Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Fort Hood Massacre

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Sudden Jihad Syndrome – It's Now Official from January 2008.

Applying principles from Objectivist epistemology, have we got an actual concept here or just bare similarity?

Moving on to a different issue, I reject the idea that anyone strongly committed to an idea which is wrong is necessarily insane. Insanity must be a physical dysfunction. Since Maj. Hassan was scheduled to be deployed to Iraq, I infer he passed a pre-deployment physical. He was not insane, or even near insane.

There exists an old idea that describes succinctly this man's actions and motives. He was evil. He was evil because he clung to the revealed word of God as found in the Koran over the evidence of his own life witnessed through his own eyes and ears.

This implies Islam is evil. It is evil because when taken literally as a guide to action it causes destruction and death. There are no good muslims, there are only dangerous muslims made dangerous because of their regard for the Koran and bad muslims who disregard much of the Koran. Bad muslims are vulnerable to peer pressure to become dangerous muslims because the dangerous muslims are more consistently observant of the premise that the Koran is the direct word of God. Consistency wins in ideological struggles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I saw this coming a mile away...

Officials: U.S. Aware of Hasan Efforts to Contact al Qaeda:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fort-hood-sh...tory?id=9030873

From the article...

"And we questioned how somebody could take an oath of office… and swear allegiance to the constitution and to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic and have that type of conflict," Finell told ABC News.

I could apply similar issues to so many elected to government.

Another example of government failure again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another (better, imo) story which details the killer's link to a radical imam: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...terrorists.html

The Obama administration and the press are very hesitant to say the word "terrorist" in relation to the Fort Hood killer, but I am beginning to believe that it was indeed a religiously motivated, somewhat planned terrorist attack and not simply a soldier gone off his rocker. Hopefully when/if the killer revives, we will find out more.

How long has it been since an American was tried for treason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long has it been since an American was tried for treason?

Adam Yahiye Gadahn, October 11, 2006, convicted of treason for aiding an enemy of the United States (Al-Qaeda) (in absentia) and before that a Japanese-American for activities during WW2.

In America treason requires participating in a war, and a lone gunman does not make a war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In America treason requires participating in a war, and a lone gunman does not make a war.

The constitution says that treason consists of levying war, and I disagree that one man cannot do so. An assassination can be an act by perpetrated by only one man, and that most certainly could be an act of war. If Hassan's heinous acts were motivated by his religion or political leanings, I think that qualifies as levying war. As an American citizen, that qualifies him to be tried for treason.

However, I don't think it will ever get there. The politically correct people calling the shots will cover up the facts as much as possible, and it will be claimed that he went temporarily insane and should not be held responsible for his actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allegedly Obama is heading to Ft. Hood today to pay his "respects" to the murdered. Of course it's all BS.-his sympathies at heart lie not with our military but with irrationalist anti-man wingnuts, like the murdering Hasan. In his heart he is going to pay respects to the murderous bastard who was being oppressed by the America "imperialists". And why wouldn't he?-the douchebag worshiped in an anti-liberty/mysticism crazed church. DISGUSTING.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allegedly Obama is heading to Ft. Hood today to pay his "respects" to the murdered. Of course it's all BS.-his sympathies at heart lie not with our military but with irrationalist anti-man wingnuts, like the murdering Hasan. In his heart he is going to pay respects to the murderous bastard who was being oppressed by the America "imperialists". And why wouldn't he?-the douchebag worshiped in an anti-liberty/mysticism crazed church. DISGUSTING.

I'm not the one for psychoanalizing Obama, but my best guess is that he in fact is horrified by the murders and is heading down there to pay his respects to the murdered. Another possibility is that he doesn't care either way, and is just going there for a political show.

Either way, your version of what his state of mind is like is baseless, emotionalist speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam may very well have been a motivating factor for this man, but we will only know that after the investigation is complete. To say unequivocally that he went on this rampage because he was a Muslim is incredibly naive and it is collectivist in origins. As has been stated by other posters, simply identifying as a Muslim does not make you a murderer. It's a bit irritating that supposedly intelligent individuals are making statements like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam may very well have been a motivating factor for this man, but we will only know that after the investigation is complete. To say unequivocally that he went on this rampage because he was a Muslim is incredibly naive and it is collectivist in origins. As has been stated by other posters, simply identifying as a Muslim does not make you a murderer. It's a bit irritating that supposedly intelligent individuals are making statements like that.

Shouting "Allah Akbar" while you kill over a dozen people does make you crazy, a terrorist, a Muslim and hence, a crazy Muslim terrorist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not the one for psychoanalizing Obama, but my best guess is that he in fact is horrified by the murders and is heading down there to pay his respects to the murdered. Another possibility is that he doesn't care either way, and is just going there for a political show.

Either way, your version of what his state of mind is like is baseless, emotionalist speculation.

From what I've read and heard Obama say in the past, the poster's estimation of Obama's state of mind is most definitely not "baseless". Of course there's no way to be certain of another person's state of mind without them telling you, but if she were still alive today I believe Ayn Rand's horror file would have its own Obama section.

Another thought...

Isn't it sadly ironic that our military personnel, on the grounds of a military base, were unarmed and had to rely on the police for their protection? I hate to think that the people charged with the defense of the nation are somehow not trusted with option to carry a weapon that might have protected themselves individually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam may very well have been a motivating factor for this man, but we will only know that after the investigation is complete. To say unequivocally that he went on this rampage because he was a Muslim is incredibly naive and it is collectivist in origins. As has been stated by other posters, simply identifying as a Muslim does not make you a murderer. It's a bit irritating that supposedly intelligent individuals are making statements like that.

From what I've read and heard the guy was a dedicated anti-American muslim. He was motivated by his faith to hate America. Honestly, I've rarely seen such strong evidence. His own words, for crying out loud, make it obvious as hell. He might as well have had a neon sign on his back "I'm a terrorist!".

And notice we don't see Christians or Buddhists doing this stuff. Muslims, however, have gone on religiously motivated killing sprees quite a bit in America the last 8 or so years, which is surprising considering there aren't very many muslims in America. How often did this stuff happen pre-911?

I'd say the motivating factors for such barbarism are profound alienation and hopelessness and antisocial ideologies like Islam serve as validation for acting out on this negativity.

The reasons why someone adopts such ideologies is hard to say, however what is clear is the muslim ideology is deadly if practiced religiously ... nice pun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam may very well have been a motivating factor for this man, but we will only know that after the investigation is complete. To say unequivocally that he went on this rampage because he was a Muslim is incredibly naive and it is collectivist in origins. As has been stated by other posters, simply identifying as a Muslim does not make you a murderer. It's a bit irritating that supposedly intelligent individuals are making statements like that.

It would be collectivist if the reasoning were as follows:

Some muslims are guilty of murder.

Therefore all muslims are guilty of murder.

Hasan is a muslim.

Therefore Hasan is a murderer.

Instead what we have already before us is:

Hasan is a muslim

Muslims believe
the Koran is the literal word of God
, not an interpretation or a product of an "as told by" ghost writer

Hasan wrote
"Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the Islam"

Hasan admires suicide attacks in 'defense' of muslims by his own statements
(see comment dated 5/20/2009)

Hasan
is linked to Anwar Aulaqi (or al-Awlaki)
, imam to 3 of the 9/11 hijackers

Hasan shouted "Allah Akbar" when he began firing

Hasan killed people intentionally and not in self defense

Hasan did not attempt to commit suicide, and has survived (although he may have reasonably expected to be killed that is not suicide)

In conclusion: Hasan's ideas caused his actions and his ideas came from the Koran via a worldwide evangelical movement advocating those ideas

Not every communist in the U.S. participated in espionage during the Cold War, in fact the vast majority did not. That said nothing about the essence of communism. Kant's philosophical innovations led to oppression, famine, war and concentration camps while Kant himself was a peaceful harmless academic that never murdered anyone or even advocated murdering anyone. The Critique of Pure Reason does not advocate killing anyone, yet it leads to the deaths of millions. The Koran does advocate converting or killing people and has already led to the deaths of millions. To deny that Islam is a death cult is a plain contradiction of the Koran, the history of Islam and the principle that men's actions are caused by their ideas. Hasan is a jihadist because of his own words and deeds linking him to the Koran which objectively does sanction his act. This is a logically necessary conclusion from the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've read and heard Obama say in the past, the poster's estimation of Obama's state of mind is most definitely not "baseless". Of course there's no way to be certain of another person's state of mind without them telling you, but if she were still alive today I believe Ayn Rand's horror file would have its own Obama section.

Another thought...

Isn't it sadly ironic that our military personnel, on the grounds of a military base, were unarmed and had to rely on the police for their protection? I hate to think that the people charged with the defense of the nation are somehow not trusted with option to carry a weapon that might have protected themselves individually.

There are specific reasons that few people within a military base have live ammo on them. I would trust the authority of the military in deciding what they do and do not allow on their own premises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are specific reasons that few people within a military base have live ammo on them. I would trust the authority of the military in deciding what they do and do not allow on their own premises.
What are those reasons? My understanding was that base commanders used to have that authority until 1993 when the Clinton administration revised the law via a defense directive requiring approval by the Secretary of the Army on a case by case basis.

I would also trust the base commanders to decide what they DO or do not allow on their premises. I just don't think they have that freedom anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've read and heard Obama say in the past, the poster's estimation of Obama's state of mind is most definitely not "baseless". Of course there's no way to be certain of another person's state of mind without them telling you, but if she were still alive today I believe Ayn Rand's horror file would have its own Obama section.

From what you've heard Obama say in the past, such as?

Repeating that something isn't baseless, without ever even atempting to offer any basis for it, is just a second baseless statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what you've heard Obama say in the past, such as?

Repeating that something isn't baseless, without ever even atempting to offer any basis for it, is just a second baseless statement.

You said the below was baseless.

Allegedly Obama is heading to Ft. Hood today to pay his "respects" to the murdered. Of course it's all BS.-his sympathies at heart lie not with our military but with irrationalist anti-man wingnuts, like the murdering Hasan. In his heart he is going to pay respects to the murderous bastard who was being oppressed by the America "imperialists". And why wouldn't he?-the douchebag worshiped in an anti-liberty/mysticism crazed church. DISGUSTING.

First, even here he gave a reason -- Worshiping at Jerimiah Wright's church (i.e. "God Damn America" 9/11 being the "Chickens coming home to roost", et al). BTW, now there's new tapes of him praising Marxism. Obama did say to judge him by the people he associates with (in a debate w/ hillary)... I'm not going to go through the list. But he provided a basis for his opinion of Obama's possible mindset.

Couple this with the President (and his administration, and the media) going out of their way NOT to offend Muslims by calling this Fort Hood act of treason/war what it is. Watch this. There is knowledge of the "alu akbar" shout followed up with Obama's urging us not to jump to conclusions. (Not even a "It is fair to say [Hasan] acted stupidly" quote)

As for Obamas past words, there's something in just about every statement he makes that lead me to believe he is the "real deal" when it comes to having an ANTI-MAN and ANTI-LIFE philosophy. Whether it be wanting to turn 9/11 into a "day of service" or telling us that we all need to sacrifice -- Or saying that he wants to "spread the wealth". There is the lamenting that the courts haven't gotten into re-distribution of wealth and "economic justice".

He talked about "fundamentally" remaking this country constantly during his campaign. He is a statist.

It isn't that big of a leap to think he might see everyone at Fort Hood as a "victim"... including the shooter. From today, with Jake Tapper "OBAMA: Well, look, we -- we have seen, in the past, rampages of this sort. And in a country of 300 million people, there are going to be acts of violence that are inexplicable. Even within the extraordinary military that we have -- and I think everybody understands how outstanding the young men and women in uniform are under the most severe stress -- there are going to be instances in which an individual cracks."

I admit, I had assumed you were aware of the vast amount of statements like the above being that you're an Objectivist. These things stick out when I hear them.

As I said, I don't know what is in his head, but there's no way I could discount the evidence that he and I are diametrically opposed philosophically. My thoughts have been about how angry I'd be if I were a family member of one of the people who were shot. I have no sympathy for or even curiosity about this shooter.

Obama today: "And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice -- in this world, and the next." [my emphasis] (I'm not sure if he's saying Hasan will, or won't be getting his 36 virgins) :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Obamas past words, there's something in just about every statement he makes that lead me to believe he is the "real deal" when it comes to having an ANTI-MAN and ANTI-LIFE philosophy. Whether it be wanting to turn 9/11 into a "day of service" or telling us that we all need to sacrifice -- Or saying that he wants to "spread the wealth". There is the lamenting that the courts haven't gotten into re-distribution of wealth and "economic justice".

That's what makes you think he's glad this guy murdered a bunch of people?

Obama today: "And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice -- in this world, and the next." [my emphasis] (I'm not sure if he's saying Hasan will, or won't be getting his 36 virgins) :P

I am sure. He doesn't mean that he will get 36 virgins. Suggesting he does is more nonsense that makes anyone reading your rhetoric not take anything you have to say seriously.

None of the things you brought up come even close to proving that Obama's symaphies lie with Nidal Malik Hassan, or that he is going to Fort Hood to pay his respects to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what makes you think he's glad this guy murdered a bunch of people?

I am sure. He doesn't mean that he will get 36 virgins. Suggesting he does is more nonsense that makes anyone reading your rhetoric not take anything you have to say seriously.

None of the things you brought up come even close to proving that Obama's symaphies lie with Nidal Malik Hassan, or that he is going to Fort Hood to pay his respects to him.

Try reading again.

I did not claim that I think Obama is glad about the murders. I also did not set out to "prove" that Obama's sympathies lie with Hasan.

I merely pointed out that you were wrong about your "baseless" statement. (Just as you're now wrong about stating that I've concluded that he is "glad" or am intending to prove an unknowable mindset.) Words have meanings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also did not set out to "prove" that Obama's sympathies lie with Hasan.

I merely pointed out that you were wrong about your "baseless" statement.

My statement was that claiming that Obama's sympathies lie with Hassan is baseless nonsense.

Baseless is a commonly used metaphor for "unsupported by evidence". Setting out to prove, and proving that it's not baseless, are the same thing. So I don't know what you're talking about, but it's not making any sense.

Edited by Jake_Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's sympathies DO lie with the mysticism and nihilism of leftist ideaologies, wether they be religious or political. He has said it plainly. Therefore, when contrasting the US military and its function with that of radical Islamists and the politics of the left there can be no denying that Obama does puts his sympathies within the Hasan types, if not indirectly by his very own philosophy which is on public record for any and everyone to see and here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...