BF2S Forums 12 killed, 31 injured in Fort Hood shooting spree

lowing wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

I wouldn't conclude that one shooting means that Islamic terrorists have infiltrated the military, that's abit far fetched but a typical knee jerk rash conclusion. Although you can never rule that out. All sorts of extremists and criminals could infiltrate the organisation for whatever reasons. You always hear stories of gangs joining the military for training etc.. and no doubt you probably will get religious extremists joining for their own reasons.

The thing is reading the background of this guy and the she he had done, it seems that this could have been avoided. I think some higher ups need to be answering some questions about this.

There is nothing "knee jerk" about it. It is well known that sleeper cells exist. Do not kid yourself into thinking they are going to show up on main street wearing robes sandles and toting RPG's.

He is a Muslim that by all accounts, went against the US military and it actions in the ME. He decided to use his creditials to gain access and kill his enemy un-noticed until it was too late. He gave his possessiond away, he knew he was going to die that day. Tell me the dman difference?

The difference is I don't think he went in there into the military under the guidance of real islamic terrorists to then after a career spanning since 1988 (I think) go on a rampage, that wouldn't make any sense.

Your only hope of this guy's motive actually being linked to real islamic terrorists and not just being some crazy pissed off muslim (there's a difference) is if he was reached out to be some outsiders who persuaded him to do what he did.

We'll all see in the next few weeks what really happened and why. I'd be surprised if this guy was actually linked to terrorist groups though.

If it's easier to scrub this guy off as a terrorist who infiltrated the armed forces then think like that. It's harder to come up with the notion that this guy did what he did for more complex reasons than that.

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-11-06 14:21:00)

Mekstizzle wrote:

lowing wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

I wouldn't conclude that one shooting means that Islamic terrorists have infiltrated the military, that's abit far fetched but a typical knee jerk rash conclusion. Although you can never rule that out. All sorts of extremists and criminals could infiltrate the organisation for whatever reasons. You always hear stories of gangs joining the military for training etc.. and no doubt you probably will get religious extremists joining for their own reasons.

The thing is reading the background of this guy and the she he had done, it seems that this could have been avoided. I think some higher ups need to be answering some questions about this.

There is nothing "knee jerk" about it. It is well known that sleeper cells exist. Do not kid yourself into thinking they are going to show up on main street wearing robes sandles and toting RPG's.

He is a Muslim that by all accounts, went against the US military and it actions in the ME. He decided to use his creditials to gain access and kill his enemy un-noticed until it was too late. He gave his possessiond away, he knew he was going to die that day. Tell me the dman difference?

The difference is I don't think he went in there into the military under the guidance of real islamic terrorists to then after a career spanning since 1988 (I think) go on a rampage, that wouldn't make any sense.

Your only hope of this guy's motive actually being linked to real islamic terrorists and not just being some crazy pissed off muslim (there's a difference) is if he was reached out to be some outsiders who persuaded him to do what he did.

We'll all see in the next few weeks what really happened and why. I'd be surprised if this guy was actually linked to terrorist groups though.

If it's easier to scrub this guy off as a terrorist who infiltrated the armed forces then think like that. It's harder to come up with the notion that this guy did what he did for more complex reasons than that.

Since when do you have to have ties to an organization to be a terrorist. Like minded is close enough. He may not have joined for that reason, but when his views strayed from that of his country's, he decided to side with our enemies while he was still able to do some dmaage. His motives are all but established and yes it is linked to Islam.

lowing wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/05/muslims.fort.hood/index.html


CAIR's actions does not speak well of the ties to this sort of thing and Islam. They wrote a statement even before they knew the guy was a Muslim, and then issued it before they knew even if it was religious based. It would appear even CAIR knows what Islam is all about.

Now, I wonder what other religious group would re-act like that. Only ones with a guilty conscience it would appear.

lol. Trolling again so soon... 'What Islam is all about'. You really do have an irrational complex. Still haven't been killed or mistreated (save for people begging) by the millions of muslims I've passed by in my life. If Islam was 'all about' this I'd be a dead man - especially given that I'm not even a man 'of the book' - I'm an atheist.

It's funny that the Council for American Islamic Relations would say:

"No political or religious ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence."

Of course they thought straight off that it was a muslim, just like I did, because America is currently pounding two predominantly muslim countries into the ground and throwing principles of morality and fairness out the window by blindly supporting Israel... it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess it's more likely to be a Mohammed than a McVeigh.

lowing wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

It matters whether he was just a lone pissed off crazed gunman or whether he was part of a wider conspiracy, the latter being a much more worrying than than the former. Surely you'd understand that.

No not really, the randomness of like minded Muslims in the miltary is just as troubling. A tank driver, an Apache pilot, An a-10 driver.

You do not need a conspiracy. You need an individual who has access to YOUR shit and wants to hurt you with it.

You could say that about anyone not just Muslims though, really. At the end of the day it's upto everyone to trust each other

why do people defend islam to their last breath, yet dont give the same benefit of the doubt to like the US or israel for example?

Mekstizzle wrote:

lowing wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

It matters whether he was just a lone pissed off crazed gunman or whether he was part of a wider conspiracy, the latter being a much more worrying than than the former. Surely you'd understand that.

No not really, the randomness of like minded Muslims in the miltary is just as troubling. A tank driver, an Apache pilot, An a-10 driver.

You do not need a conspiracy. You need an individual who has access to YOUR shit and wants to hurt you with it.

You could say that about anyone not just Muslims though, really. At the end of the day it's upto everyone to trust each other

Like it or not, there is a reason everyone was thinking MUSLIM when all of this shit broke out. Trust is earned, Obviously he earned it, then he used it against us.

Last edited by lowing (2009-11-06 14:39:31)

Dilbert_X wrote:

Its just as likely this guy was reacting to the racism and christian fruitloopery apparently endemic in the US military.
Or maybe he just had to deal with too many lowings.

This is one of the problems, people like lowing think all mooslums are evil, when maybe they are just responding to decades of US and US sponsored aggression against them.

I think I asked you before to show me where I said all Muslims are evil, if you can not produce such a quote then stop attaching it to me.

Instead try arguing against what I actually say. That is if you cna find an argument without inventing one.

I don't really get what lowing is trying to say here though. So is it that Islam is the fundamental problem there then? What's your solution, kick out all Muslims?

From your style of assumptions/generalisations, you can only ever reach a few sort of extreme solutions tbh.

lowing wrote:

The day before yesterday, you would have included this guy in your moderate Muslim group. The problem really is, you can not tell who is who, until it is too late, and heavens for fuckin' bid, if we profiled to find out.

Not if I had heard he had been posting shit on Islamic extremist websites, declaring himself as Palestinian instead of American in documentation and vocally decrying the Afghan and Iraqi missions whilst serving in the army! Alarm bells anyone!!?

Mekstizzle wrote:

I don't really get what lowing is trying to say here though. So is it that Islam is the fundamental problem there then? What's your solution, kick out all Muslims?

From your style of assumptions/generalisations, you can only ever reach a few sort of extreme solutions tbh.

I am saying that the US military was, by all accounts of this guy, infiltrated by an Islamic extremist. What are you trying to say, That it wasn't?

Islam is a problem, to deny that, well, you're in denial.


Nope, not kick out all Muslims, but CAIR, Mosques, schools, etc should be profiled, scrutinized and kept under surveillance. Or will this hurt too many feelings?

lowing wrote:

Well then you are admitting an Islamic extremist infiltrated the military. I agree.

Quite possibly and quite unsurprisingly.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-11-06 14:53:35)

I think it's more likely he turned to extremism after joining, than infiltrated.

AussieReaper wrote:

I think it's more likely he turned to extremism after joining, than infiltrated.

It sounds like that from the sequence of events presented thus far.