199 Comments

1. anton:

I saw that blubbering moron on TV last night. He is the most oblivious twit I can think of. Chicago is a city without guns (well, legal ones at least) and has one of the highest violent crime rates in the civilzed world.

Yep, it’s the guns. Not the crazies, not the PC bosses afraid to act, not a blood-soaked religion, nope they are all innocent of any wrongdoing. The guns lead Hasan astray.

Daley probably blames the fertilizer manufacturers for the McVeigh bombing in Oklahoma City.

Filthy Idiot!

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:51 am 2. A Simple Guy:

Absolutely stultifying, Mr. Daley.

This is your brain on Political Correctness.

Any questions?

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:03 am 3. BackwardsBoy:

There is no question that the massacre at Ft. Hood could have been minimized had there been anyone else there who was armed. Bill Clinton bears much of the responsibility for the deaths of the innocent due to his edict declaring military bases be weapon-free.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:04 am 4. Brian:

There are no guns in Mexico either… they are illegal, so no one has them… EXCEPT for the criminals.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:09 am 5. Sherab Zangpo:

That is so typical of the subversives.
THEY have just allowed this massacre to happen, with the political correctness that has stopped all the investigations about this jihashist (it’s: jihadist + shit + fascist)

AND NOW they add to that that they want
EVERYONE to be disarmed, so their muslim friends can masscre us in the malls, in the streets, in the schools, in the kindergartens, in the colleges.

If the moderator allows me, these are typical communists assassins, they just hate the American People and they want us to be the disarmed victims of the jihashists (jihad+shit+fascist).

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:18 am 6. Steven:

Wow, he is incredibly stupid.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:20 am 7. mary:

The truth is THE REVERSE, BLAME BELONGS ON PC GUN HATRED. These cowards always go postal in Gun-Free sites. This situations is a testament to why gun control will never work. The bad guys break the rules, anyway, by definition. Let the good guys defend themselves against terrorists or any type of criminal instead of being sitting ducks.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:24 am 8. anton:

7. mary:

Good point, odd that they never feel the need to show up at a gunshow, an NRA meeting or Fraternal Order of Police hall. They would certainly find more of the people that they call enemies there. Instead they show up at schoolyards or offices where they are pretty sure that those present are defenseless.

Support the right to keep and bear arms. Cops are only a 9-1-1 call away, but you can get real dead in the three to five minutes it takes for them to get there.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:42 am 9. Sherab Zangpo:

I apologize for repeating myself, but I am scared by the fact that America has not the antibodies to defend itself from DOMESTIC subversion:

these opinions of these leftists must be read for what they TRULY are: declarations of war against Freedom.
The subversives LOVE the criminals and the terrorists because they think they can play them, use them in their delirious revolutionary dreams.

THIS is why the cities governed by the left have strict gun control laws: it means high levels of crime, and the lefties love chaos, any chaos.
Chaos is their way to power.
Chaos is what they want.
And they know that with a permanent Militia of Citizens in the streets and in the malls… chaos is impossible.

Don’t be fooled, the leftists do everything they do for a single reason: subverting the West.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:48 am 10. Floradora:

This is the most ridiculous thing I have read. Absolutely astonishing stupidity…if he really believes that and isn’t perpetuating some “poor lil’ me Islam-worshipping victim” meme.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:51 am 11. EDS:

“4. Brian:
There are no guns in Mexico either… they are illegal, so no one has them… EXCEPT for the criminals.”

And, in los Estados Unidos, criminals have guns, which they then use to kill people in military bases.

What’s your point?

All that 2nd Amendment nonsense didn’t prevent anyone to use their own concealed handgun in Fort Hood, TEXAS.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:53 am 12. Old Soldier:

What an incredible ass. Luckily for him he doesn’t have to stand for actual elections.

Hasan was a MAJOR in the ARMY!

Even if gun sales were illegal in TX, he was weeks away from deployment when the Army was going to issue him a weapon. At that point, just add ammo and start shooting.

As a Major, he probably could have finagled he was to sign his weapon out of the armory – claiming he needed to pre-deployment zero and qual at the range. The armorers would probably cut a Major some slack and sign it out to him. That kind of thing will get you in big trouble – if you aren’t shooting a bunch of people anyhow.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:04 am 13. Skyfox:

We really should become more like the Brits, who are debating the outlawing of pointed steak knives and pint beer glasses, now that the problem of guns has been totally eliminated from their advanced and pristine society.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:11 am 14. Moho:

What’s funny was your hagiography of an event that never happened last week. It wasn’t Munley who downed Hasan, but her partner, Mark Todd. The best reason not to jump to conclusions–in this case, your baseless conviction that the murder was motivated specifically by Islam–is not looking like a fool five minutes later. As you did just last week. Are you capable of learning from this, I doubt it,…,

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/us/13hood.html?_r=1&hp

But the initial story of how Sergeant Munley and the accused gunman went down in an exchange of gunfire now appears to be inaccurate.

Another officer, Senior Sgt. Mark Todd, 42, fired the shots that brought down the rampaging gunman after he had seriously wounded Sergeant Munley, according to an eyewitness account and an interview on Thursday morning with Sergeant Todd himself.

Isn’t it likely that other elements of the story are in question? Do you believe everything you read in the paper?

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:11 am 15. RE:

Agreed – Richard Daley is an incredibly stupid myopic man.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:15 am 16. Bob:

Anybody who thinks Richie Daily got where he is on his brains ought to have his own head examined. Daily led an unsuccessful crusade by suing the gun makers, claiming they are responsible for the violence in Chicago. He is an idiot who keeps getting elected despite all the crime, violence, poor schools and other problems in his city, simply because he and his minions are better organized than their opponents. While he’d like us to forget, our Beloved Leader is straight out of the political cesspool called Chicago. Obama’s contemporaries include not only Mayor Richie Daily but also former Governor Rod Blagojevich and Senator (and perjurer) Rolland Burris.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:16 am 17. tanstaafl:

Mayor Daley (“living proof that the corrupt idiot gene runs in families”) likely will blame last week’s food fight among Chicago’s middle schoolers on food.

School Safety: ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policies Common Sense?

BTW, is the Chicago school dropout rate still 3rd highest in the nation, around 50%? I think Mayor Daley should blame that on Lake Michigan.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:22 am 18. Banned by Huffpo:

“bolshaya zona . . . I like it, I like it a lot!

What the U.S. is becoming . . . “The big prison.”

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:29 am 19. Distraught:

I hope it was fun… havin me up 48 hours n all.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:41 am 20. Bohemond:

Moho, what the hell is the point of your inane nonsense? That one cop rather than another shot the terrorist? And this is supposed to prove what?

———

EDS:

WTF was your comment about the 2d Amendment supposed to mean? The Army forbids carrying personal firearms at Ft Hood and all its other bases. The jihadi was put down by armed cops- but only after he had shot three dozen unarmed folk.

————–

It’s sure a good thing there are no guns in Chicago. The law says so. Because if there were, there might be crime in Chicago….

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:41 am 21. MarkD:

Absent the attempt at sarcasm, I’m not following your argument EDS.

Do you not know that soldiers are not allowed to carry private weapons on a military base? That Military Police excepted, most soldiers are therefore unarmed except while on ranges or actually training with weapons? That Major Nidal was violating the UCMJ and the law before he shot anyone? The rest of the soldiers were following the law and their orders and were unarmed victims. That’t the point.

Yes, soldiers could probably smuggle a handgun onto a base, but discovery would be a career ending move for sure, with some prison time tossed in for contemplation.

During the Vietnam era, we were required to check our rifles out of the armory every week and clean them. Yes, I could have bought some ammunition and shot someone, or smuggled it off base and done someone or something with it, but I’m not crazy. If I needed to shoot someone, I had only to ask for orders to Vietnam. If I felt like shooting at targets, well, we had to go to the rifle range every year to qualify. Volunteers would be welcome. The guys on base were on our side.

Quit trying to excuse the terrorist traitor, or the PC military and civilian “leadership” that allowed this to happen.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:42 am 22. Distraught:

I have something to confess now. My post on the original Fort Hood thread was inappropriate in that I was did not distinguish between Muslim terrorists, which was the said topic of the article, and Muslims. And simply referred to ‘them’ if I recall, and in so doing inadvertently included general Terrorist Muslims in my criticism.

As I was referring to the lack of integration of the Muslim culture into American society.

Please accept my deepest apologies, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It will never happen again.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:45 am 23. Dave Surls:

‘Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, who insists that the core problem behind Fort Hood is that “America loves guns.”’

LOL. Kinda hard to have an army without guns.

Moron.

Of course, the whole reason we have more weaponry than anyone on planet earth is because the Dems created a gigantic army, and that big ol’ military-industrial complex, so they could fight all their 20th century wars. Now, they’re complaining because we’re the most heavily armed.

Morons.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:46 am 24. Distraught:

On second thought, everyone. These 2 ideas come from the same thing, not the same people, but they all stem from the incitement and glorification of violence with Islam

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:48 am 25. FlyingDutchman:

Yes, blame the guns dummy.By the way, start working on cars and every other vehicle – they kill big numbers of people too. And 16 year should than be 21 or perhaps 30 years of age before you drive a car. I think we should rather go back to the old west. That way more shootings perhaps but also a better selection or evolution if you like of decent people and criminals.And no doubt the “peace full” muslims would fear that more than the current situation. A long story short, guns will eventually settle our freedom. Talking will not get us anywhere with these radical “70 virgin hunters”.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:54 am 26. ak138:

And does Mayor Daley blame Derrion Albert’s death on Chicagoans’ love of railroad ties and not on a mindlessly violent gang subculture?

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:58 am 27. Distraught:

Sorry guys, we are not banning Islam. Not unless you want to rewrite the constitution.

Nov 12, 2009 - 12:00 pm 28. BattleofthePyramids:

We don’t have to re-write the constitution. We DO have to recognize that Islamic civilization has thrust a state of war upon us and respond accordingly. It was perfectly within the law to put the Japanese in Internment camps for the duration of WWII, according to the great liberal hero FDR and the supreme court of the time. ALL Muslims in the USA must be interned, and the US must be willing to wage total war with nuclear weapons against Islamic countries that employ or encourage terrorism. Until that happens there will be more massacres of American citizens by Muslims.

Nov 12, 2009 - 12:12 pm 29. anonymous:

27. Distraught: “Sorry guys, we are not banning Islam.”

Not only that, but we’d better be prepared to welcome more and more of them in our midst. That’s what happens these days when you go to war. Does anyone recall a Vietnamese presence in this country before the Vietnam war? Well, get ready for the waves of refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Vietnamese community has proven itself a tremendous asset to our nation; we should expect no less from our new citizens.

Nov 12, 2009 - 12:20 pm 30. Distraught:

This is all going to far. You started out giving my vague essay titles. Not telling me what you were doing with them, I could only assume as you had me in a private board, that the posts were private between ‘authorized’ people. Though I don’t recall being offensive there.

I mean no offense at all to any Religion, especially Muslims and Christians, and I deeply regret if any was taken.

I simply am not with full knowledge of the task you requested which I thought…

I, no I see. Well, you guys led me to post in the form of the Palin post. I was not of the style and am still not. I am no writer of anything. You made me. All I did was post comments on a public post, while also having some insomnia, and just wanted to write my ideas out for one. never pushed one single idea multiple times (reposts yes but cause of no reply to heartfelt question). that is all.

I wonder if there is something I am ’supposed’ to do? little heads up? I have no bad intentions here so it would be great if someone gave me a hint?

Nov 12, 2009 - 12:30 pm 31. clear mind:

And now you know why this moron isn’t seen on TV too often. I wonder who got him the pass to get out of the asylum?

Nov 12, 2009 - 12:56 pm 32. deguello:

I, for one, blame mayor Dailey on tertiary syphilis and inbreeding;it’s as if MOHO,JAVELIN,and the other infected Obama trolls got elected to high office.

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:11 pm 33. Clayton E. Cramer:

ALL Muslims in the USA must be interned, and the US must be willing to wage total war with nuclear weapons against Islamic countries that employ or encourage terrorism.

Where, exactly, are you going to lock up six million Muslims? And what justification is there for making the assumption that all, or even most, are a threat to the U.S.? Remember that large numbers of Muslims in America are here because they are tired of living under Islamic governments. A friend had a Muslim Arab taxi driver in San Diego a year or two after 9/11. The taxi driver believed that the madness of the Middle East would continue until they ran out of oil.

There is certainly a good case to be made for aggressively looking for foreigners–especially those from Muslim countries–who are here illegally (usually overstaying tourist or student visas) and deporting them, NOW.

There is a good case for keeping a careful watch on Muslims who have ties to terrorist groups.

There is a very strong case for expelling Muslim clerics with ties to terrorist groups as well, even if they are permanent residents.

Those Muslim extremists who are naturalized citizens? Take a careful look at the statements that they made when applying for citizenship, and if we find evidence of fraud, strip them and deport them.

Most Muslims in America aren’t the enemy; treating them as the enemy may make some of them into the enemy.

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:16 pm 34. donttreadonme:

Heck, guns aren’t the problem! A properly trained gun respects people and will not be prone to violent outbursts. If you start imposing discipline and training when they’re young, a gun is just about the best companion you can have. Why, I send my gun out solo for beer and smokes every Saturday night, and presto! he delivers the goods.

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:33 pm 35. Paul -Indiana:

Is Daly an Obama underling or is Obama a Daly underling? Does it matter?

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:37 pm 36. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Clayton E. Cramer, et al.
RE: Daley Idiocy

If this wasn’t such a dreadfully serious matter, it would almost be funny watching Democrats insist that there’s no elephant in the bathtub. — Clayton E. Cramer

I’m getting weary of these idiots. And becoming more and more concerned about the idiots who put them there.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Hell is being intelligent in a world full of idiots.]

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:41 pm 37. donttreadonme:

Mohommad(14),
Your slavish devotion to your child-raping, innocents beheading lunatic of a prophet has clearly twisted your ability to think rationally. If Yosemite Sam himself screamed “I’ll get you rabbbiitttttt!” while blasting your buddy Hasan to the lowest circle of hell where he belongs, it doesn’t change the fact that 1) he is a Muslim, 2) he did plan this attack, 3) he has openly spouted his contempt and hatred for his host country, and 4) he did go to a strip club prior to the attack (which is the prelimary step in all Jihad attacks-it says so right in the Jihadi Guide to Purging Your Repressed Twisted Soul Before Blowing Your Own Ass Up). You need to stop channeling your “inner Baghdad Bob,” and soon.

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:45 pm 38. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Clayton E. Cramer
RE: The Muslims Amongst US

Most Muslims in America aren’t the enemy; treating them as the enemy may make some of them into the enemy. — Clayton E. Cramer

Depends on how you recognize an ‘enemy’.

Obviously, those pulling guns and shooting people are blatantly such.

Equally obvious, those that are honestly decrying perps like Nadil Malik Hasan and John Allen Muhammad are not.

But what about all those who stand by and do nothing?

It’s like a horrific incident where people hear and/or watch some defenseless woman being raped and murdered on the street….

….and they do NOTHING!!!!

They don’t want to ‘get involved’. For fear, more than anything else. I can understand ‘fear’. But I don’t understand doing NOTHING. And I mean absolutely NOTHING.

What about them?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men. -- Abraham Lincoln]

Nov 12, 2009 - 1:48 pm 39. carla:

Mayor Daley is a schmuck, What else is new?

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:00 pm 40. Professor Guvinoff:

If the gun control provisions at Fort Hood had not been so prohibitively restrictive, there would have been guns at the disposal of soldiers and officers well trained to use them competently when unexpected circumstances warrant it. They would have been able to limit the carnage without waiting for the arrival of a police which cannot be as omnipresent as the targeted victims.

In fact the jihadist would have had to think harder before pulling a gun in the open, and whatever countermeasures he had dreamed up would have complicated his “task”, as it were, and limited his lethality.

If the gun control argument has any validity, why should it be any more valid when security is of particular importance, like at a military post? If the mayor of Chicago is such an authority on the matter, why has he not given the example by cleaning up his murderous city, already?

What would be wrong with a charge of treason for a flagrant instance of treason, anyway? Why should we let ourselves side-tracked in discussing gun control when it is not the primary issue? Jihadists are not limiting themselves to guns. What would we be talking about if he had used poison gas, as in the Tokyo subway attack in 1995?

The phrase “political correctness” can be translated into English: What it really means is verbal cowardice. How can you defeat an enemy after failing to recognize it the first place? Because you are polite?

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:01 pm 41. bill:

14:
moho, you commenst here are usually full of sh*t and thisone is no exception. If you are basing your infomation on wht was printed in the NYT then you really are a philistine. My birds won’t use that useless rag and I didn’t even know they could read!

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:14 pm 42. Tom Curley .:

Anybody wonder why Chicago is somewhere between the dog and a Fire-hydrant??
Just a little more Federal Aid and another 50 years of help for the “poor” and Chicago will be heaven. Did I forget? Guns and “cop killer bullet” are the problem not the Muslims and not the scum committing crime after crime. Watch your step around city hall you may step in a pile politician.

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:23 pm 43. Distraught:

We have to win in Afghanistan, in my view.

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:39 pm 44. Distraught:

And I think we should send as many as needed to get the job done as soon as possible and with the least loss of lives.

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:41 pm 45. Distraught:

Muslims are not the enemy of America, radical Muslims with guns are.

Nov 12, 2009 - 2:50 pm 46. George Bruce:

So what policy does the Count of Chicago propose? Disarm the military?

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:00 pm 47. Delia:

Killing is a decision. Killing can be a spur of the moment decision or a planned decision but it is still a decision to attempt to take someone’s life.

Guns/knives/motor-vehicles/stones/sledge-hammers/box-cutters and assorted inanimate objects don’t make decisions.

Hey, Daley, do you blame the penis when a man rapes someone?

Idiot.

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:03 pm 48. anonymous:

41. bill: “14: moho, you commenst here are usually full of sh*t and thisone is no exception.”

“Bill” must be the name of the gun that donttreadonme (#34) sends out for a drink on Saturday night.

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:10 pm 49. Charlie from Australia:

I agree with Daley, this would never have happened if the military did not have guns. ( and keep shooting them at US enemies) In Australia we have almost no citizen-owned guns, domestic shooting murders are down, domestic baseball bat murders are up. Bank robbers and drug lords have plenty of guns. All our cops and security guards carry guns at all times, I wonder why if we have such absolute gun control?

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:16 pm 50. Distraught:

I believe our right to bear arms is our last line of defense as a nation. As such I don’t think we should consider changing it, until, well, we no longer need a military.

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:34 pm 51. Dave Surls:

“Yes, blame the guns dummy.”

Heck, we know that one ain’t going to fly, because Muslimn fanatics would just as soon blow you up with a bomb, or cut your head off with a scimitar as shoot you.

Ask Mayor Dumb-as-a-stump how many people got shot on 9/11/01.

“In Australia we have almost no citizen-owned guns, domestic shooting murders are down, domestic baseball bat murders are up.”

I don’t know about Australia, but I’ve looked at stats for the U.K. and the U.S….and the more gun control laws they’ve passed, the higher the homicide rates have gone.

For example, The United States homicide rate in 1900, when there was basically no such thing as gun control, was roughly 1.0 per 100,000 population, now, over a hundred years later, with thousands of gun control laws, it bounces around between 5.0 to 10.0 per 100,000 population.

Gun control?

A complete total and abject failure. At least in America and the U.K.

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:38 pm 52. kabloie:

“If Dr. Hasan had run into any significant obstacles to purchasing handguns legally, does anyone seriously doubt that he would have used his al-Qaeda contacts to obtain weapons?”

I’m sorry to quibble, but doesn’t the Army have guns? Not sure he would have had to fly to Yemen to pick up 2 handguns.

Nov 12, 2009 - 3:59 pm 53. Clayton E. Cramer:

For example, The United States homicide rate in 1900, when there was basically no such thing as gun control, was roughly 1.0 per 100,000 population, now, over a hundred years later, with thousands of gun control laws, it bounces around between 5.0 to 10.0 per 100,000 population.

Careful: I believe that you will find the data upon which you are relying comes from R.D. Grove and A.M. Hetzel, Vital Statistics in the United States 1900-1960 (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Health Statistics, 1968). The U.S. homicide rate in the series to which you allude isn’t terribly complete until at least 1933, because many states weren’t actually reporting data to Washington until then.

I am fairly sure that national homicide rates did in fact actually rise between 1900 and 1933, but I wouldn’t rely on that data set for that evidence.

Nov 12, 2009 - 4:14 pm 54. Allie F.:

How about “blame Obama”!!!! He is a confirmed muslim, practicing islam all of his life. He is shielding this outrageous behavior in order to further his religious beliefs. He wants America to be the great “islamic state” in the world. Wake up, folks…..we have a delusional, incompetent, racist idiot in the WH…..he will give up the Constitution and our freedoms to further his cause.

Nov 12, 2009 - 4:20 pm 55. Clayton E. Cramer:

Isn’t it likely that other elements of the story are in question? Do you believe everything you read in the paper?

Were the eyewitnesses who reported him saying, “Allahu Akhbar” wrong?

Were the emails to the Muslim cleric in Yemen a misunderstanding of some sort? (Maybe Dr. Hasan was trying to let him know that Dr. Hasan needed some help moving $12 million in cash that had fallen into his hands, and Dr. Hasan needed a trustworthy partner to assist him with the transfer.)

I’m impressed how Mayor Daley can be responsible and sensible in ascribing blame based on data, but no one else is. Moho, let’s see how serious you are about your concern about rush to judgment.

Let’s say that a guy had marched into a mall in a poor section of Chicago and had murdered thirteen black people.

News accounts reported that those present heard him shout, “Whites rule!” before he opened fire.

News accounts reported that he had a history of repeatedly emailing neo-Nazis.

News accounts reported that he had made a presentation to his colleagues about the inherent racial superiority of white people. “Whites rule because they have the will to power.”

News accounts reported that friends of the shooter told that he had become increasingly angry about the dominance of black people in Chicago.

And then some idiot mayor insisted, “Well, there’s no reason to think that racist ideology had anything to do with this.”

Would you find the bulk of the evidence pretty persuasive?

Nov 12, 2009 - 4:25 pm 56. nolan:

distraught and anon @29
Read the koran!!!
Read it today and don’t put it down ’till you’re done!!! (please don’t revert ((you’ll understand what that measn if yoiu read it)))
Anon, moslems CAN’T assimilate like the Viet Namese. Those that are here and going about their business aren’t *true* moslems. islam is a totalitarian political ideology, being Viet Namese is not.
PLease look to europe (which many now call eurabia, and with reason) to catch a glimpse of how well they’re integrating moslems. Not so good! If the MSM were doing a half-way decent job (Fox incl.), Americans would be, literally, up in arms by now about islam on our shores. As it stands, things are going to get way, way out of control before our Grandkids can put this country back together.
Clayton @33;
“There is a good case for keeping a careful watch on Muslims who have ties to terrorist groups.”
As it stands right now, the FBI is negotiating, NEGOTIATING!, the ability to surveill the moslem community! They’re asking for permission, trying to buddy-buddy withy them, in the hopes that ther’ll be some kind of co-operation. Read Melanie Phillips’ “Londonistan” if you haven’t already and you’ll see how well the brits did! All your other suggestions merely allow the enemy among us to play for time, which is on their side.
I enjoy a great deal of what you write here on PJM, but, and I’m sorry for sounding insulting/condescending, but I don’t think you’ve got a grasp on islam.

All others; excersise your 2d Amendment rights ASAP, through
all legal means, and pay attention!
Thank you.
out

Nov 12, 2009 - 4:28 pm 57. Moho:

Bohemond. I understand that you find it difficult to read. I will help you. A week ago, with the facts still unclear, the author wrote a piece which used the Fort Hood massacre as a backdrop:

The tragedy at Fort Hood was ended by a female police officer.

It wasn’t, that story is completely wrong in every detail. Now, the same author wants us to assume that Islam alone–not some underlying mental problem–promoted the Fort Hood killings. In doing so, he is referring to the same hastily assembled information–much of it produced to sell news–and assuming that its fact. That’s stupid, given that just one week ago, the entire point of one of his stories was based on misinformation.

If anything shows the need to slow down and try to unravel what happened it would be that. Someone with a brain would wonder what other information from that day came out garbled, or has yet to be revealed. Given that there are witnesses and elements of Hasan’s past that are still being deciphered. Not Cramer, his need to talk about guns 24/7 and his stupid bigotry against muslims trumps even his pride. Looking like a fool twice in one week…well, actually that’s normal for him.

Nov 12, 2009 - 4:41 pm 58. Moho:

Were the eyewitnesses who reported him saying, “Allahu Akhbar” wrong?

Now you’re acting like a critical thinker. Certainly, you should ask as many questions as possible, so you don’t get caught out there basing laudatory articles on feminine gunplay on something that didn’t happen. You were quite certain of its veracity on the day you wrote your previous article, now its not true. Despite that fact, you can’t let go of the rest of your certainty, even as most legitimate news sources cautiously sift through the evidence. No, you don’t want to lose the boner you have because of the opportunity you have to hate muslims.

Now, I ask you, why didn’t you care about these incidents:

In the six years since combat operations began in Iraq, Fort Carson — the country’s third-largest Army base, with 22,000 active soldiers on duty — has become its own kind of killing field. Before Kevin Shields was gunned down, at least three other Iraq War veterans from the base had been arrested for murder, and a fourth had committed suicide after killing his wife. Since then, at least five more GIs at Fort Carson have been arrested in connection with murders, attempted murders or manslaughter. All told, the military acknowledged this summer, 14 soldiers from the base have been charged or convicted in at least 11 slayings since 2005 — the largest killing spree involving soldiers at a single U.S. military installation in modern history.

I doubt you can explain why this violence caused not a ripple on Pajamas Media, but this current crop means that we need to start jailing Muslims. You’d be an ok advocate for gun rights, if you weren’t so invested in bigotry and ignorance.

Oh and by the way, this an account by a survivor of the massacre, who says:

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.

By the way, he also says that there was no Allahu Akbar…“He was silent in my presence.”

Is he lying? Or is it possible that in the rush to have answers, you’re simply choosing the ones you like best to create your own little reality. Pig.

Nov 12, 2009 - 4:56 pm 59. CrossBow33:

kabloie:

Are you not reading these posts!? One more time… It is illegal for ANYONE other that law enforcement to carry firearms on a military installation. Got It?

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:14 pm 60. Distraught:

We have to win in places where we dispatch our troops. to not is too lose.

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:22 pm 61. d:

We have to win in Afghanistan so that we can not leave that place in the condition that lead to 911.

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:24 pm 62. Anonymous:

I am wiling to help anyway possible

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:26 pm 63. Distraught:

The Palin post was 100% accurate… you spazzes… It was the way written, which was …, not my style or lack there of. Please re-read it.

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:32 pm 64. Bear:

To whom it may concern:

Moho has a Phd in cut and paste. Often without regard to which sites he’s pasting at.

A true crab that wants to drag everyone down to his level.

I tend to leave a site once he’s arrived (anymore)

CYA

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:38 pm 65. TriGeek:

Here is the problem- Since the late 60’s we have been raising a country of over-protected sissies. Our schools are so afraid to hurt our childrens’ self-esteem that they don’t allow anyone to fail. Everybody gets a trophy!! Then when then get out of school and start to realize that the real world doesn’t care about their sensitive psyche, then they don’t know how to deal with failure or rejection. That’s when they snap. It’s not the guns, it’s the soft inner core that our children end up with due to our lib-focused schools.

Nov 12, 2009 - 5:39 pm 66. Mr. Independant:

Dear Clayton E. Cramer,

Overall your article was excellent. I do have one critique though; the title. The title implies (even though your article does not) that Islam is the problem. Religion is not the problem, terrorism is. A better title would have been ‘Mayor Daley Blames Fort Hood on Guns, Not Terrorism’. Otherwise great article.

Nov 12, 2009 - 6:20 pm 67. Moho:

Bear
tend to leave a site once he’s arrived (anymore)

If my political perspective relied on a fragile system of hatred based mythology, I’d leave to whenever someone showed up with evidence that countered it. I think you should leave. I’d hate to be the cause of a grown man’s tears.

Nov 12, 2009 - 6:48 pm 68. Clayton E. Cramer:

The title implies (even though your article does not) that Islam is the problem. Religion is not the problem, terrorism is. A better title would have been ‘Mayor Daley Blames Fort Hood on Guns, Not Terrorism’.

Yet the bulk of the problem with terrorism today is associated with one religion. Why is that?

Nov 12, 2009 - 7:05 pm 69. Clayton E. Cramer:

Bohemond. I understand that you find it difficult to read. I will help you. A week ago, with the facts still unclear, the author wrote a piece which used the Fort Hood massacre as a backdrop:

The tragedy at Fort Hood was ended by a female police officer.

That’s what the news reports said. As it turned out, she fired at Dr. Hasan, may have hit him, but that wasn’t what ended the mass murder. Are you suggesting that all of the evidence that has appeared in the last few days showing a connection between Dr. Hasan’s religious beliefs and what happened is similarly wrong? Or are you just terrified that someone might start to notice that our terrorism problem is overwhelmingly Islamic?

I doubt you can explain why this violence caused not a ripple on Pajamas Media, but this current crop means that we need to start jailing Muslims. You’d be an ok advocate for gun rights, if you weren’t so invested in bigotry and ignorance.

Except that I have not argued for “jailing Muslims.” One overwrought commenter here made such a suggestion, and I pointed out why this was impractical, wrong, and counterproductive. And of course, you would have to look far and wide to find anyone else suggesting “jailing Muslims.”

There is no question that there are soldiers returning from the war who are having serious PTSD problems, which may be contributing to murders. (The problem of long deployments away from home also leads to a certain amount of adultery, and some murders on return that are related to this.) But how many murders is that? You mention a total of 11 murders since 2005 on a base with 22,000 soldiers. I’m guessing that including dependents, that’s probably more like 50,000 people. If so, that would mean over 3 1/2 years, about 6.2 murders per 100,000 people (assuming that that I have the total population correct, which is a guess). That’s a little higher than the U.S. average, but not spectacularly so.

Here we are concerned about one single killer who murdered 13 people in one single incident–not something spread across 3 1/2 years. Yet it seems very important to you to downplay the terrorist nature of the attack. Why?

Nov 12, 2009 - 7:13 pm 70. Dark Helmet:

After all, it was box cutters that took down the towers and murdered 3000 Americans.

Try daly for treason and execute him.

Nov 12, 2009 - 7:38 pm 71. Mr. Independant:

Clayton E. Cramer,

Actually it’s not. But in the interest of research, what percentage of terrorism due you feel is associated with Islam?

Nov 12, 2009 - 7:40 pm 72. Dave Surls:

“Careful: I believe that you will find the data upon which you are relying comes from R.D. Grove and A.M. Hetzel, Vital Statistics in the United States 1900-1960 (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Health Statistics, 1968)”

Actually it comes from the United States Department of Justice. And, they make no disclaimer about the accuracy or completeness of their data.

http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/glance/hmrt.htm

But, no matter how you cut it, or what year you want to start from…passing gun control laws does nothing to prevent homicides, as a glance at the chart will make clear.

You can see the same thing if you look at U.K. homicide statistics. The U.K. has virtually total gun control and an almost complete ban on private ownership of guns (as a matter of fact it’s illegal to carry ANY weapon at all in the U.K. for the purposes of self-defense)…and their homicide rate is higher now, then when they had no gun control at all.

I wouldn’t support gun control laws even if they DID work…but, they don’t work, so having gun control laws is totally pointless.

And, the reason why what happened at Fort Hood happened is is that liberals have been engaging in treason, sedition, disloyalty and spewing anti-Americanism for decades without being penalized (ask Jan Fonda about it), so not surprisingly, people who do that and have government jobs don’t get fired or thrown in jail, or punished in any way for for doing it.

Nov 12, 2009 - 7:45 pm 73. Thiagan:

Mr.Independent/ Moh

I have alrready quoted the definition of jihad, as defined by Al Hazar University Cairo. You can not claim to be better informed than these Islamic scholars.

I have already listed the jihads by the followers waged agains various other reiligionits. No other religion has committed even 10% of the crimes committed by the followers.

Your attempt to bracket IRA, LTTE and KKK is plainly childish. The verses in the Bible are later abrogated by NT and Jesus.

Do not quote crusades. It was an attempt to reconquer the lands taken over by the muslims.

In obvious situations, do not manufacture explanations.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:06 pm 74. Dave Surls:

“Hasan was a MAJOR in the ARMY!”

Yup, and the fact that he was in the government is just one more reason that only a fool would want the government to have a monopoly on possession of weaponry.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:07 pm 75. Clayton E. Cramer:

Clayton E. Cramer,

Actually it’s not. But in the interest of research, what percentage of terrorism due you feel is associated with Islam?

I suspect that you are using total incidents of terrorism (which includes a lot of such acts by ALF and such which don’t kill anyone) to get this “low percentage of terrorism” associated with Islam. The largest acts of terrorism (in terms of loss of life) in recent American memory are 9/11, the Murrah Building, and the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. You are going to need a lot of abortion clinic bombings, abortion doctors killed, etc. on top of the Murrah Building to even begin to approach the loss of life of 9/11.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:17 pm 76. Clayton E. Cramer:

“Careful: I believe that you will find the data upon which you are relying comes from R.D. Grove and A.M. Hetzel, Vital Statistics in the United States 1900-1960 (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Health Statistics, 1968)”

Actually it comes from the United States Department of Justice. And, they make no disclaimer about the accuracy or completeness of their data.

http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/glance/hmrt.htm

When you go to their page, they source it to the National Center for Health Statistics–which is what I said. I’m disappointed to see DOJ this careless.

But, no matter how you cut it, or what year you want to start from…passing gun control laws does nothing to prevent homicides, as a glance at the chart will make clear.

I don’t see that gun control laws make much of a difference in murder rates, but that graph isn’t particularly good evidence for that. By the way, there are gun control laws in some parts of the United States before 1900, although mostly restrictions on carrying in some of the Southern states. South Carolina actually passes a complete ban on sales of handguns, except to deputy sheriffs, about 1902. Of course, that’s because deputy sheriffs were white, and any white person with much of a reason to have a handgun could become a deputy sheriff.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:22 pm 77. Pragmatist:

Guys if you want to know where the MOHO Troll is coming from you have to realise that he is a self confessed, on PJM, JEW HATING, antisemitic, Mohammedan Arab and also a PC MC left wing moonbat who loves Obambi. A match made in heaven you will no doubt agree. So now you know all that you will see why he is DESPERATELY trying to make excuses for and to rule out Islam as any answer to the the Fort Hood TERRORIST massacre committed by a TRAITOR.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:27 pm 78. Dave Surls:

“I doubt you can explain why this violence caused not a ripple on Pajamas Media, but this current crop means that we need to start jailing Muslims.”

What? Throw Muslims in jail, just because they’re Muslims? That isn’t happening and isn’t likely to, so why don’t you find a new strawman to wrestle with? That one is looking a little tattered after 40 plus years of Muslim terrorism against Americans, thousands and thousands of Americans killed…and with no one ever rounding up all the Muslims in response to those attacks.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:28 pm 79. Moho:

Clayton:

But how many murders is that? You mention a total of 11 murders since 2005 on a base with 22,000 soldiers

Here you go. Not that you’ll accept it. Accepting it means that your current interest in this particular series of murders is politically driven, and driven by the bigotry that infects the discourse from the right. You won’t accept that, apparently your entire self-worth is invested in it. If you actually cared, you’d have done your own research, you wouldn’t have asked me to do it for you.

The New York Times found 121 cases in which veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan committed a killing in this country, or were charged with one, after their return from war. In many of those cases, combat trauma and the stress of deployment — along with alcohol abuse, family discord and other attendant problems — appear to have set the stage for a tragedy that was part destruction, part self-destruction.

Three-quarters of these veterans were still in the military at the time of the killing. More than half the killings involved guns, and the rest were stabbings, beatings, strangulations and bathtub drownings. Twenty-five offenders faced murder, manslaughter or homicide charges for fatal car crashes resulting from drunken, reckless or suicidal driving.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/us/13vets.html?ex=1357880400&en=a38b8fa258d68ade&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

As for looking far and wide for people calling for the jailing of muslims, simply look around the comments section of the site that hosts you. I know that you understand what’s out there; just like the rest of the idiots here, you want all the fun of bigotry but you want to cry when people call you bigots. Grow a pair and learn to live with the appellation. As for Muslims being the largest cause of terror, it certainly depends on how you define terror and where you’re interested in looking for it. If you’re invested in the mythology that all of our actions in our wars are justifiable, and just dandy on top of it, then you’ll rarely be interested in what we do to Afghans and Iraqis. Indeed, many of our returning soldiers understand too well, they can’t live with what YOU’VE asked them to do Cramer. You and all the other bozos here, who think war is a game with no repurcussions. Seriously, the only thing that keeps me sane is the hope that you actually are too stupid to understand what you and like-minded people have launched with your support these past eight years.

As for this:
That’s what the news reports said. As it turned out, she fired at Dr. Hasan, may have hit him, but that wasn’t what ended the mass murder.

Yes, you obtuse psycho. That’s my whole point. The news reports were wrong. This often happens in the first days after a critical event like this with lots of witnesses and little coordination. For god’s sake is it that difficult to wait a week or two when all of the accounts are settled to make your determination? I seriously actually don’t care if this guy did it for Jihad or because the base barber gave him a bad haircut. What I do care about is this repellant discourse and the glee people like you take in pinning the same crimes Americans are responsible for on other people. Look to your own country you fool, fix that first before you cry Jihadist in the wood pile. We’ve killed thousands of civilians. By accident or on purpose, its made no difference to them or their families.

Nov 12, 2009 - 8:51 pm 80. Bear:

Moho. I’m driven to tears. You are entitled to your perspective, regardless of your technique to get there. Your arrogant belittling attitude gets you nowhere, and I find it personally distasteful.

I know your comeback, but statistically you are the worst offender.

CYA

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:21 pm 81. Blacque Jacques Shellacque:

Daley doesn’t actually believe that the rest of the country cares about what some two-bit corrupt mayor of a thoroughly corrupt city thinks….does he?

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:22 pm 82. Pragmatist:

MOHO you balloon you have to PROVE that all those cases where veterans went postal were by guys who were fundamental religious believers who proselytized their faith and justified the atrocities committed in the name of their faith and contacted TERRORIST proponents of their faith and then cries ‘MY God is GREATEST’as they committed their TRAITOROUS TERRORIST crime.
Because otherwise all you are doing is spewing Tu Quoque nonsense (dont know what Tu Quoque is look it up). But then you know that dont you and you are just trying to protect Islam like a good Mohammedan.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:23 pm 83. Pragmatist:

MOHO you fool you have to PROVE that all those cases where veterans went postal were by guys who were fundamental religious believers who proselytized their faith and justified the atrocities committed in the name of their faith and contacted TERRORIST proponents of their faith and then cries ‘MY God is GREATEST’as they committed their TRAITOROUS TERRORIST crime.
Because otherwise all you are doing is spewing Tu Quoque nonsense (dont know what Tu Quoque is look it up). But then you know that dont you and you are just trying to protect Islam like a good Mohammedan.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:23 pm 84. Pragmatist:

Islam and Logic are mutually incompatible in the same as Islam and Truth are.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:31 pm 85. kochevnik:

75. Clayton E. Cramer:
>9/11, the Murrah Building, and the 1993 attack on the
>World Trade Center. You are going to need a lot of
>abortion clinic bombings, abortion doctors killed,
>etc. on top of the Murrah Building to even begin to
>approach the loss of life of 9/11.

These are christian domestic terrorist incidents, done with government coordination. They just add to the chirstofascist tally.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:33 pm 86. Mr. Independant:

Thiagan,

You’re either not paying attention or you don’t know what you’re talking about. I never commented on the University of Al Hazar at Cairo.

Your comment that “no other religion has committed even 10% of the crimes committed by the followers” is wrong. Mainly because, religion itself does not commit crimes. Criminals and terrorists do. That’s like trying to argue people don’t kill people, guns do.

My comments comparing Al-Qaeda to the KKK are completely appropriate. If you feel that the comparison is childish, explain to me the difference between the islamic terrorist organization Al-Qaeda and the christian terrorist organization the KKK.

Finally can you explain how Jesus later abrogated versus in the Bible, when it was written after he walked the earth?

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:43 pm 87. Jim Jones:

Meanwhile, back to Daley: Bog Irish.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:48 pm 88. Mr. Independant:

Clayton E. Cramer,

Below are two links; one from a ‘right wing’ source and the other from a ‘left wing’ source.
(http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/muehlenberg/2008/12/mumbai-and-islamic-terrorism)
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7772771.stm)
They discuss that since 9/11/09 there have been over 12,000 acts of islamic-terrorism committed around the world and that in 2008 alone there were over 5,000 acts of narco-terrorism committed in just Mexico. Just one country in one year. Over the past 40 years the narco-terror group the FARC has been attributed by the Columbian government with over 300,000 murders. That doesn’t even include their other acts of terrorism.

The majority of terrorism is doesn’t have religious agendas. So unfortunately your opinions are disproven not just by history but by current events.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:52 pm 89. Thiagan:

Mo (79)

“repellant discourse and the glee people like you take in pinning the same crimes Americans are responsible for on other people.”

Have the followers ever taken responsibility for their own violent actions? Blame every thing on others. Their main target of hatred are USA, Israel and India. The Americans can fix their problems; the precondition is the followers go back to their countries of origin. See my earlier comment (73) Name one country where the muslim minority is not the main source of problem and name one muslim country where minorities are treated with equity. Turkey is not now and remember Armenian genocide.

Nov 12, 2009 - 9:55 pm 90. Thiagan:

Moho

Refer my earlier comment. Read this. You are an undesirable lot world over.

“A SYDNEY couple has withdrawn their two children from a public primary school, claiming their 11-year-old son was bullied by Muslim students because he ate a salami sandwich during Ramadan.

Andrew Grigoriou said yesterday he complained to the school and to police after his son Antonios was chased and later assaulted by Muslim students after a confrontation over the contents of his lunch, The Daily Telegraph reports.”

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26343471-421,00.html

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:03 pm 91. Dave Surls:

“When you go to their page, they source it to the National Center for Health Statistics–which is what I said. I’m disappointed to see DOJ this careless.”

Clayton, as far as I know, those statistics are valid. If you can show that they aren’t, then I won’t use them.

But, I am using them in good faith at this time.

“I don’t see that gun control laws make much of a difference in murder rates, but that graph isn’t particularly good evidence for that.”

I think if you look at, you’ll see that no matter how many gun control laws they pass…it doesn’t make the homicide rate go down. I don’t see how can you come to any other conclusion, even if you want to throw out the earlier data.

“By the way, there are gun control laws in some parts of the United States before 1900″

There were some state or local laws against carrying weapons in some places, but for all practical purposes there was no such thing as gun control.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:32 pm 92. Samizdat:

I trust that the Daley firearms controlers will continue to attempt to advance their anti 2nd Amendment agenda. Please keep pushing, every time you do it aids the cause of us right to bear arms 2nd Amendment advocates. Had a few of us been present to aid law enforcement at Fort Hood the murder of innocents would have ended far quicker.

Notice how the lefties try to divert attention by harping on the confusion about who actually brought Hasan down. I applaud the courage of the marksman and woman, as do most of us save a few tragically misguided visitors to this website. Their pathetic bleatings are comprehensible, but not relevant.

I will be interested to read the upcoming Supreme Court opinion on 2nd Amendment rights which may well expand on Heller. If 2nd Amendment rights are supported by the Court I expect the lefties will go into a death spiral to change the 2nd Amendment. It will be a fitting preoccupation, I can’t concieve of a less likely outcome. It also will further alienate them from the mainstream, not a surprizing, but fitting consequence.

Meanwhile, it will create a new calculus for the violent criminal, the greater possibility of being shot by an armed homeowner.

Nov 12, 2009 - 10:50 pm 93. Moho:

Your arrogant belittling attitude gets you nowhere, and I find it personally distasteful.

Music to my ears. Everyone of your complaints sounds like a compliment to me, because I find you a repugnant cowardly war-mongering fool.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:40 pm 94. Moho:

MOHO you balloon you have to PROVE that all those cases where veterans went postal were by guys who were fundamental religious believers

Yes, of course. Because otherwise you wouldn’t give a crap about the victims.

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:41 pm 95. kochevnik:

88@Mr. Independant:
A most excellent point you make. Or can we forget Vatican-controlled Mexico, the new Narco State Next Door? 4000 dead in the past year alone. I bet that number is low by a magnitude.

As to christian fascism, one only need look through the writings of the founder of Protestantism to see he is merely a Vatican shill, and christianity is the enemy of all free thinkers:

“Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil’s appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom.”
-Martin Luther

“Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but—more frequently than not—struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”
-Martin Luther

“Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and wish to know nothing but the word of God.”
-Martin Luther

Nov 12, 2009 - 11:49 pm 96. Thiagan:

Mr.Inde (86)

> The definition of jihad by Al Hazar clearly states that the muslims should kill non muslims, if they refuse to convert. Jihad is an integral part of Islam and hence Islam, as a belief system, is inherently violent. This list of jihads, I gave, proves the statement.

> Your example is right; the positioning is wrong. Islam is the man and Nidal Hasan is the gun.

> You must be out of mind to equate gangland murders and acts of terrorism. Islam terror attacks are aimed to frighten non muslims into subjucation with large scale violence and killings of civilians and non combatants. The final aim is world domination of Islam and universal imposition of shariaa. Is that acceptable?

> Jesus abrogated the earlier violent verses with his message of peace and the New Testament.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:43 am 97. Fen:

Boho, the NYTs as a source? Really? And you have the audacity to call people ignorant?

Here’s an example of the propaganda that you so willingly swallow: CNN edits an interview to deliberately misrepresent an eye-witness account of Hasan shouting Allah Akbar:

http://www.mudvillegazette.com/032881.html

This is not a case of initial reports getting it wrong, its a case of CNN deliberately misquoting to fit a predetermined narrative.

Don’t ever come here with quotes from the NYTs or CNN and expect to be taken seriously. You might as well be parroting Pravda.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:51 am 98. genghis:

Daley should ship the Chicago ‘hood’ to Afganistan and solve two problems as one.

Nov 13, 2009 - 3:40 am 99. FredGarvin:

Mr Independent wrote: “Over the past 40 years the narco-terror group the FARC has been attributed by the Columbian government with over 300,000 murders. That doesn’t even include their other acts of terrorism.”

At first I thought you were attempting to refer to Columbia clothing company, but since you mention FARC, I can figure out you simply mispelled the name of a country. Colombian FARC is no more a political terror group than Pablo Escobar ever was — they are a narco-trafficking COMPANY. They do not murder in the name of God, nor consider deaths within their ranks as martyrs. They do however kidnap and murder for MONEY, as well as to maintain control over the drug trade.

To attempt to throw this group into the same classification as salafi jihadists (and in particular, Hasan — Whom was a salafi jihadists living among us), is just ignoring reality and does absolutely nothing to support your argument whatsoever. If we look at TODAY’s events, the terrorism Clayton and others are referring to holds true: salafi jihadism and it’s religous motivations are certainly dominant and maintain the current definition of terrorism.

Nov 13, 2009 - 5:02 am 100. liveaboard:

Mayor Daley appears to be the kind of politician that would deliberately precede a handshaking session with the public by No2 trip to the loo, use no paper, then not wash his hands.

Nov 13, 2009 - 5:40 am 101. Anonymous:

Cramer wrote: “But all the evidence so far shows, quite persuasively, that what drove the Fort Hood massacre was not mental illness or a tantrum. This was a carefully planned terrorist attack by a highly motivated and intelligent person. If Dr. Hasan had run into any significant obstacles to purchasing handguns legally, does anyone seriously doubt that he would have used his al-Qaeda contacts to obtain weapons?”

What you wrote is true and correct, everything else you said serves what purpose other than giving a platform to those who disagree with your conclusion?

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:10 am 102. kerry:

I’m still waiting for Daley to blame and condemn 2 x 4’s for the murder of Derrion Albert.

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:14 am 103. EDS:

“74. Dave Surls:
“Hasan was a MAJOR in the ARMY!”

Yup, and the fact that he was in the government is just one more reason that only a fool would want the government to have a monopoly on possession of weaponry.”

“The government is not the answer; the government is the problem.”
– Ronald Reagan

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:29 am 104. Pragmatist:

I see the Mohammedans and their moonbat apologists are still trying Tu Quoque BS by trying to equate Islamic TERRORISM with normal criminal actions. Criminals are motivated by greed and stupidity its only Mohammedans who kill and maim in huge numbers in the NAME of thier God allah.

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:45 am 105. Clayton E. Cramer:

What I do care about is this repellant discourse and the glee people like you take in pinning the same crimes Americans are responsible for on other people.

It does sound like the person who described Moho as a Jew-hating Muslim is probably right. I’m ignoring Moho from now on.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:19 am 106. Clayton E. Cramer:

These are christian domestic terrorist incidents, done with government coordination. They just add to the chirstofascist tally.

Government coordination? There’s a paranoid point of view. Of course, the Murrah Building bombing was done by someone who was rather loudly not a Christian.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:20 am 107. Clayton E. Cramer:

Below are two links; one from a ‘right wing’ source and the other from a ‘left wing’ source.
(http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/muehlenberg/2008/12/mumbai-and-islamic-terrorism)
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7772771.stm)
They discuss that since 9/11/09 there have been over 12,000 acts of islamic-terrorism committed around the world and that in 2008 alone there were over 5,000 acts of narco-terrorism committed in just Mexico. Just one country in one year. Over the past 40 years the narco-terror group the FARC has been attributed by the Columbian government with over 300,000 murders. That doesn’t even include their other acts of terrorism.

You might want to read those a bit more carefully. The article from BBC is quite clear that many of those murders in Mexico are warfare between gangs, killing each other. That doesn’t make them okay, but it does mean that much of the bloodshed involves criminals killing other criminals. That isn’t terrorism. There is terrorism involved as well, directed at civilians, but certainly not the full 5,000 murders.

Loose definitions of terrorism are something that terrorist apologists like, of course, which is why Moho classifies accidental deaths in combat operations as terrorism. In civil society, if a bank robber comes into a bank, and in the ensuing gunfight, a bank guard shoots at the robber, and kills a customer, the bank robber is charged with murder–not the bank guard. Moho, of course, would prefer to regard the robber who initiated the confrontation as innocent, and the bank guard as the murderer.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:29 am 108. Moho:

Fen: Boho, the NYTs as a source? Really? And you have the audacity to call people ignorant?

This always makes me laugh. You people think that by labelling something without any proof, you can diminish respect for it in others. The reality is that almost any position taken by you toothless hillbillies immediately prompts suspicion. If you can prove anywhere here that the New York Times is inherently a bad source for news, then do so. Sitting here and childishly denigrating it without any proof is the typical reaction from an illiterate person with insecurities about his/her intellect. Its clear to most observers. Come on then, lets hear your critique of the NYT. I want details, I want proof that its a bad source.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:37 am 109. Clayton E. Cramer:

I see that Kochevnik has outed himself as a crazy person in another comment thread at PajamasMedia:

This timing is made to coincide with the Vatican agenda to uproot Iran, install a central bank, and instill a financial system of usury in the Iranian economy. Iran is one of the few remaining nations which don’t pay tribute to the Vatican via the Bank of England.

With Iran under control, the Vatican will be free to toy with currencies, wreaking havoc on a weekly basis, until every last person on earth pays daily tribute. Soon afterward the purges of heretics will begin, and camps will be readied to immolate unbelievers by the millions in the third Inquisition.

I’ll add Kochevnik to my list of people that are so crazy that they aren’t worth engaging.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:38 am 110. Moho:

You might want to read those a bit more carefully. The article from BBC is quite clear that many of those murders in Mexico are warfare between gangs, killing each other. That doesn’t make them okay, but it does mean that much of the bloodshed involves criminals killing other criminals. That isn’t terrorism. There is terrorism involved as well, directed at civilians, but certainly not the full 5,000 murders.

Not surprisingly, Cramer, you don’t understand what terrorism is. Unless you’re going to claim that its whatever you say it is:

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Here’s the US government’s definition:

The United States Department of Defense defines terrorism as “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” Within this definition, there are three key elements—violence, fear, and intimidation—and each element produces terror in its victims. The FBI uses this: “Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The U.S. Department of State defines “terrorism” to be “premeditated politically-motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

It does not have to be directed at civilians. Using violence to coerce for political purposes is the main definition. That’s why the Hasan murder is a hard fit, because he seemed to have no agenda of coercion, no demands. And that’s why the narcoterrorism of Mexico and Colombia are great, if non-traditional examples. There’s only one reason why a gang commits violence against another, and that’s an attempt to coerce. They are para-state political actors, running economies based on drug trafficking and they use terrorism. Similary, the US and Israel use terrorism on a regular basis. In fact, one of the stated goals of the Israeli invasion of Gaza in January was to terrorize the civilian population into rejecting Hamas. They did the same thing in Lebanon in 2006. They were quite open about it, but people like you see only what you want to see.

It does sound like the person who described Moho as a Jew-hating Muslim is probably right. I’m ignoring Moho from now on.

I found that last comment hilarious, you coward. I asked you a simple question earlier, and this is the way you slither out of it? What I find especially funny is your constant pearl-clutching, jump on the stool complaints about being labelled racist, and then calling me “jew-hating”. That’s hilarious. I really challenge you to document some of this “jew-hating”. Or is this simply what you say when you are unable to defend your position?

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:49 am 111. Moho:

Well, are you going to answer me coward? I’m not one of the dumb simpletons here who’s never engaged in a debate based on substance…I know what you’re pulling here. You got caught out there, unable to justify your political views and now you want to run away. Your hilarious dodge that I’m a “jew-hater”–in your words–and now you’ll ignore me is something we both know to be as cowardly a position as is possible for a man with descended-testicles to take. Prove it, and then prove your lame-brained assertion. Anything less, I’ll take as evidence of your pant-crapping cowardice and on your haunches surrender.

Nov 13, 2009 - 8:05 am 112. Mark in Texas:

Clayton Cramer — I’m guessing that including dependents, that’s probably more like 50,000 people. If so, that would mean over 3 1/2 years, about 6.2 murders per 100,000 people (assuming that that I have the total population correct, which is a guess). That’s a little higher than the U.S. average, but not spectacularly so.

I suspect that if you adjust for the age distribution and the predominance of males between the ages of 18 and 25, you would find that the homicide rate would probably come in significantly below the national average, despite the PTSD.

Nov 13, 2009 - 8:35 am 113. Moho:

Ignore it all you want, you cynical bastards. You didn’t give a crap about Fort Hood when they were becoming the murder capital of the area:

Staff Sgt. Gilberto Mota, 35, and his wife, Diana, 30, an Army specialist, had returned to Fort Hood from Iraq last year when he used his gun to kill her, and then took his own life, the authorities say. In July, two members of the First Cavalry Division, also just back from the war with decorations for their service, were at a party when one killed the other.

That same month, Staff Sgt. Justin Lee Garza, 28, under stress from two deployments, killed himself in a friend’s apartment outside Fort Hood, four days after he was told no therapists were available for a counseling session. “What bothers me most is this happened while he was supposed to be on suicide watch,” said his mother, Teri Smith. “To this day, I don’t know where he got the gun.”

Fort Hood is still reeling from last week’s carnage, in which an Army psychiatrist is accused of a massacre that left 13 people dead. But in the town of Killeen and other surrounding communities, the attack, one of the worst mass shootings on a military base in the United States, is also seen by many as another blow in an area that has been beset by crime and violence since the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq began. Reports of domestic abuse have grown by 75 percent since 2001. At the same time, violent crime in Killeen has risen 22 percent while declining 7 percent in towns of similar size in other parts of the country.

The stresses are seen in other ways, too.

Since 2003, there have been 76 suicides by personnel assigned to Fort Hood, with 10 this year, according to military officials.
Henry Garza, the district attorney for Bell County, which includes Killeen, said increases in crime might reflect the town’s rapid growth, though the federal crime data is adjusted for population changes. But the data may be understated because it does not count crimes prosecuted by the military authorities, who sometimes handle serious felonies and misdemeanors by active-duty soldiers even when they occur off base.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us/10post.html?sq=killeen&st=cse&scp=3&pagewanted=print

Nov 13, 2009 - 8:56 am 114. Mr. Independant:

Kochevnik & Moho,

Do you really think you’re going to convince anyone of your positions with disparaging remarks and personal attacks? Those types of posts serve no purpose. Furthermore, you might have a valid point to make but end up undermining your credibility by making those kinds of statements.

Kochevnik your post #95 was absurd. Christianity and Islam are gifts of peace. The problem is not religion but what happens when angry, bigoted men twist religion to justify violence.

Moho, your post #79 was obscene. 99% of the men and women of the US Armed Forces are good, honest, law-abiding people. Don’t attempt to disparage the millions of Americans who have served this country by suggesting that the actions of a tiny few represent everyone else.

Civility and honesty are two essential elements needed for learning. You both have a right to your opinion. But if you’re not going to be civil and honest with your responses then don’t comment about my posts.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:11 am 115. Fen:

Mojo: “The reality is that almost any position taken by you toothless hillbillies immediately prompts suspicion.”

It says alot about your intelligence that when your opinion is challenged, the most you can muster is ad hom

“If you can prove anywhere here that the New York Times is inherently a bad source for news, then do so.”

Oh, how about this for starters:

“A week after the first (1993) World Trade Center attack, the same New York Times ran the following front-page headline about the arrest of one Mohammed Salameh: “Jersey City Man Is Charged in Bombing of Trade Center.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/13/medicalizing_mass_murder_99142.html

“typical reaction from an illiterate person with insecurities about his/her intellect.”

And now you’re projecting. Besides, how could I ever be insecure with you as my foil?

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:19 am 116. myth buster:

When Martin Luther spoke of reason as the Devil’s whore, he was referring to the corrupt logic of mankind that induces people to rationalize their own wickedness and dismiss the Word of God as fantasy no matter how much evidence supports it, nor how even more absurd the alternative may be. Reason grounded in truth leads to wisdom, but reason that seeks its own agenda is corrupt thinking that lulls the fool into believing he is good and wise, leading him to destruction.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:38 am 117. Pragmatist:

Dont worry about all the bluff and bluster from the Mohammedan LIAR MOHO the Arab he is on record on PJM admitting his antisemitism and his Mohammedanism and his Arab ethnicity he just hopes people will forget that he did.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:40 am 118. Fen:

Filcher Mojo: “You didn’t give a crap about Fort Hood when they were becoming the murder capital of the area. Ignore it all you want, you cynical bastards.”

Nah, we’re hoping your enlightened sophisticated self can figure out what a Tu Quoque Fallacy is before this thread hits 200.

Guys, any side bets?

Mojo, perhaps you should ask your college for a refund…

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:41 am 119. Moho:

Fen, I’m having a little trouble understanding what you’re trying to convey here. Here’s the article. I actually found the real article, as opposed to a mention of it in someone else’s column:

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/05/nyregion/twin-towers-overview-jersey-city-man-charged-bombing-trade-center-after-rented.html

A New Jersey man described by the authorities as an Islamic fundamentalist was arrested yesterday and charged with taking part in the car bombing that shook the World Trade Center a week ago.

With twisted but crucially identifiable fragments of a yellow van found in the rubble and a paper trail showing that the vehicle had been rented in New Jersey four days before the explosion, investigators said they traced the renter and achieved what they called a swift, lucky breakthrough in a case that had been expected to take months.

Officials said Federal agents seized the suspect, 26-year-old Mohammed A. Salameh, in Jersey City after he appeared at a rental agency and tried to reclaim a $400 deposit on a Ford Econoline van. They said the van may have carried the explosives and was destroyed in the blast last Friday that killed five people, injured more than 1,000 others and closed the world’s two biggest office towers for a month. ‘A Remarkable Day’

Although a suspect was in custody, questions continued to swirl about the case: Did the suspect drive the van into the trade center? Or did he play some other role? Where did the explosives come from? Did the suspect have ties to domestic or international terrorists?

This was the day after he was arrested before authorities released any real information. In fact, the NYT did exactly what a newspaper should do. The fact that you think this is bad reporting–and I’m guessing here, trying to bring myself down to the level of somebody with a third grade education–because the words “muslim fundamentalist” weren’t used–when its simply an example of competent journalism is just about the funniest thing I’ve ever seen. In fact, here’s an article from the very next day, when more information had been released by the FBI:

THE TWIN TOWERS: The Suspect; More Light Is Shed On a Shadowy Life:
He apparently lived in this country illegally, squeezed into a small disordered apartment here with three others. Neighbors say he kept to a shadowy life penetrated by few people outside of a tight network of Muslims who shared housing and fraternized with him. Some of these friends seem to have vanished in the last few days.

Mohammed A. Salameh, the 25-year-old man described by the police as an Islamic fundamentalist who was arrested on Thursday morning as the first suspect in the World Trade Center bombing, has lived for about two years in a one-bedroom apartment on an unobtrusive residential street here that he shared with two women and another man, neighbors said. At some point, he may have driven a cab or worked in construction.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/06/nyregion/the-twin-towers-the-suspect-more-light-is-shed-on-a-shadowy-life.html?scp=1&sq=march%206,%201993%20salameh&st=cse

Please, I don’t want you to stop, provide more examples, LOL. Nothing pleases me more than swatting down your every attempt to prove your baseless belief system.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:44 am 120. Pragmatist:

We have also been asking the Troll MOHO to provide us PROOF that all these OTHER killings he is bleating on about had any connection whatsoever to any religion or TERRORIST Churches or Imams or Preachers who advocate Islamic TERROR or if any of them were documented as shouting ‘My God(Supreme Being ) is the GREATEST as they shot. he cant and he knows he cant hence the “Rage Boy” bluff bluster ad hominem attacks and Tu quoque. Islam and logic and Islam and truth are mutually incompatible.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:46 am 121. Moho:

Fen:

Tu quoque: I know what it is, but I’d be surprised if you could define it. Would you like to give it a try, and explain why my statements are and example of this fallacy? If you can’t, its you in the wrong. There’s no name for the fallacy of asking your opponent to prove your points for you, but I can tell you definitively that its a loss in the eyes of anyone with a modicum of intelligence. Served again.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:48 am 122. Pragmatist:

Perhaps the TROLL can also tell us what WAR ZONE the MOHAMMEDAN TRAITOR Major Nadal had every been to to get his STRESS. We all know the answer NONE the coward.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:51 am 123. A Simple Guy:

I used to think that all you needed to be smart was some brains.

Now I’m learning that you also need some balls.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:53 am 124. Mr. Independant:

Thiagan,

Ok, now your post makes sense but your position is still false. Your list of jihads do not prove anything. I could just as easily cite the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Reformation as examples that appear to justify terrorism in the name of Christianity; they don’t. Neither are the jihads you listed Islamic justification for terrorism. I’ve stated in previous articles that anyone can twist scripture from any religion and use it as basis for violence. That doesn’t justify terrorism.

My previous example and the its position are both correct. I noticed you didn’t explain how they’re not. Was it because they are in fact correct?

Actually groups you call gangs (like the FARC) are listed by the US State Department as terrorist organizations. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/45323.pdf Narco terror attacks are aimed to frighten non-narcos and civilians into subjugation with large scale violence and killings of civilians and non-combatants. The final aim is domination of the countries they operate in and universal imposition of their will. Is that acceptable? The answer for me is NO for any kinds of terrorism.

Your opinion that Jesus abrogated the new OT and the NT is just your opinion. Every single Pope since the First Council of Nicaea has decided to keep the OT in the bible. You cannot claim to know more about Christianity than the leader of the majority of all Christians. Additionally your opinion is contradicted by the NT itself. Mathew 10:34-35 – Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth, I did not come to bring peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

BTW, you stated in the in post #136 in article listed below: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/islamist-perfidy-and-western-naivety-which-is-more-lethal/ that you support various acts of terrorism. You completely undermine your credibility advocating against terrorism when you condone it.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:55 am 125. Moho:

We have also been asking the Troll MOHO to provide us PROOF that all these OTHER killings he is bleating on about had any connection whatsoever to any religion or TERRORIST Churches or Imams or Preachers who advocate Islamic TERROR or if any of them were documented as shouting ‘My God(Supreme Being ) is the GREATEST as they shot.

Well, if that’s what your asking–and its hard to tell through the haze of fifth grade grammar–then you’re barking up the wrong tree. I don’t have to prove that they had anything to do with anything. I’ve demonstrated time after time, that your only concern in this issue is to use unreliable information to engage in bigotry. If you can explain why this is the first time you’ve been interested in deaths on a military base, more power to you. I’m not defending myself in an argument or from an accusation–which is the only way tu quoque is a fallacy–I am accusing you people of hypocrisy! LOL. Even dumber than Fen.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:55 am 126. Pragmatist:

#121 MOHO yet again proving that Mohammedanism and logic are incompatible. He is even incapable of understanding what he is doing wrong. Tu Quoque my foolish Mohammedan is YOU trying to justify YOUR Mohammedan Majors ATROCITY by saying other soldiers kill people too and that claim is even more stupid when you cannot show any similarities with the circumstances except they were soldiers who killed people. Give it up MOHO its a lost cause We KNOW it was Islam which inspired him.

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:57 am 127. Moho:

Pragmatist:

Tu Quoque my foolish Mohammedan is YOU trying to justify YOUR Mohammedan Majors ATROCITY by saying other soldiers kill people too

Again, show where I did that. I’ve never tried to justify Hasan’s act. I’ve not qualified it in any way. Its your behavior and your actions that I’m critiquing you dumnb@##! It really is hilarious. I hope you don’t stop.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:08 am 128. Pragmatist:

#94 MOHO wrote

My Comment “MOHO you balloon you have to PROVE that all those cases where veterans went postal were by guys who were fundamental religious believers”

MOHO’s response ‘Yes, of course. Because otherwise you wouldn’t give a crap about the victims.’

That one post alone encapsulates all that is wrong with MOHO and PROVES his lack of logical ability and his determination to protect ISLAM even at the cost of making himself look stupid. The POINT my simple minded friend is that the OTHER incidents did not involve intricate long term extensive RELIGIOUS elements as the MOHAMMEDAN TRAITOROUS Majors atrocity DID and because they did not you CANNOT hold them up for COMPARISON. So apart from making a Tu Quoque logical fallacy you are being stupid. The point is NOT that there is any less concern with the victims. If YOU think OTHER soldiers murdering people on Army Bases is not relevant my dear illogical friend then WHY MENTION IT AT ALL there would be absolutely no point in you doing so.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:16 am 129. Mr. Independant:

FredGarvin,

Nice catch on my misspelling of the country Colombia. Unfortunately you didn’t seem to catch the understanding of my position. Other posters on this cite (like ETAB, Thiagan, and Clayton E. Cramer) have stated or agreed with statements that Islamic terrorism is responsible not just for 99.9% of all terrorism in history but for 99.9% of all terrorism today. That is false. Which is why I’ve cited the Christian terrorist organization the KKK and the non-religious terrorist organization the FARC. My point is not to justify one groups terrorism by pointing to another but to illustrate the point ETAB and others are making is false. And the FARC is a narco-terrorist organization. US law (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)) defines terrorism as : premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by sub national groups or clandestine agents. Additionally the US State Department includes the FARC in its list of terrorist organizations: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/45323.pdf These facts completely support my position. Religious-related terrorism is not the most dominant form of terrorism today.

Finally the problem with terrorism in NOT religion but the terrorists.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:21 am 130. Laika's Last Woof:

Who knew the “root cause” of terrorism was the easy availability of box cutters?
Thanks, Mr. Daley! My eyes are opened now!

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:22 am 131. Moho:

I hope you all start using the term “tu quoque” in your posts. Its quite obvious you’d never heard of it before and don’t know what it means. Every time you use it I get a cheap laugh, and there’s nothing wrong with that. My comments have always been ABOUT YOU IDIOTS, not Hasan. Because otherwise YOU wouldn’t give a crap about the victims. Do you get it? I am accusing you of not caring about the issue of murders on these bases, until it fit a pattern that allows you to vent your bigotry. The accusation is about you. Its not about Hasan, its not even about those other killers, or about the use of guns or murder. Its about YOU!

The fact that most of you can’t read is really what prevents us from having a productive discussion, nothing else.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:22 am 132. Banned by Huffpo:

@90:

You think that’s bad? Check out this article from the Portland Press Hearald a couple of years ago:

“Student Leaves Ham Sandwich on Lunch Table Near Muslims, Suspended for Hate Crime

Somali Muslim Students Highly Offended, Scarred for Life

By Nicholas Plagman

A middle school student in Lewiston, Maine is being investigated by the police for a possible hate crime after he placed a bag containing a ham sandwich on a table where Somali students eat lunch. According to the school’s superintendent, Leon Levesque, the student has been suspended, and more disciplinary action could follow pending the outcome of the investigation.

Muslims, who believe pork to be unclean and highly offensive, were reminded of a man who threw a pig’s head into a mosque located in Lewiston last summer. “That ham sandwich in a bag where we couldn’t even see might as well have been that pig’s head,” said one of the traumatized Somali students, “and that cafeteria might as well have been the most religious building for Muslims in the state of Maine.”

According to Superintendent Levesque, “the school incident is being treated seriously as a hate incident.” Police are currently investigating the matter alongside the Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence, who is also working with the school to create an anti-ham “response plan.”
“We’ve got some work to do to turn this around and bring the school community back together again.” Said Levesque, “These children have got to learn that ham is not a toy, and that there are consequences for being nonchalant about where you put your sandwich.”

“Placing ham where Muslim students were eating is an awful thing,” said Stephen Wessler, the executive director of the Center for Prevention of Hate Violence. “It’s extraordinarily hurtful and degrading. They probably felt like they were back in Mogadishu starving and being shot at. No child, Muslim or normal, should have to endure touching a ham sandwich.”
Wessler continued, “incidents like this that involve degrading language or conduct are often said by the perpetrator as a joke. But unfortunately we don’t live in a world where young children try to be funny, we live in a society in which these types of actions always escalate into violence against minorities.”

“If people think insulting Muslims with ham is okay, more degrading acts will follow. The Jews had to go through the same thing when the Nazis would force-feed them bacon; do we really want our schools to become concentration camps?”

Added Levesque, “the incident does not reflect the moral values of the school staff and students. We need to take a look at this and review how a careless act is degrading and causes hurt to other people. All our students should feel welcome in our schools, knowing that they are safe from attacks with ham, bacon, porkchops, or any other delicious meat that comes from pigs.”

According to Levesque, a letter has been sent home to parents to explain the incident and outline the school’s response. The next step will be for Wessler to meet with the students to address the school’s atmosphere, after which staff will discuss how to respond to future hate incidents, with emphasis on their prevention.

Said one of the students who witnessed the event, “I know the guy who put the sandwich there, he just wanted to be funny and see how those Somalis would react. I’m just glad that kid I beat up yesterday was white; I wouldn’t want to be in that mess.”

One of the victims, whose mother didn’t want his name released, said “we didn’t know what was in this bag. One of my friends reached inside it. It was a big ham steak. There were five of us at the table, all Somali. Right then, I could feel allah condemning me to burn for eternity for being within a 6.2 meter radius of ham, so yeah, it was a hate crime.”

The boy said that he felt better after several students apologized for the incident and said that the kids who did it were jerks, “but for the rest of my life when I remember middle school, this will pop up right away,” the boy said, “it’s like I’m back in Somalia being shot at all over again.”

________________________________________

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:23 am 133. Pragmatist:

The only defense Mohammedan MOHO is able to offer now he has been found out and his Tu Quoque and stupidity has been exposed for all to see is ad hominem attacks. A typical Mohammedan ploy to try and deflect from the REAL issue the MOHAMMEDAN TRAITOR who committed the atrocity with the name of his SATANIC God on his lips.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:25 am 134. Pragmatist:

To put it bluntly Mr so called Independant the problem is with the RELIGION whose scriptures JUSTIFY TERRORISM and that religion is ISLAM.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:27 am 135. Pragmatist:

If you want to blame Christianity for Terrorism Mr Independant you have to bring Chapter ad Verse from the NEW TESTAMENT to show where it is justified and called for. If you cant then you are just playing Tu quoque like your Mohammedan friend MOHO.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:31 am 136. myth buster:

And another thing… what’s with all this “alleged” shooter stuff? There is no doubt in any rational human’s mind that this man is guilty, so if we must state a legal qualifier, let’s use the term “accused shooter” rather than “alleged shooter.”

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:44 am 137. Fen:

Guys, be gentle. Mojo is having another meltdown. And still can’t comprehend what Tu Quoque is.

Keep thrashing Mojo. I love to see you TWANLOCs flop around on the deck.

Nov 13, 2009 - 10:50 am 138. Mr. Independant:

Clayton E. Cramer,

Actually, you might want to read the article below more carefully:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7772771.stm
Nowhere in the article does is state “that much of the bloodshed involves criminals killing other criminals”.

And I’m not apologizing for anything. I’m simply pointing out errors when I see them. When you and others make statements like “Islamic terrorism is responsible not just for 99.9% of all terrorism in history but for 99.9% of all terrorism today” or state agreement with those statements, I’m simply pointing out that your wrong.

Furthermore when you make false statements or misquote me I’ll point that out as well.

Nov 13, 2009 - 11:13 am 139. Mr. Independant:

Pragmatist,

Apparently you don’t understand the concept of my position. I’m not blaming Christianity or any religion for terrorism.

The point I’ve been making is that the problem with terrorism is NOT religion but the terrorists.

Nov 13, 2009 - 11:18 am 140. Moho:

The only defense Mohammedan MOHO

You seem to think of that word as an insult, but it only shows that you never had anything worth listening to to say. All of you fall this way eventually, until people are so revulsed by the obvious bigotry that animates your political position. And then you hide until someone else makes a national movement to validate it. Thus fell and rose McCarthyists, Dixiecrats etcetera, and here they are again. Cowardice and hatred is their only steady theme.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:02 pm 141. Bear:

Moho:”Music to my ears. Everyone of your complaints sounds like a compliment to me, because I find you a repugnant cowardly war-mongering fool.”

I challenge you to find anything I’ve posted that indicates I’m warmongering or a fool. I just don’t understand your objective when you pick a fight and start name calling. You think you are using a discriminate tactic but it is a shotgun blast not a rifle approach.

You have no idea what I believe or don’t believe based on my posts.

All you can do is insinuate. That is my beef with you. I can’t even say I always disagree with you, just your tactics. Like others but more blatant when you take on the me against the (right wing) world attitude.

I personally don’t like guns, but don’t object to the second amendment. I wasn’t even all that interested in this article, just the rants that evolve as an outcome in the comments section. So take that under advisement.

and CYA as you always attempt to do…using the NYtimes…that doesn’t carry a whole lot of cred these days.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:03 pm 142. Anonymous:

‘119. Moho:
Fen, I’m having a little trouble understanding what you’re trying to convey here.’

Quelle surprise. A great number of your comments start with noting your inability to understand another commenter. Since you appear to be alone in that – invariably the content, context, and point be made is immediately obvious to every other casual reader on the site – perhaps you should seek out a forum where you could understand the comments that actually contribute to the discussion.

One my middle schooler periodically visits might be appropriate:

http://betweentalk.com/

They are, however, rather quick to ban namecalling, so be warned.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:20 pm 143. Moho:

All you can do is insinuate. That is my beef with you. I can’t even say I always disagree with you, just your tactics. Like others but more blatant when you take on the me against the (right wing) world attitude.

I personally don’t like guns, but don’t object to the second amendment. I wasn’t even all that interested in this article, just the rants that evolve as an outcome in the comments section. So take that under advisement.

Fair enough criticism Bear. Would that you attacked the ugly bigotry here with the same enthusiasm. Since you’ve chosen only me to attack, I take it that you’re comfortable with the rest of the drivel here. That’s actually not a defensible position for me, so you’re right. But the term “lie down with dogs” seems suitable here. You are judged by the company you keep. If I’m the only person that offends you here, then I’m probably not very far off on my supposition. Tell me what your position is on some of the disgusting commentary here. Really, you started the dialogue, let’s hear it.

and CYA as you always attempt to do…using the NYtimes…that doesn’t carry a whole lot of cred these days.

Simply because people want to ignore facts doesn’t make them any less useful. Perhaps, since people eschew the NYT [with no real proof of its uselessness] then I should use the National Enquirer? Please. The main reason the morons here hate the Times is because its beyond their level of reading comprehension.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:22 pm 144. Moho:

You managed to avoid the rest of the sentence, Fen, which asked you to explain yourself in light of the information I presented–information which rendered your point meaningless. Rather than explain your badly formulated critique that used as its only proof an example of an NYT headline from another source, you hid like the pant-crapping infant you seem to be, if your level of intellect and cowardice shown here are any indicator. Are you really seeking to imply that the headline means something all by itself, or in any other context? Please, I’m dying to read your explanations. How should the headline have read that first day?

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:29 pm 145. Anonymous:

Gee, “America loves guns” because left/liberals are too afraid to say “jihadists love killing Americans”… douchebags.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:30 pm 146. Clayton E. Cramer:

Clayton E. Cramer,

Actually, you might want to read the article below more carefully:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7772771.stm
Nowhere in the article does is state “that much of the bloodshed involves criminals killing other criminals”.

It actually says:

Much of the violence has been in the northern states of Baja California, Sinaloa and Chihuahua where the Sinaloa cartel, led by Mexico’s most-wanted man, Joaquin “Shorty” Guzman, fights with his rival Vicente Carrillo over smuggling routes into the US.

…

Officials say the gruesome violence shows that the drugs gangs are being squeezed, intensifying their internal squabbles.

But the fight against organised crime has been hit by a series of corruption scandals in recent months, with more than a dozen high-ranking police officers and prosecutors detained or charged for allegedly passing information to the cartels.

Try as hard as you want to read it differently, the article is clearly implying that much of this is between gangs.

And I’m not apologizing for anything. I’m simply pointing out errors when I see them. When you and others make statements like “Islamic terrorism is responsible not just for 99.9% of all terrorism in history but for 99.9% of all terrorism today” or state agreement with those statements, I’m simply pointing out that your wrong.

Except that I never said that, and I never agreed with such a statement. The only person who has made any statements in this thread that contain “99.9%” is yourself.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:34 pm 147. Clayton E. Cramer:

I suspect that if you adjust for the age distribution and the predominance of males between the ages of 18 and 25, you would find that the homicide rate would probably come in significantly below the national average, despite the PTSD.

Agreed. Because the military doesn’t accept people with serious mental illness problems or felony conviction records–or loses them as they are discovered–many of the most dangerous sorts don’t end up on a military base.

PTSD is a serious problem, and sometimes leads to violence. But more commonly, it causes returning vets to be a danger to themselves, either directly, or by drinking themselves to death. There’s a very, very high cost that going to war imposes on a nation, and most especially, on returning soldiers. If there was some alternative for the problem with al-Qaeda, it would have been preferable. But most of the alternative strategies require either long-term international cooperation, or a willingness to use methods that are so barbaric that only al-Qaeda would consider them acceptable.

Nov 13, 2009 - 12:39 pm 148. Anonymous:

More terrorism. Funded by American drug use and most likely using American guns.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/31/world/americas/31mexico.html

Drug Massacre Leaves a Mexican Town Terrorized
A massacre here two weeks ago has turned this once sleepy town into a ghostly emblem of the drug violence that has swept Mexico over the last year and a half, gutting local police forces, terrifying citizens and making it almost impossible for the authorities to assert themselves.

On the night of May 17, dozens of men with assault rifles rolled into town in several trucks and shot up the place. They killed the police chief, two officers and three civilians. Then they carried off about 10 people, witnesses said. Only one has been found, dead and wrapped in a carpet in Ciudad Juárez.

The entire municipal police force quit after the attack, and officials fled the town for several days, leaving so hastily that they did not release the petty criminals held in the town lockup. The state and federal governments sent in 300 troops and 16 state police officers, restoring an uneasy semblance of order. But townspeople remain terrified.

Wrong religion, I suppose, so such issues are invisible to you, despite the fact that most of their arms are funneled in from the US.

This week, an Arizona gun shop goes on trial in state court in what law-enforcement officials are calling a landmark case against gun dealers who sell weapons that end up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, fueling horrific violence south of the border that killed more than 6,000 people last year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123595012797004865.html

You’re full of crap Kramer.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:00 pm 149. Moho:

Ban me if you like Kramer. I only come here to make fun of you. We both know that if you can’t defend your opinions in front of a hostile audience, they are crap. Loser.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:03 pm 150. Cybergeezer:

It was probably the terrible Army chow.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:07 pm 151. Bear:

Moho:But the term “lie down with dogs” seems suitable here. You are judged by the company you keep. If I’m the only person that offends you here, then I’m probably not very far off on my supposition. Tell me what your position is on some of the disgusting commentary here. Really, you started the dialogue, let’s hear it.

Only here to try and understand how people think, as with all the other sites I visit – not to incite. Sometimes I learn something. I’m sure Hasan will have his day in court. too early to characterize this, (alot of heresay and some of the eye witness accounts were odd) that I will agree on. Personally, i wonder if he was off medication.

We live in Intolerant times.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:18 pm 152. Commuter:

‘105. Clayton E. Cramer:
I’m ignoring Moho from now on.’

Other PJM contributors have declared the same thing and/or banned him from commenting on their articles. His immediate reaction is to start calling them cowards to try to get them to re-engage him.

Quite literally amazingly juvenile, but moho is a one-trick pony as his response to your declaration indicates.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:19 pm 153. Moho:

Bear: Fair enough. I subscribe to the idea that discourse need not always be polite or civil, and that in fact, sometimes the only way to enter into a real debate is to be bluntly honest concerning your opinions. I really do feel that most of the commentary here is a product of feeble thinking, enabled by years of atrophy of reason[if it was ever there to begin with]. Americans in general, and the people here especially, tend to rely on mythologies that allow them to sidestep logic on the way to feel-good conclusions. Those mythologies have to be exposed and being nice about it has gotten us nowhere. In any case, its easy to shrug off insults if you have a point that you can defend. Have you seen some of the ridiculous bigoted taunts that some launch in my direction? They don’t bother me at all, especially, because, unlike the ones I throw back, there really is no point attached.

In any case, when you see something like this:

If there was some alternative for the problem with al-Qaeda, it would have been preferable.

as a defense of a war such as the one in Iraq, where its been proven conclusively that there was no Al Qaeda link, after all the death, misery and destruction to our economy, you can’t help but want to point out the lunatic stupidity of such a commenter. If these are really matters of life and death, I see no reason to assume a facade of polite acceptance of points I find repugnant in the extreme. Let’s have it out, invective and all, and let the better argued point prevail. Cowardly retreats like Cramer’s baseless labelling me as “anti-Jewish” so that others won’t engage me, are everything that’s wrong with our discourse. If you can’t defend your point Cramer, then go home and cry to your mommy.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:41 pm 154. deguello:

#151 BEAR “We live in intolerant times”. You mean like Obama trying to shut down FOX,BLOGs, and TALK RADIO?

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:42 pm 155. Clayton E. Cramer:

Wrong religion, I suppose, so such issues are invisible to you, despite the fact that most of their arms are funneled in from the US.

Wrong again, as a number of studies have demonstrated. Most of the guns that the Mexican government confiscates from the drug dealers aren’t American-made. They are being smuggled into Mexico from other countries. And on several occasions, our government asked Mexico for the serial numbers on American-made guns to help trace them–and then Mexico lost interest. Why? Because a lot of those guns were probably sold by our government to the Mexican Army–where some soldier or officer probably sold the guns to the drug dealers.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:48 pm 156. Odysseus:

Moho wrote: “(I)f you can’t defend your opinions in front of a hostile audience, they are crap.” Really? What’s your standard for a hostile audience, you? Who’s the judge of that, you? Pretty self-referential, if so. Otherwise, how would you know that Mr. Cramer can’t defend himself before a “hostile audience”? You’re all about empiricism, or so you claim. Evidence?

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:53 pm 157. Clayton E. Cramer:

By the way, that Wall Street Journal is full of factual errors:

At a farewell picnic at a federal shooting range in Tucson, the Mexican policeman was invited to test fire a powerful American weapon that has been surfacing lately in the narco-gangs’ arsenals: the 50 caliber Barrett rifle, powerful enough to pierce a tank’s armor.

Nope. Flat out false. It might penetrate through lightly armored sedans, and maybe even some armored personnel carriers. But there is no tank anywhere that .50 BMG will penetrate.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:54 pm 158. deguello:

#108 MOHON :Mohonus the trollus, thinks there is no evidence for thinking the NYT is a farcical source. REALLY? the same NY SLIMES that tells us EMINEM is a GENIUS,CASTRO a democrat,STALIN a reformer,and that MAO was bringing about “human redemption”?The rag that overlooked Jason Blair’s phony reporting for months, because he was their affirmative action boy,and needed to be cosseted? Get treatment,MOHONUS,the spyrochetes(that’s Greek to you) are active again.

Nov 13, 2009 - 1:54 pm 159. Odysseus:

Moho wrote: “Ban me if you like Kramer.”

Why would Mr. Cramer want to do that, Moho? He’s already written in a past thread that your posts refute themselves, and display your ignorance for all the world to see. He has a point.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:06 pm 160. Moho:

Hello again Clayton. The provenance of the guns wasn’t central to my argument. However, do you want to prove your assertion? I showed you evidence that 6,000 guns, in just one case, came from a single arms dealer in Arizona. Iknadosian, the owner of the store was acquitted, but not because the guns were found to not have been sold. Instead, Iknadosian was found innocent because the state failed to provide evidence that anyone had bought the guns illegally. In fact, the Mexican government had provided evidence that the weapons had come from the gun store and that they had been involved in thousands of acts of violence. I actually don’t think the seller should have been prosecuted in the first place, he was following the law. He did, however, seem to know exactly where the guns were going and made sure that the buyers did all of their transactions legally to avoid trouble.

My point was to show you how obviously your animus against muslims animates this particular issue for you. You’ve said many times that the vast majority of terrorist acts are committed by muslims. You’re wrong, and demonstrably so. Yet you persist. At that point only prejudice could be the fount of that opinion.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:06 pm 161. Mike G:

From Moho “I really do feel that most of the commentary here is a product of feeble thinking, enabled by years of atrophy of reason [if it was ever there to begin with]. Americans in general, and the people here especially, tend to rely on mythologies that allow them to sidestep logic on the way to feel-good conclusions. Those mythologies have to be exposed and being nice about it has gotten us nowhere.”

I know it is better not to engage with certain people but I cannot resist pointing out the exquisite irony of Moho’s statement in that it perfectly self-describes him/her and the main problem with the overly strident left/liberals.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:07 pm 162. Moho:

Oh do they Odysseus? Well, you’re welcome to prove it, but I doubt you’ve got the brains or the sack.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:08 pm 163. Bob R:

People, why do you let this fake, silly-assed personage MOHO bait you up?!? He’s the kind that a barbaric individual,such as myself,just loves to run into,say in a beer joint on Sat. night,and bitch-slap him around. It makes both of us feel better about our position.I get to relieve frustrations and he/she can be a martyr to their belief system. He/she is a piece of bull-shiite to the max. He/she does not appreciate the simple concept of Patriotism. He/she is either a Flaming Liberal and/or a muslim wantabe. Maybe he/she is a muslim. Probably sniffs little girls bicyle seats. Almost certainly from Chicago; again, if not, he/she ought to be. He/she would fit right into barrackhussienobama mmmm mmm mm’s program.And in fact,I would not be surprised if he/she were not a Daly supporter. Of course.Please quit letting him/her bait you up.If you quit it,he/she eventually will go fornicate (substitute any slang term that works for you here) with someone else. And I really do enjoy insulting this type. Again,we both benefit. For the above mentioned reasons.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:28 pm 164. Bob R:

A little editing here: People, why do you let this fake, silly-assed personage MOHO bait you up?!? He’s a pseudo-intellectual. He’s the kind that a crude, barbaric individual,such as myself,just loves to run into,say in a beer joint on Sat. night,and bitch-slap him around. It makes both of us feel better about our position. I get to relieve frustrations and he/she can be a martyr to their belief system.”He was right about All of us”. He/she is a piece of bull-shiite to the max. He/she does not appreciate the simple concept of Patriotism. He/she is either a Flaming Liberal and/or a muslim wantabe. Maybe he/she is a muslim. Probably sniffs little girls bicyle seats.And/or,little boys. Almost certainly from Chicago; again, if not, he/she ought to be. He/she would fit right into barrackhussienobama mmmm mmm mm’s program. And in fact,I would not be surprised if he/she were not a Daly supporter. Of course.Please quit letting him/her bait you up.If you quit it,he/she eventually will go fornicate (substitute any slang term that works for you here) with someone else. And I really do enjoy insulting this type. Again,we both benefit. For the above mentioned reasons.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:39 pm 165. Bob R:

Onward with the crude insults. If he/she is either/or a muslim, or liberal, it really does piss them off,in spite of his/her protestations to the contrary. The muslim hates you regardless and it pisses the liberal off because You Don’t Love Him. In any case, they’re fun to abuse.

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:45 pm 166. Odysseus:

Bob R wrote: “People, why do you let this fake, silly-assed personage MOHO bait you up?!?”

Good question! Mr. Cramer has his own reasons, but, for many, I suspect, it’s that Moho is doing a bang-up impersonation of “The Black Knight” (with Mr. Cramer playing the role of King Arthur in this case) from the film “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=dhRUe-gz690

‘Tis but a scratch, eh, Moho?

Nov 13, 2009 - 2:58 pm 167. Bob R:

And the Wind doesn’t Blow over Chicago, Daley, barrackhusseinobama mmmm mmm mm, or even Moho. It Sucks.

Nov 13, 2009 - 4:10 pm 168. Moho:

Odysseus, what makes me laugh is that your retarded partner in crime had to post his incoherent post twice, and it still doesn’t make any sense. The idea that impotent claims of physical prowess are somehow going to get you through an online debate suggest the body and mind of a pre-adolescent. Bitchslap me…lol. Oh please don’t, you big strapping man lol. You might as well have bragged about your Extenz consumption.

As for this:

Onward with the crude insults. Its exactly what I suggested you do, you moron. Good to see you know who’s boss. Yes, keep them coming, its almost like watching you insult yourself.

As for you Odysseus. I gave you a chance to prove your assertion:

Well, you’re welcome to prove it, but I doubt you’ve got the brains or the sack.

You didn’t prove yours; and failing to do so, proved mine.

Nov 13, 2009 - 5:23 pm 169. Mr. Independant:

Clayton E. Cramer,

Well I’m glad to see that you are quoting the BBC article correctly now. In post #107 you stated “The article from BBC is quite clear that many of those murders in Mexico are warfare between gangs, killing each other.” That was not what was written in the article. The point of my last post was to illustrate that you were being dishonest with that statement. Additionally, you stated in post #148 “the article is clearly implying that much of this is between gangs”. You changed your statement. Try as hard as you want to the article does not state what you said it did in post #107.

However, let’s say (hypothetically) I believe that you were not attempting to be dishonest. Let’s also say that the article did say (hypothetically) that those murders were between gangs only. Can you cite any evidence that most of those murders weren’t targeted at non-gang members for non-political purposes? The following is a CRS report detailing some of the various activities of the Mexican Drug Cartels: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/105184.pdf
Organizations like the Gulf, Juarez, Sinaloa, and Tijuana cartels all meet the US definition of a terrorist organization. U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d) defines terrorism as : premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by sub national groups or clandestine agents. They all meet the legal definition of a terrorist organization. There not just trying to sell drugs, their trying to control a country. Can you explain to me how specifically (other than their location and size) the organizations listed above are different from the FARC?

Now I have a correction to make. I did write “When you and others make statements like ‘Islamic terrorism is responsible not just for 99.9% of all terrorism in history but for 99.9% of all terrorism today’ or state agreement with those statements, I’m simply pointing out that your wrong.” You in fact did not write that. That statement was actually intended for a different article. I apologize.

Finally, you did state in Post#68 “Yet the bulk of the problem with terrorism today is associated with one religion.” What percentage of terrorism is specifically associated with Islam?

Nov 13, 2009 - 5:28 pm 170. Moho:

I know it is better not to engage with certain people but I cannot resist pointing out the exquisite irony of Moho’s statement in that it perfectly self-describes him/her and the main problem with the overly strident left/liberals.

Just think, if you had any capacity to articulate a reasoning opinion, you could have said it yourself, rather than relying on me to gather the words together for you.

Nov 13, 2009 - 5:47 pm 171. duxx:

I wonder if Mayor Daley departs for his daily work without his very own set of armed bodyguards. The love of guns is only wrong when commoners engage in the practice.

Orwell was a prophet!

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:25 pm 172. Odysseus:

Moho wrote:
“As for you Odysseus. I gave you a chance to prove your assertion: ‘Well, you’re welcome to prove it, but I doubt you’ve got the brains or the sack.”

“You didn’t prove yours; and failing to do so, proved mine.”

My, my, so self-referential; just as noted in @156.

You don’t read well at all do you, Moho. Go back to my post @159. There you will see that I assert only an assessment of Mr. Cramer’s past opinions expressed about you, and that Mr. Cramer has a point. Do think I’ve misstated Mr. Cramer’s opinion of your writing? How so?

With regard to Mr. Cramer having a point, in exchanges with Mr. Cramer you do bear a remarkable resemblance to that Black Knight noted @166. Clearly you disagree. Others can and will decide for themselves without assistance from you or me. In the meantime, by all means, do continue.

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:32 pm 173. Moho:

Circular logic, from bung to mouth, and back again Odysseus.

Nov 13, 2009 - 6:59 pm 174. Pragmatist:

Mr so called Independent similarly YOU dont seem to understand the point I am making you CANNOT ignore the Terrorist acts committed by members of a religion whose so called Holy Book not only encourages but prescribes such act as holy and praiseworthy and that religion is ISLAM. Putting your head in the sand and singing la la la la cant hear you like the rest of the moonbats is not going to change that FACT.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:23 pm 175. Pragmatist:

Political Correctness is a mental disease it spawns obscenities like the abominable ‘Yuman Rites Act’ and the ‘elf n safety act’ in the UK the first of which gives Terrorists, Criminals and Illegal Immigrants rights over and above those of indigenous citizens the latter which gives rise to such obscene nonsense as Police bodies pronouncing that Policemen must put THEIR ‘Elf n safety’ above that of the public they are supposed to SERVE. So much so that two Community Policemen stood and watched someone drown in a POND as THEIR safety MIGHT have been at risk had they tried to help. Needless to say the Police UNION and the Police authorities fully supported THEM.

Mohammedans and Blacks of course love it, because along with the RACIST Affirmative Action in the USA which benefits ONLY BLACKS, Political Correctness means they can NEVER be blamed for what they do so they do it all the more.

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:25 pm 176. Pragmatist:

#140 MOHO the Mohammedan proselytizer said

“You seem to think of that word as an insult, but it only shows that you never had anything worth listening to to say. All of you fall this way eventually, until people are so revulsed by the obvious bigotry that animates your political position. And then you hide until someone else makes a national movement to validate it. Thus fell and rose McCarthyists, Dixiecrats etcetera, and here they are again. Cowardice and hatred is their only steady theme.
Nov 13, 2009 – 12:02 pm”

Yet again no reasoned argument no explanation no answers just AD HOMINEM and attempted diversion from his co-religionist Mohammedan TRAITOROUS MAJOR Hassan’s atrocity. This is always the last resort of an exposed Mohammedan SCOUNDREL

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:37 pm 177. Dave Surls:

“I wonder if Mayor Daley departs for his daily work without his very own set of armed bodyguards.”

Wonder no more. He’s protected by an armed security detail, kindly paid for by the taxpayers of Chicago.

“GRAND BEACH, Mich. – A convicted killer who was one of three inmates who escaped from the Indiana State Prison was caught Monday near the vacation home of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley by one of his bodyguards, and authorities warned residents nearby to stay inside.

The guard was holding the inmate, 48-year-old Charles Smith, at gunpoint in a driveway near Daley’s home, when police arrived and took him into custody…”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31880316

Nov 13, 2009 - 7:50 pm 178. Pragmatist:

BTW MOHO I do not consider the word Mohammedan an insult just a much more apt description of those who follow the CULT of Islam which was invented by and for the financial, megalomaniacal power, benefit and glorification of the aforementioned Mohammad.

Nov 13, 2009 - 8:08 pm 179. PAthena:

#132: I have no sympathy at all with the Somali students who were so distraught about a ham sandwich. They didn’t have to eat it. What idiots! Even more idiotic is the school principal who thinks that it is a dreadful “Hate” crime! (“I hate anyone who does not love his fellow man,” as Tom Lehrer said.) Jews I know would not react this way, nor to people eating meat with dairy products. Nor do my Hindu friends react this way when I eat meat at meals with them.

Unfortunately for Mohammedans, most of whom are decent people, the fanatics get the publicity. Terrorism began with Robespierre, during the French Revolution, (while he praised Reason!), and is not specifically connected to Mohammedanism. The recent acts of terrorism, alas, have been by Mohammedan fanatics.
On Thursday, November 19, 8-9 p.m., HBO television channel, there will be a documentary on the recent Mohammedan terrorist attack on Mumbai (Bombay), India, which will include the conversations between the terrorists and their handler in Pakistan, caught by Indian Intelligence.

Nov 13, 2009 - 8:18 pm 180. Nichevo:

Moho, the host really needn’t engage you anymore. He needn’t justify it. Nor must anyone else. Accept it or reject it, but you will find that in cyberspace, the hallucination is indeed consensual.

I tell you this as kindly as possible from someone who will surely disagree with you nine out of ten if not more – and you won’t believe me, is the beauty part: Your brand is expired, you should move to a new name. This is what always happens to old trolls, it’s nothing personal. But at this point you exist (in the incarnation of “moho”) primarily to be dissected. You will do more damage moving on.

BTW, on which dog-whistle of leftist agitprop did you receive this delicious new meme of “pearl-clutching?” I lurvs it.

PPS Forgive me for not engaging you on your point. What was it?

Nov 13, 2009 - 9:04 pm 181. Mr. Independant:

Pragmatist,

What you still seem to not understand, is that the problem is NOT religion but angry bigoted men. Anyone of any faith can claim that their faith and its holy texts justify terrorism. The Christian terrorist organization the KKK claimed that about their faith and the Bible. Do you think the KKK is representative of the majority of all Christianity? Of course not. So why would you think that Al-Qaeda is representative of Islam? It sounds to me like simple ignorance. Now I don’t write that to be insulting, but after reviewing your posts I noticed that you never cite specific suwar from the Koran. Have you ever read the Koran? How can you possible make an analysis of something you’ve never studied. You apparently don’t understand even the most basic concepts of that faith. One comical example is in post #104 when you stated “in the NAME of their God allah”. The word Allah is the Arabic word for GOD not the name of GOD. An Arabic speaking Christian would refer to Jesus as Allah. Terrorism is a very serious problem and it’s made stronger by blaming 1.5 BILLION peaceful Muslims and not the actual terrorists.

Nov 14, 2009 - 6:09 am 182. Moho:

Cramer and Nichevo.

But this guy:

Mohammedans and Blacks of course love it, because along with the RACIST Affirmative Action in the USA which benefits ONLY BLACKS, Political Correctness means they can NEVER be blamed for what they do so they do it all the more.

…just fine. Because racism only means what we want it to mean. Should the definition inconvenience us, we just change it to suit our moment.

Also. Nicevo. Everything about your post says differently by the way. That’s the beauty part of these kinds of statements–where you tell me I’m being ineffective–you might as well tell me that you’re still wiping the tears from your cheeks. As for pearl-clutching, it seems the obvious descriptor. I don’t see how anyone wouldn’t have spontaneously come up with it, watching the behavior of you people. I may be a troll here, but the only poster with any integrity.

Nov 14, 2009 - 7:22 am 183. Pragmatist:

Mr so called Independent what YOU seem to CONTINUALLY want to ignore is that there is NOTHING at all in the New Testament to encourage or justify terrorism so your Tu Quoque attacks on Christianity are just plain stupid. Whereas the Koran is full of such exhortations to the faithful and what more you KNOW it. But you STILL keep trying to play the ‘moral eqivalence’ card so I strongly suspect you are of the Mohammedan persuasion.

MOHO as usual you have no rebuttal to offer just more nonsense. So lets see you deny that Politically Correct Affirmative Action applies ONLY to Blacks or that the OJ murder trial defense did NOT attack the Police and the RACE CARD was blatantly played by them too you cant and whats more you know you cant you inconsequential Mohammedan balloon.

Nov 14, 2009 - 9:45 am 184. Pragmatist:

BTW Mr Mohammedan Independent yes I HAVE read the Koran which is why I know the violence, misogyny, contradictions , nonsense and idiotic repetition that it contains.

Nov 14, 2009 - 9:49 am 185. Pragmatist:

Is this the religion that you seem to think is so wonderful Mr Mohammedan Independent. This is as true now as when Winston Churchill first wrote it. BTW you can drop the deceitful mask now we KNOW what you are.

“How dreadful are the curses which Islam lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property‹either as a child, a wife, or a concubine must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.

Far from being moribund, Islam is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science -the science against which it had vainly struggled -the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

~~ Sir Winston Churchill~~

Nov 14, 2009 - 9:55 am 186. Mr. Independant:

Pragmatist,

Actually I’m a Buddhist. I only point that out to illustrate that it gives me a certain degree of independent credibility to understand these concepts.

In response to post #183, I could point out that the OT is part of the Bible. And that in over 1600 years the OT has never been removed from the Bible. But for the sake of argument (which I’m not making) Mathew 10:34-35 states – Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth, I did not come to bring peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. Now I only quoted that verse in answer to your misguided question, not as justification for you misconceived moral equivalence. I’m not attacking Christianity or any other faith. The point I’ve been making is that anyone can claim that any faith justifies terrorism. Passages in both the Bible and the Koran have references to violence. But in my opinion those references are metaphorical. The problem with terrorism is not the Bible or the Koran is the terrorists.

Finally, you stated in post #184 that “yes I HAVE read the Koran”. Whey then haven’t you ever posted any specific quotes from the Koran? Were you being honest in post #184?

Nov 14, 2009 - 10:53 am 187. Moho:

About the Mohammedan. I don’t mind. I generally call you people Christ-Fellaters. It all comes out in the wash.

Nov 14, 2009 - 11:37 am 188. Moho:

Mr Independent:

Can you point out the obscenity in #79? If you’re implying that having a fact based discussion about crime in the military is obscene, you’ve basicallly recused yourself from rational discussion. You’re like Kramer, who called me anti-Jewish because I mentioned Israeli violence.

Nov 14, 2009 - 11:41 am 189. Mr. Independant:

Moho,

I’m not implying anything. It appears it me that you were attempting to equate the actions of a tiny few with the actions of the entire US Military. Otherwise, why make references to the wrongs that have been done to the Afghans or Iraqis? Was the intention of post #79 to disparage the US Military? If you say specifically that it wasn’t, I’ll apologize for my post.

Nov 14, 2009 - 12:02 pm 190. Moho:

Mr. Independent. Don’t worry about me, apologize to yourself for cheating yourself out of intelligent discourse. Here’s what I wrote, you’d really have to want to construe some disparagement of the US military here. However, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with disparaging the US military either. When you start to paint crosses on certain barns, you create monsters:

Here you go. Not that you’ll accept it. Accepting it means that your current interest in this particular series of murders is politically driven, and driven by the bigotry that infects the discourse from the right. You won’t accept that, apparently your entire self-worth is invested in it. If you actually cared, you’d have done your own research, you wouldn’t have asked me to do it for you

If you’re invested in the mythology that all of our actions in our wars are justifiable, and just dandy on top of it, then you’ll rarely be interested in what we do to Afghans and Iraqis. Indeed, many of our returning soldiers understand too well, they can’t live with what YOU’VE asked them to do Cramer.You and all the other bozos here, who think war is a game with no repurcussions.

!!!!Seriously, the only thing that keeps me sane is the hope that you actually are too stupid to understand what you and like-minded people have launched with your support these past eight years.!!!

As for this:
That’s what the news reports said. As it turned out, she fired at Dr. Hasan, may have hit him, but that wasn’t what ended the mass murder.

I seriously actually don’t care if this guy did it for Jihad or because the base barber gave him a bad haircut. What I do care about is this repellant discourse and the glee people like you take in pinning the same crimes Americans are responsible for on other people. Look to your own country you fool, fix that first before you cry Jihadist in the wood pile. We’ve killed thousands of civilians. By accident or on purpose, its made no difference to them or their families.

Indeed, what’s obsene is the ease with which some people forget that they voted for these wars, and then sent our children to fight them. They’ve come back home, stained with what we asked them to do–with nothing to be gained for Americans–and throughout the last eight years, not one post about the rising crime rates on the bases on this website. No call for more mental health care professionals, most imporantly no call to stop sending these innocent dupes out to fight for the lies they’ve been inculcated into. No one cared about soldiers killing soldiers when the perpetrators weren’t muslims. That’s sick.

Seriously, if anything is obscene, its that.

Nov 14, 2009 - 12:52 pm 191. Mr. Independant:

Moho,

I could read the post without you reposting it. And I asked you a very simple question, you didn’t answer it. Furthermore I asked you in a previous post that if you can’t be civil in your posts then don’t comment on what I write. I’m not going to bother responding to any of your posts in the future. I’d appriciate it if you would do the same.

Nov 14, 2009 - 3:18 pm 192. moho:

Mr. Independent

I could read the post without you reposting it.

That’s obviously untrue, you illiterate coward. Your question would be the equivalent of asking if “thank you” means “I hate you”. If the words aren’t there–and more importantly, if you can’t prove that they’re there, then you have no business asking such a moronic question. One of the stupidest things I’ve ever encountered; and that’s saying quite a bit here.

If you want to cowardly impugn that my comments are somehow anti-military in order to undermine them in a way that your powers of reason are unable, then you deserve no consideration of any kind. I don’t care what you’d appreciate.

And the funny thing is, I actually have a kid in the military and he’s deployed. Under your own stupid rubric, your inference that I’m denigrating the military would be an INSULT TO ME AND MY SON. Do you get how stupid your point is, how asinine your holier than thou bs is? Its quite possible I won’t address you again, but it will only be because you’ve revealed yourself to be the dumbest poster here! And that’s saying quite a bit.

Nov 14, 2009 - 5:43 pm 193. Pragmatist:

Mr so called Independant as YOU must have obviously read the Koran too why should I need to post references to it you should KNOW whats in it like I do. I mean you would not be so stupid to defend something you know nothing about would you or maybe you WOULD you. Your posts are so woolly and touchy feely that if you are not a Mohammedan, and to be honest I still think you ARE and practicing Taqqiya and DECEIT as recommended in the Koran in defense of Islam, then you are just a PC MC Islamophile moonbat.

Nov 14, 2009 - 10:55 pm 194. Pragmatist:

Give it up MOHO we all KNOW and have seen YOU admit on PJM that you are an antisemitic Mohammedan ARAB. So you are either that or a LIAR either way you are disgusting .

Nov 14, 2009 - 10:57 pm 195. Thiagan:

> Islam means peace. It is a lie and Islam means submission

> Islam respects women as equal. It is a lie and Islam treats women as dirt.

> Jihad means inner struggle. It is a lie and jihad means and is being actively propagated world over as the war against non believers and to convert them or kill them.

> Islam is a religion of peace. It is a lie and the Book contains around 400 violent verses and they are literally interpreted. The conduct of Mohammed had been extremely violent and it was offensive.

> Islam can coexist with other religionists peacefully. It is a lie and with its ambition of world domination, it can never co exist with other communities peacefully.

> Islam facilitated a ‘golden age’ of scientific discovery. It is a lie and even the concept of zero was taken by them from Hindus and was taken to west. Islam, through the ages, has ruthlessly destroyed any scientific enquiry on the plea that the Book contains every thing; any other work that disagrees, it is blasphemy and if the work agrees with the Book, it is redundant. The present day Afganisthan was a great centre of Buddhist learning and Islam destroyed thousands of libraries, burnt millions of books and killed millions of Buddhist scholars.

> Islam is opposed to slavery. It is a lie and practising slavery and releasing them on payment of ransom is permitted in the Book; it was practiced by its founder and by successive rulers and it is being carried out on a large scale in Darfur even today. Taking slaves and releasing them for ransom is an important econommic activity for the followers. See Somali pirates.

> Islam is incompatible with terrorism. It is a lie and terrorism is one of the jihadist tools for world domination.

> Islam is democracy. It is a lie and there is no muslim country in the world today where there is genuine democracy, fundamental rights, equal rights for minorities, elected government and peaceful changeover of governments.

Nov 14, 2009 - 11:42 pm 196. moho:

Give it up MOHO we all KNOW and have seen YOU admit on PJM that you are an antisemitic Mohammedan ARAB.

This is exactly what will defeat you.

Nov 15, 2009 - 7:20 am 197. Bear:

154: Deguello:

Yes that is certainly part of it. As I’ve maintained before in other commentary, we are witnessing first hand the origins of 21st century Totalitarianism. It doesn’t matter what direction you look…which ever side ‘wins’ is out to crush the other and its only getting worse.

Nov 15, 2009 - 8:41 am 198. whyyeseyec:

Americans will n-e-v-e-r give up their guns. N-e-v-e-r. Try to take them. Try.

Nov 15, 2009 - 2:14 pm 199. rp:

whyyeseyec,

You are one of the reasons why my confidence in the good people of PJM is being shaken.
“American will never give up their guns, you say.” Then you dare our government I assume to try and take them.

I think your statement is so off target, whyyes.

Here’s why. It’s all about guns. Instead, try a compromise. Offer to give up your ammo. Your bullets.
I’m sure the Obama administration would consider meeting you half way.

Come on, W man, give up your bullets. Make that the common ground.

Fact is, I prefer when the Neo Coms come into possession of your bullets, that they’re
of the armor piercing variety. Your friend, Rachel, would prefer the kevlar outfits don’t get in the way of complete and full possession.

Nov 15, 2009 - 9:33 pm