
> > >Context of the passage you quote above:
>
>
> > >32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
> > >anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to
> > >spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind,
> > >and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all
> > >mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear
> > >proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them
> > >continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and
> > >in the land!.
>
> > >33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allâh and His
> > >Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be
> > >killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the
> > >opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in
> > >this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
>
> > >34. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as
> > >Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that
>
> > >Even if you are inclined to give 5:32 a pass, 5:33 is a bit of a
> > >problem.
>
> > >Of course all contradictions are covered by saying that the Quran is
> > >impenetrable to the unbeliever and only can be understood by the
> > >believer.
>
> > <*mmm*> I was echoing the sentiments of a Muslim holy man who was
> > being interviewed.
>
> > But pretty much the same thing can be said for the Holy Bible. If you
> > want to live the Old Testament, you'll find a lot of folks with their
> > eyes plucked out and with no hands.
>
>
> My comment isn't directed at you or your post in a personal way. There
> is a tendency that I see for people, especially educated people, to
> overcompensate for the kneejerk bigotry that is out there by subtly
> whitewashing the Quran while at the same time cherry picking the Bible
> for, say, the Leviticus line about shrimp being an abomination.
>
> I find this unfair and it sends me running for the context if I have
> free time.
A voice of reason during the storm, as always.
Fattuchus
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:14:13 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 6, 7:27 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:12:48 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Nov 6, 6:12 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> Not true.
>
> >> >> The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the lives
> >> >> of all.
> >> >Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers and
> >> >unbelievers.
>
> >> >Context of the passage you quote above:
>
>
> >> >32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
> >> >anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to
> >> >spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind,
> >> >and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all
> >> >mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear
> >> >proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them
> >> >continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and
> >> >in the land!.
>
> >> >33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allâh and His
> >> >Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be
> >> >killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the
> >> >opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in
> >> >this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.
>
> >> >34. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as
> >> >Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that
I don't know anthrolopology the way you do although your posts are
fascinating. I'm not familiar with Jaynes. However, I do have one
question/point as far as Jayne's theory: based on the above, it seems
to me that Jaynes ignores history. Much of what is written in the Old
Testament is history or based on real historical events.
>
> By today's standards Jaynes' bicameral man was schizophrenic- so the
> early religions were, in fact, psychotic - an eye for an eye, etc.
> The Hebrew Old Testament seems to confirms this while the Christian
> New Testament based on love and forgiveness appears liberal by the
> earlier standards.
>
> By the time of Christ the locus of control had shifted from an
> internal, personal God to an external, universal one controlled by the
> more powerful and intelligent and used as a means of social control.
>
> While we think that many of their practices were absolutely barbaric,
> (cruxifiction, for example) they were a matter-of-fact to the people.
> And slowly, Christianity began to civilize and liberalize the world as
> it was at that time.
So, what did your studies say about Islam?
BTW, Muhummad, who lived in the 7th century, claimed to be the last
and the greatest of all the prophets before him (eg Moses, Jesus) and
he claimed to know this because of the voice he heard in his head. It
was the voice or voices in Muhummad's head that directed him to
"recite" the Koran.
Fattuchus
LOL!
Fattuchus
Oops. I meant to say "Ayatollahs in Iran."
Fattuchus
Above I was discussing Arab/Islamic culture. Here's an artaicle about
slavery in Libya.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Libya
I find this paragraph especially interesting:
"Social impact and relics
As a result of the long history of enslavement of black Africans. The
word عبد /ʕabd/ -meaning slave- is still used pejoratively to refer to
black people. In general the word of choice for a black person is
عبيد /ʕbeːd/, which is the diminutive form of The word /ʕabd/ and is
considered acceptable by many (in Libyan Arabic the diminutive adds an
endearing meaning). وصيف--pronounced [wsˤiːf] in Libyan Arabic- which
means servant, is also used in some places, especially by older
generations to refer to black ethnicities. On the other hand, the word
حر /ħurr/, meaning 'free', is used by many old people to refer to non
blacks."
In other words, enslavement of blacks lasted for so many decades and
was such a part of the Libyan/Arabic culture, that to this day the
Libyan Arabic word for "black person" means "servant" and is still
considered acceptable today. Yet the Libyan Arabic word for "free"
refers to non-blacks.
What does that tell us about the Libyan/Arabic culture?
And if you don't get the point, just substitute the phrase "White
person in South Africa" for "Libyan/Arabic" and you'll see the
light . . . . I hope.
RichL
> On Nov 6, 9:34 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> He was a religious Muslim and he resented infidels waging war in
>>> Muslim countries. Period.
>>
>>> His Muslim "brothers" were more important to him than his American
>>> family, and he was willing to kill and, if necessary, die for it.
>>> End of story.
>>
>> Bullshit. God, you just can't wait until all the facts come out to
>> harp on your favorite prejudices, can you?
>
> I am going by what I read last night just before I made my posts.
Did you read about the President advising people to withhold judgement
until the facts are in?
>> You have no idea what was in this guy's mind. The people who are
>> doing the investigations have no idea, how can you? Are you a
>> flippin' mind reader? Are you so anxious to latch onto *rumors*
>> being reported in the news that buttress your preconceptions that
>> you can't do the decent thing and simply *wait* until we know for
>> sure what's going on?
>>
>> Keep your fucking racism to yourself.
>
>
> The problem with you is that your priorities are fucked up. The
> bastard KILLED several people and wounded over 30 more, some very
> seriously. He was shooting in a very crowded room. One report I saw
> was that it was so crowded, it was like "shooting fish in a
> barrel." (that's an exact quote from the reporter) It was hard for
> him to miss. If it weren't for the local police who stopped him, he
> probably would have killed dozens.
None of which pertains to my comments.
> Yet when YOU jump into this thread, the first thing you do is attack
> me.
Because you're up to your old tricks again. Exploitation of a *tragic*
event to attempt to score points with your agenda.
> Not one word of outrage over what this mother fucker did.
> That's the difference between you and me.
Where's your outrage about the guy in Orlando who shot five people and
killed one of them? Oh wait.....he wasn't a Muslim!!
>
> As someone who could see and smell the World Trade Center
> burning on September 11, 2001, what strikes a nerve with me
> is when well meaning people like you and some others here
> refuse to see the danger the West faces.
Spare me the phony sanctimony, lady.
There are millions of New Yorkers who experienced the shock of 9/11 (as
well as millions in the DC area, of which I am one), who don't share
your views. 9/11 didn't suddenly make you smarter or wiser.
> What strikes a nerve to me is when a well intentioned person
> like you refuses to see that Islam is a bigoted/racist belief
> system; yet because it is a religion, you believe, incorrectly,
> that it is beyond criticism and that people who complain
> about it are the bigots.
Turn that argument around to be about criticism of Judaism, and I
suspect you'd be shouting "anti-semite". You know nothing of Islam
aside from what you've read and heard from obviously biased sources.
We've been round on this several times, with you pulling quotations out
of the Koran that appear shocking, and when people point out (as they
have on many occasions) that equally shocking quotations can be pulled
out of Judaic and Christian scripture, you spin it differently. This is
called "bias", "prejudice", and, yes, "bigotry". You've played the game
with me too many times for me to take it seriously.
RichL
*No one* has even come close to saying it's a justification.
RichL
And the vast majority of those in the US who engaged in it were
Christians. So is Christianity an "evil religion"?
RichL
> On Nov 7, 2:42 am, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:14:13 -0800 (PST), PJ <palejewel...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 6, 7:27 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:12:48 -0800 (PST), PJ
>>>> <palejewel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Nov 6, 6:12 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Not true.
>>
>>>>>> The Koran preaches that if you take one life, you are taking the
>>>>>> lives of all.
>>>>> Well, sort of. There are huge distinctions made between believers
>>>>> and unbelievers.
>>
>>>>> Context of the passage you quote above:
>>
>>
>>>>> 32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if
>>>>> anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to
>>>>> spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all
>>>>> mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved
>>>>> the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our
>>>>> Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then
>>>>> after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by
>>>>> doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by
>>
>>>>> 33. The recompense of those who wage war against All�h and His
>>>>> Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be
>>>>> killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on
>>>>> the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their
>>>>> disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the
>>>>> Hereafter.
>>
>>>>> 34. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as
>>>>> Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that
Is there a point in there somewhere?
Read the story of Saul/Paul (who wrote the vast majority of the New
Testament's Epistles). Your story of Muhammed's voices translates
directly to Paul.
Crisstti
We're talking about motive, not justification.
IN any case, bullying isn't necesarily less harming because the
affected is not a teenager... (of course, we don't know if that was
the case anyway).
I heard the guy is a psychiatrist.
Fattuchus
> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 9:34 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>> He was a religious Muslim and he resented infidels waging war in
> >>> Muslim countries. Period.
>
> >>> His Muslim "brothers" were more important to him than his American
> >>> family, and he was willing to kill and, if necessary, die for it.
> >>> End of story.
>
> >> Bullshit. God, you just can't wait until all the facts come out to
> >> harp on your favorite prejudices, can you?
>
> > I am going by what I read last night just before I made my posts.
>
> Did you read about the President advising people to withhold judgement
> until the facts are in?
No, I did not read that. However, I agree that is generally a good
idea. When I saw the news reports last night, the way they were
presented, there was no hint that there were any more facts that had
to come in.
BTW, even the current reports I am reading do not suggest we need more
facts. But I agree facts can change.
What we do know is this fellow was devout Muslim, was scheduled to be
deployed to a Muslim country, and he was very unhappy about it.
I'll try to keep an open mind.
>
> >> You have no idea what was in this guy's mind. The people who are
> >> doing the investigations have no idea, how can you? Are you a
> >> flippin' mind reader? Are you so anxious to latch onto *rumors*
> >> being reported in the news that buttress your preconceptions that
> >> you can't do the decent thing and simply *wait* until we know for
> >> sure what's going on?
>
> >> Keep your fucking racism to yourself.
>
> > The problem with you is that your priorities are fucked up. The
> > bastard KILLED several people and wounded over 30 more, some very
> > seriously. He was shooting in a very crowded room. One report I saw
> > was that it was so crowded, it was like "shooting fish in a
> > barrel." (that's an exact quote from the reporter) It was hard for
> > him to miss. If it weren't for the local police who stopped him, he
> > probably would have killed dozens.
>
> None of which pertains to my comments.
Exactly. That's the precise problem with your comments!
Your sense of outrage is very seriously misplaced, IMO.
People DIED. Many remain seriously wounded. If not for the heroic
actions of "Mighty Mouse" many more may have been killed. The shooter
had enough ammo to kill dozens. He was armed for bear.
There were many posts before mine in this thread. Where are your
comments about THE SHOOTING, Mr. See No Evil/Hear No Evil/Speak No
Evil?
Your silence is deafening.
>
> > Yet when YOU jump into this thread, the first thing you do is attack
> > me.
>
> Because you're up to your old tricks again. Exploitation of a *tragic*
> event to attempt to score points with your agenda.
>
> > Not one word of outrage over what this mother fucker did.
> > That's the difference between you and me.
>
> Where's your outrage about the guy in Orlando who shot five people and
> killed one of them? Oh wait.....he wasn't a Muslim!!
Changing the subject? Nice deflection. It doesn't work.
Believe me, if someone started a thread about that, I'd be cussing the
bastard out too.
>
>
>
> > As someone who could see and smell the World Trade Center
> > burning on September 11, 2001, what strikes a nerve with me
> > is when well meaning people like you and some others here
> > refuse to see the danger the West faces.
>
> Spare me the phony sanctimony, lady.
> There are millions of New Yorkers who experienced the shock of 9/11 (as
> well as millions in the DC area, of which I am one), who don't share
> your views. 9/11 didn't suddenly make you smarter or wiser.
Well, September 11, 2001 certainly did not make YOU smarter or wiser.
>
> > What strikes a nerve to me is when a well intentioned person
> > like you refuses to see that Islam is a bigoted/racist belief
> > system; yet because it is a religion, you believe, incorrectly,
> > that it is beyond criticism and that people who complain
> > about it are the bigots.
>
> Turn that argument around to be about criticism of Judaism, and I
> suspect you'd be shouting "anti-semite".
I'm from Misouri. Show me. Show all of us.
Where's yer proof? You are reaching for straws.
You know nothing of Islam
> aside from what you've read and heard from obviously biased sources.
I studied it. With professors. You know . . . .PhD people. Like you,
Dr. L.
And I've seen speeches and read articles by articulate, intelligent
people who lived through it.
Read this, if you dare:
http://www.aei.org/article/100484
Or this:
http://www.aei.org/article/100627
And before you start flailing your arms and screaming "fuck" which
seems to be your MO lately, you may wish to read the author's
impressive bio . . . . . (Hint: she's black, she's Muslim or was
Muslim, she was born in and grew up in Somalia and escaped to avoid
persecution and she lives in Denmark). She lived through it. You and
I didn't. At least keep an open mind about her POV before you start
waving the "you are a stupid sick bitch bigot you need professional
help" flag.
Fattuchus
Yes, and IMO that makes his crime even worse. Hasan was a doctor. He
was trained to help people and may have even taken an oath to save and
protect lives, not to kill people. A teenager would not have that
training and would not have taken such an oath.
Mack A. Damia
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>So, what did your studies say about Islam?
As far as the Ghost Dance, Islam was a response to the many warring
tribes and factions in the Middle East: It unified them into one.
>BTW, Muhummad, who lived in the 7th century, claimed to be the last
>and the greatest of all the prophets before him (eg Moses, Jesus) and
>he claimed to know this because of the voice he heard in his head. It
>was the voice or voices in Muhummad's head that directed him to
>"recite" the Koran.
7th Century is a bit too late for the bicameral mind. Muhummad may
have just been a very shrewed psychotic. Organized religion is about
power and social control. Surely when we look at the practices of
hard-line Islam, we see evidence of psychosis.
Jaynes based his theories on early writings including the Old
Testament and early Greek writings. Ample evidence of psychotic
thought. Do a Google on him and his most well-known book.
His well-known work is, *The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown
of the Bicameral Mind*. Very controversial but hard to refute; he has
a large following of believers.
--
mad
Bernie Woodham
>
>
> A voice of reason during the storm, as always.
What storm? The one you created?
Mack A. Damia
Maybe.
Slavery was an accepted practice at the time - and had been for
thousands of years. By today's standards, though, we would call it
"evil" as it was based on the permise that some people were not
"human" - they were "property".
Thomas Jefferson was a kind slave owner as were many others in
Colonial America.
--
mad
Bernie Woodham
>
>
> As someone who could see and smell the World Trade Center burning on
> September 11, 2001, what strikes a nerve with me is when well meaning
> people like you and some others here refuse to see the danger the West
> faces.
And over and over and over again, it's been pointed out that G.W. Bush
simply ignored the warnings. The trade center attack could have been
prevented simply by heightening airport security. Instead you had a
President who did nothing but took naps.
But rather than blame the idiot people like YOU elected, you choose to
blame people on the other side of the earth.
Crisstti
>
> - Mostrar texto de la cita -
Christianity has a histiory that isn't very different. People
justified slavery based on quotes of the Bible. They still justify
other forms of discrimination that way. I don't see why you're
judging Christianity and Islam so differently, why you blame one
violence on religion and the other not...
Crisstti
> On Nov 6, 10:27 pm, Mack A. Damia <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > But pretty much the same thing can be said for the Holy Bible. If you
> > want to live the Old Testament, you'll find a lot of folks with their
> > eyes plucked out and with no hands.
>
> True, but you seem to forget that the passages in the Old Testament
> were written more than 2000 years ago. Mainstream Judaism and
> Christianity have evolved considerably. Islam is much younger and has
> not evolved as much. Indeed, under the Taliban and the Ayatollahs in
> Iraq as well as other parts of the world, one could argue it has not
> evolved at all.
>
But you're taking just the most extreme examples. Most Muslims do NOT
agree with the Talibans. They have huge problems with them. They
keep doing terroist attacks in Muslim coiuntries and killing hundreds
of people.
In any case, are you saying then that the problem with Islam is how
young (comparatevely speaking) of a religion is, and not really the
religion itself?