This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Hasan's Power Point Presentation

Thanks to Nonny (if that's his real name).

59 comments:

RV said...

I watched the presentation. I feel he was telling the viewers how he felt himself, that he was deeply conflicted. Why didn't anyone pick up on this? Presumably, he was surrounded by mental health professionals.

Sarkazein said...

I talked to many radical Muslims back before 9/11, in fact dating back to the early eighties. Believe it or not, I enjoy bringing up politics to people I know won't agree with me. They were one on one conversations, strangers in public. They were all crazy.
They made no sense and based their opinions on misconceptions for the most part.
Political correctness and hate crime legislation are products of the thought police. Both very destructive and with opposite intended result.
Hasan's peers were brave enough to be officers in the military, but frozen in fear of being perceived as anti-Muslim. Believe me, our enemies, future enemies, past enemies laugh at this.

RV said...

Are you being politically correct when you don't listen to someone who is telling you very plainly how he feels? I think his military associates missed seeing what was in plain sight.

Sarkazein said...

Yes, you are.

Sarkazein said...

Part of PC has to be denial.

Nonny said...

I completely agree. It's time for us to drop all the PC crap and unite to strip all weaponry from kooks who believe their diety directs their actions.

BikerBard said...

Nonny:
Are you suggesting this to include Christians? How about those attending the church in TN which instructed its (notice the useage, Sark) congregation to bring their guns to Sunday worship?

Nonny said...

If they can be considered "kooks who believe their diety directs their actions," then, yes, I would include them, BB.

Isn't that what many of the fundamentalists on this board are suggesting today? Aren't they saying that it's crazy and dangerous to kill in the name of God? Aren't they saying it's time to drop all the PC crap and start calling a spade a spade?

SURELY they wouldn't suggest that we reserve our ire, our shock and our disgust only for Muslims who believe that killing people is done in their God's service.

oatz said...

I guess he really was misunderstood....

ABC News: Nidal Hasan & Followers of Islam Are the Real Victims
Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 2:20 PM
Jim Hoft

Remember: Major Nidal Hasan was just a victim.
ABC’s ‘World News’ portrays Nidal Hasan and the followers of Islam as the real victims:

In the real world… Hate crimes against Muslims have steadily declined since 2001. Today there are more reported hate crimes against Christians in the United States than Muslims.

Related… Bob Schieffer at CBS: “Christianity has nuts too.”

Sarkazein said...

"...instructed its (notice the useage, Sark) congregation to bring their guns to Sunday worship?"-BB


This is what I mean by denial. The pettiness of BB and his father Nonny after such a serious number of dead, here and around the world from Extremist Muslim terrorist attacks. To attempt humor to disguise their denial is weird. But this is how deep seeded it is in our liberals. Their fear and cowardice (BB's and Nonny), cannot be hidden. No matter how they try or giggle as they type.
Nonny, the Atheists I have known, are as devout in their beliefs as any Christian or Jew I have known.

Sarkazein said...

"I completely agree. It's time for us to drop all the PC crap and unite to strip all weaponry from kooks who believe their diety directs their actions."-Nonny


Nonny jokes as he doesn't believe that if he were in the room with the Muslim terrorist working in his direction as Nhe lays there, unarmed, shaking in a puddle of his own urine, wouldn't be glad to see the cop blow the Muslim terrorist away.

Nonny said...

I'm not joking, Sark. And, yes, I'd be scared doodooless if a gun were being pointed at me by ANY type of religious zealot, be they a Muslim extremist, a hellbent Buddhist, a crazed Zionist, a confused Quaker, or a rabid Pro-Life Baptist.

To me, if someone is actually insane enough to believe that their particular God authorizes, condones, encourages and/or directs the killing of non-believers, we should find a way to prevent them from handling firearms.

Nonny said...

Actually, that should be the killing of anyone, not just non-believers.

Sarkazein said...

Nonny-

See how hard it is to hide your fear? You slipped and wrote about the killing of "non-believers".

Nonny said...

Are you nuts, or are you just faking it? I'm hiding nothing. My fear is right there for all to see. How much clearer do I need to be?

It scares the crap out of me to know that people both in and out of our military own weapons AND are convinced that their god wants them to kill people in his name.

Sarkazein said...

Nonny- You can't distract from the truth either.
The lengths you go to, not write what you know to be true, proves the point.
PC becomes a social disorder as clearly reflected in you comments.

Nonny said...

Sark, I think we're saying the same thing.

If political correctness stands in the way of our protecting our citizens and our soldiers from deadly rampages waged by armed and delusional fundamentalists, then political correctness should be abandoned.

Would you agree or disagree with that stance?

Honest Debate said...

Nonny (Okay, if that's the way you wanna play),

I coming in a bit late to this thread and I missed the part where someone suggested Muslims shouldn't have guns. Can you point that out for me? While you're at it please tell me who mentioned guns at all? Also, if one religion directs it's followers to kill infidels and another commands "Thou shall not kill" is there a difference?

Sarkazein said...

Nonny-

No, you will need to change the words "armed and delusional fundamentalists" to Muslim or Islamic extremists"...that is the subject. This is the current repetitive problem we face.
But you are welcome to your fear of any armed fundamentalists,delusional or not. For instance, I would feel safer unarmed in a room of heavily armed Israeli Jewish Fundamentalists (only delusional in your opinion) than I would in a room with one heavily armed islamic extremist (delusional or not). And so would you...you'll try to hide that fact, but you know it's true. Your PC does not allow you to agree. And that is dangerous.

Honest Debate said...

Sark, you're all over it.

Nonny said...

Sark & HD: I would be equally frightened to be in a room with ANY armed person crazy enough to actually believe that his particular god wanted him to kill other people.

And if we have THAT type of fundamentalist extremists in our armed services, regardless of whether they're Muslims or Jews or Baptists, we need to drop all the PC posturing and do all in our power to protect our people by removing them from duty.

It just logically follows that if we can't trust certain religious zealots (like Hasan) to serve in the military, given our fear that they'll just shoot up their company at some point, then we surely can't trust them to own private firearms and keep them in their homes. Right?

So if people want to claim that "something should have been done," or that "something needs to change" to make sure this never happens again, then they have to believe that potentially deadly religious kooks need to be drummed out of the military and stripped of their weapons.

RV said...

I just read an article in WP that said it is highly unlikely they would have let Hasan out of the military if he had asked. The reason given was that the Army had paid for his training, and he had a debt to repay.

I hope military personnel will become more perceptive and the military rules will be less rigid after this tragic incident.

I agree with Nonny that religious zealots of any stripe should not be armed. I would also add non-religious zealots, which I define as anyone who thinks it is right to obliterate people who don't measure up to their standards, whatever they are.

RV said...

I'm thinking of people like Tim McVeigh and the Unabomber. Their zealotry was not religious.

Sarkazein said...

Nonny- Keep denying the truth, that's what got us here. Watch the video of the decapitation of Daniel Pearl in the name of Allah and don't bother to discern the difference.

Atheists have to have more faith than anyone.

RV said...

Sarkazein - I think you are the one denying the truth. Non-believers can be just as cruel as believers. What causes ideology to trump humanity?

RV said...

Does anyone know what is going on here? First it was Greek or Arabic (or something) and then it was jibberish. It is in the comments of this post -

Friday, January 25, 2008
NC DOT board member resigns over Perdue fundraising

Is this one of the glitches you are talking about?

Sarkazein said...

"....What causes ideology to trump humanity?"-RV

I don't understand your last comment.

Nonny said...

Sark, what specific truth am I continuing to deny?

I've repeatedly admitted that religious zealotry exists, both in and out of our military. I've also repeatedly stated that, much as may be the case with Hasan, deadly consequences can result from applying political correctness to the issue of dangerous, armed religious zealots. Further, I've admitted that we need to strive to ensure that nothing like this tragedy ever happens again.

Where's the denied truth?

RV said...

I'm just trying to understand what makes ideological killers (of any kind) the way they are. Their beliefs are all important to them, even more than their own lives, definitely more than the lives of others.

Sarkazein said...

Thank you Nonny and RV. You have made my case for me. It proves to be a liberal trait. Your comments are exactly the problem...fear of saying/writing what you know to be true. Distracting, mainly, from the truth to keep from confronting the truth, pushing your PC political agenda at all costs. Until people regain their ability to deal with TODAY'S truths, we are lost as a civilization.

Nonny said...

Sark: Why pussyfoot? Why poke with a stick and then run? Tell us which of "today's truths" I'm either denying or avoiding.

I agree with you and nearly EVERY talking head that appeared on FOXNews yesterday in so much as I feel it is dangerous to care more about people's feelings than to protect our citizenry from armed religious zealots. Is that a stance that denies some mysterious truth that you keep alluding to?

Enlighten us all unless, of course, you're seeking to hide whatever truth it is that you claim I'm hiding.

RV said...

It will be dangerous if we don't learn how to detect these people before they kill. Think about the Columbine killers.

Sarkazein said...

Nonny and RV, more distraction. RV, since I consider your comment to be sincere, I'll comment. Columbine is another subject, as many mass murders. Just like the guy with the 11 bodies inside his home this past week. And of course no logical person thinks being murdered by a gun is worse than being murdered by ones fingers crushing your wind-pipe.
As far as I know, none of those people belong to a group (such as Islamic extremists) that declared war on America and Western Civilization in the name of Allah or anyone else. None of these Columbine like murderers have justified their actions, along with their spiritual advisors.
No Metodist Minister sold the kids on martyrdom.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm

RV said...

So you think only Islamic zealots are dangerous? What about Tim McVeigh and the Unabomber?

Nonny said...

Sark: I'm still waiting for you to pull back the curtain on whatever truth it is you claim I'm hiding. Or are you only able to ring doorbells and run away?

Sarkazein said...

Nonny- Again, you are hiding your knowledge of the truth in the way of political correctness.
To further explain: You try to lump in all religious groups in to what you fear. Just as the TSA checks every fifth person as not to offend any Muslims.
They know what they are looking for, but they distract from the truth by searching a red haired blue eyed one year old's diaper for his weapons. All suffer for this PC.
PC is more important than truth to the liberal.
The "flying Imams" are a perfect example. The litigation to follow, puts fear in the heart of workers for doing what they know is right. And as always, antagonists like the "flying Imams" could find shysters to represent them. The complaint was based in PC. Win loose, doesn't matter, it makes us less safe. What you are hiding (being politically correct about) is that you know the aforementioned examples are the truth, yet deny it and distract from it.

Honest Debate said...

Maybe I can help although (at least in Nonny's case) it's most likely futile. Can't say I blame Sark for not dignifying willful ignorance.

Religious zealotry exist. That in itself is not dangerous. The unabomber was not a religious zealot. Ditto McVeigh. Ditto Colombine. The Jehovah Witness' that knock on my door are religious zealots. Big deal. Snake handlers are religious zealots but they're not advocating cobras in kindergarten. Monks in Tibet are religious zealots, who cares. God bless'm all. Muslims that fast for Ramadan and pray 10 times a day are religious zealots, cool. Peace be with them. Hindus trying to avoid stepping in cow crap while walking down the street are religious zealots. They won't even kill a cow. Religious zealotry is fine. BTW so are guns.

Civilizations that have been brainwashed in radical madrassas for generations to believe that infidels (non-Muslims) MUST be killed are zealots for death. Rulers of these societies with these same beliefs make entire nations deadly. There's your danger. Get it?

People have strong faiths but NO ONE can say with experience what happens when you die. We each follow our own faiths and live our lives accordingly. Why is it so hard to admit that and respect others that find comfort in their peaceful beliefs? Anti-religious zealotry perhaps? Or maybe an elitist attitude that makes them think they smarter than everyone else. What arrogant jerks they are. That's the truth, deny it.

Honest Debate said...

Shyster,

You've lost a step since the elections.

Sarkazein said...

H.D.- Couldn't have written it myself better, obviously.

Nonny said...

Thank you, HD, for having the sack that Sark does not.

OK, so if I'm reading you properly, the truth that I'm somehow hiding or hiding from is that militant extremist Muslims are the only armed religious radicals that I should be fearful of? Is that it?

If not, please treat me like a total moron and spell it out like this: "The truth you are hiding from, Noddy, is ........" Pretty simple process. And if you truly are interested in engaging in "Honest Debate," I'd assume you'd want to foster as clear, open and understandable an arena as possible.

As far as allowing people to follow their own peaceful faith is concerned, I'm all for it. But how, assuming persons of opinion here are not solely interested in puffery, would you suggest we (meaning the U.S. government and/or our military) establish a Constitutionally acceptable set of screening criteria to identify whether or not someone is a raging, blood-thirsty religious nut or just a peaceful, faithful follower?

See, I've heard and read a lot over the past few days regarding how we need to drop all the PC BS, start calling spades spades, and start protecting ourselves from the dark force of Jihadists. But I'm not hearing HOW any of these whiners think we either CAN or SHOULD do this.

Would you suggest internment camps for all U.S. Muslims? Would you release all Muslims from active duty in the U.S. armed forces? Would you suggest that undercover agents bug all mosques?

Seriously, aside from resorting to knee-jerk xenophobia, what, specifically, would you suggest we do to reduce the chance of this type of rampage occurring again?

Honest Debate said...

"I'm somehow hiding or hiding from is that militant extremist Muslims are the only armed religious radicals that I should be fearful of? Is that it?"

Close but not quite. "Militant extremist Muslims are the only religious radicals that" we are afraid to confront. We hide from this truth at our peril.

As far as tactics, use common sense within the law. For instance the Patriot act allows us to monitor conversations with known terrorist (the Yemeni Imam) outside the U.S. As a matter of fact it is my understanding that you sign away any expectation of privacy when you enlist so the Patriot Act isn't even needed. Why didn't we? Also, Bush tore down Gorelick's wall between the FBI, CIA and the Pentagon. The FBI had information that it did not share with the Pentagon. It's easy to say that had people, like the Army doctors that watched this presentation you provided, questioned why the topic wasn't medical as it was supposed to be then this might have been stopped. Or that if the FBI and the Pentagon shared information or co-workers reported radical behavior that lives could have been saved. We don't know for sure but we didn't stand a chance with the willful avoidance of the many red flags. So let's at least not hide from what we know or we will continue to be sitting ducks.

Reader asked the important question: "How long will we continue to let them kill us from within?" Remember the 9/11 hijackers were trained in Florida. Is there a conserted effort to infiltrate our military? Why wouldn't there be? The terrorist want us dead more than they value their own lives!

Maybe you want to hear this: Muslims warrant more scrutiny that anyone else. There, I said it and I'm happy to have said it. It is not racist it's common sense. It's truth. It's honest debate.

Nonny said...

Thanks for the clarity, HD. Why that couldn't have been stated yesterday by Sark, I have no idea.

Sarkazein said...

Nonny, You are silly. It is not a silly subject, but you have the right to be silly.

Sarkazein said...

Another part of liberalism has reared it's ugly head in the Hasan case. Officials looking into his behavior could not find exact criminal violations to prosecute him in the past. Most liberals want to treat terrorism as a criminal matter even after the results of the Clinton administration refusing to take custody of Osama (pre 9/11) because they didn't have sufficient criminal charges against him (per bill Clinton). Now this.
Liberalism is a mental disorder, and we all are in more danger because of it.

.

Nonny said...

It's not liberalism that prevents us from sweeping the streets clean of all Muslims, Sark. It's our Constitution.

Let's say I agree with HD's take that Islam is the only religion we're afraid to confront. And let's say I want to support realistic and fairly applied measures aimed at making us all safer amidst extremist Muslims on our turf.

How, besides ignoring our laws and the rights of our citizens, would you suggest we attack this menace on our homefront?

guy faulkes said...

How, besides ignoring our laws and the rights of our citizens, would you suggest we attack this menace on our homefront?

Interesting point. It is somewhat diminished by the fact we allow prayer to be banned in schools, people that are merely exercising their rights to participate in the political process to be insulted by public servants that disagree with them, and unborn babies to be murdered. If we can do these things, I guess we can ban Muslims.

This would be unfortunate as not all Muslims follow lesser jihad. Those we catch that do should be exiled, deported, or executed. The majority should be left alone as should anyone else.

Liberal POV said...

HD, Sark, Reader, Guy, Nobody

My advice for what little it may be to the conservative bloggers is.

Don't panic, stay calm, don't buy the fear that's being sold, don't over react.

We ALL will know more by next week and next month.

From what little I know about the Hasan case is he was more insane than Muslim. Lets don't change the constitution to fix that.

We may very well need to fix how Hasan continued to work when his fellow doctors knew he had mental issues?

BikerBard said...

Faux:
If we can ban Muslims, we can ban Morons. Then, watch your back.

RV said...

Guy, I appreciate your attitude toward peaceful Muslims. I think we need to find a way to differentiate the dangerous ones, and not just Muslims, but anyone whose obsessions put other people's lives at risk.

Sarkazein said...

"It's not liberalism that prevents us from sweeping the streets clean of all Muslims, Sark. It's our Constitution."-attorney at law Nonny


And????

Nonny said...

And.....Given that Muslims enjoy the same Constitutional protections that Georgia snakehandlers do, I'm still waiting to read how, besides ignoring our laws and the rights of our citizens, you would suggest we attack this menace on our homefront, Sark.

You CAN make a constructive contribution to the discussion, can't you?

Sarkazein said...

Nonny-

Back when you spent a day or two in uniform, what would have happened to an officer that made contact with the enemy and was known for talking against the mission?

Nonny said...

Still waiting, Sark.

Will you actually respond this time, or will Daddy HD need to come along to help again?

Sarkazein said...

Nonny-

The answer is in many of my past comments.
You are not "still" waiting, because you modify your comments/questions after you get an answer.

Your "question" was a comment, not a question.

Note Hasan was covered under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice), somewhat different than a citizen's protection under the Constitution. For instance, I cannot put one of my employees in jail for disobeying one of my orders.

BikerBard said...

Nonny:
You are trying to explain your position to those who are ingrained in their own beliefs and will not concede anything to you. The Ft. Hood shooter does not represent all Muslims as Sark does not represent all conservatives. Some have a much more accepting belief system.

Sarkazein said...

BB-

Just to see who's belief's are so ingrained...yadayada, find one of my comment that matches yours.


"The Ft. Hood shooter does not represent all Muslims as Sark does not ...blahblah "-BB

Your beliefs are so ingrained and so in denial, that your brain translates a comment to your own mind-set. Find where I wrote (said) your above quote.
Go ahead, I'll wait here.

BikerBard said...

Are you Sark raving mad, man? Just what are you waiting for? Sanity?

another said...

BB, "Sark Raving Mad" is pretty funny.

Simon Jester said...

Talking to yourself, BB?