Those "Zany Christians"

[Churchmouse]

The "lame"stream media is going all out making the point that the shootings at Fort Hood had nothing to do with terrorism or the Islam faith. One newman?? went so far as to say there are "plenty of zany Christians our there" also.

So while we're out and about today we had better be vigilant and watch out for those "Zany Christian Suicide Bombers.

[NeuroTypical]

It's amazing.

* The guy seeks out contact with jihadists, including Anwar al-Awlaki, radical Imam with contacts to 9/11 hijackers, currently hiding in Yemen.

* He has an email/internet history defending Islamic suicide attackers, and expressing sympathy and support for them.

* He's made radical statements to people he worked with, who saw them as extreme enough to actually report him.

* The Department of Defense, the FBI and the CIA were all keeping tabs on this guy as a potential actor.

* A few days before his attack, Nasir al-Wahayshi, leader of alQaeda on the Arabian Penninsula, issues a call for anyone considering themselves a jihadist to conduct simple attacks against targets in the West.

* He actually shouts AllahuAkbar as he starts his attack.

* But no, he just "snapped". No terrorism here. Nothing even remotely resembling radical islamic militantism here. We may have to invent a whole new category of mental problem for him (PRE-traumatic stress disorder), but hey, it could happen to anyone. This is just what you get when you let Bush start a war, right?

Any of our resident liberals wish to defend the media's party line here?

LM

Edited November 18, 2009 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[Maxel]

Terrorists are the new non-radical freedom fighters.

Peaceful 9/12 protestors and Tea Party protetors are the new radicals.

Welcome to the Obamanation. Enjoy your stay.

[ADoyle90815]

To be honest, anyone who is fanatic enough about their religion to kill is scary to me, whether they're Muslim, or those Psalm bumper stickers that suggest that people are praying that the President is killed as an "unjust" leader, or some Islamic fundamentalist who is trying to recruit jihadists like the Ft Hood shooter. What's scary is that there are probably more like him out there, or nutty Evangelical Christians who are going to use Psalm 109:8 as an excuse to assassinate the President. They're the same Evangelicals who think that the LDS church is not Christian, and are the ones you see at Conference time protesting.

Biblical anti-Obama slogan: Use of Psalm 109:8 funny or sinister? | csmonitor.com

Edited November 18, 2009 by ADoyle90815

[Guest Godless]

Any of our resident liberals wish to defend the media's party line here?

The man was suffering from mental illness. Religious extremism is a mental illness.

[prisonchaplain]

My guess is that security agencies are monitoring Muslim, Militia, radical pro-lifers (those who speak of justified execution of abortionists, for example), anti-government groups, etc. We saw no backlash against Christians after the Oklahoma City bombing. Muslims do have reasonable fears after these types of incidents. So, it may seem unfair, but official responses are sometimes tempered by concerns about domestic order.

[Maxel]

To be honest, anyone who is fanatic enough about their religion to kill is scary to me, whether they're Muslim, or those Psalm bumper stickers that suggest that people are praying that the President is killed as an "unjust" leader, or some Islamic fundamentalist who is trying to recruit jihadists like the Ft Hood shooter.

Wait, wait- praying for the death of an unjust leader is tantamount to actively recruiting jihadists to kill Americans? Did I get that right?

Godless, I wouldn't say religious extremism is a mental illness. Not all violent acts are due to illness- sometimes, the person is just too devout in untrue beliefs (such as the belief that one needs to kill for said belief).

[NeuroTypical]

The man was suffering from mental illness. Religious extremism is a mental illness.

I appreciate the witty phrase turn, but I believe we do ourselves a disservice when dissmissing those who would do us harm as mentally unbalanced.

In other words, we have a problem if we refuse to admit that people can be in their right mind, and still choose to rain down death and destruction on people.

LM

[Guest Godless]

I appreciate the witty phrase turn, but I believe we do ourselves a disservice when dissmissing those who would do us harm as mentally unbalanced.

I don't see it as a dismissal of any sort. Religious extremism is a serious issue regardless of how you view the mental state of people who hold such views.

In other words, we have a problem if we refuse to admit that people can be in their right mind, and still choose to rain down death and destruction on people.

That's a classic case of rational people holding irrational beliefs. Irrational beliefs suggest a susceptibility to delusion. And it can easily take a hold of people who may otherwise seem well-adjusted. Hasan's radical interpretation of his religious beliefs made him delusional, and therefore irrational. There was something mentally wrong with him, and his religious views were at the root of it.

[prisonchaplain]

While I'm sure Godless sees an element of truth in the above, his tongue also seems to be protruding from his cheek somewhat.

[talisyn]

It's amazing.

Any of our resident liberals wish to defend the media's party line here?

LM

I come not to defend the news but to bury it

What we see is a bunch of news shows desperate to be The One, and will interview/project/conjecture their way to that top spot. They feel they cannot wait to find out facts and so must fill in the spaces with 'experts' who blather away with the blessings of the producers. You can see it with every story, on every station (even the most high Fox News). To be honest, I don't trust anything anyone on the news says the first few weeks of a story, especially police and prosecutors. If they are accurate, they will still be right when all the evidence/information is in. If they are not, I would hope but not counting on them having the guts to admit it.

And that's this liberal's take on the news today

[beefche]

I

That's a classic case of rational people holding irrational beliefs. Irrational beliefs suggest a susceptibility to delusion. And it can easily take a hold of people who may otherwise seem well-adjusted. Hasan's radical interpretation of his religious beliefs made him delusional, and therefore irrational. There was something mentally wrong with him, and his religious views were at the root of it.

So, are you saying that someone who goes on a killing spree (due to religious extremism or gets a sexual thrill while killing or some other seemingly irrational belief) is mentally ill? That implies to me that all murderers (at the very least all serial murderers) have no accountability since there is something mentally wrong with them. Am I misunderstanding?

[NeuroTypical]

In other words, we have a problem if we refuse to admit that people can be in their right mind, and still choose to rain down death and destruction on people.

That's a classic case of rational people holding irrational beliefs. Irrational beliefs suggest a susceptibility to delusion. And it can easily take a hold of people who may otherwise seem well-adjusted. Hasan's radical interpretation of his religious beliefs made him delusional, and therefore irrational. There was something mentally wrong with him, and his religious views were at the root of it.

See, I still want to take issue with that. Not everybody shares the same foundational concepts. What's rational to one culture is not rational to another. "I'm right and they're all crazy" is a rather irrational stance to take, wouldn't you agree?

For example, the concept of civil liberties, basic human rights, and the intrinsic worth of an individual are western concepts, and very much NOT shared in many parts of the world. These are also relatively new concepts, unheard of and unshared across the span of human history until it gained popularity in the last two or three centuries.

There's a pressure to dismiss anyone so radically unlike us as crazy, but at the end of the day, it's a difficult definition to hold. In other words, if you can't for the life of you see why someone would want to do what Hassan did without being crazy, then the human race has been crazy for most of it's history.

It just dawns on me who I'm talking to - you are an athiest, right? I've noticed this thought process from other athiests I know (that people who kill just have something wrong with them). Have you studied clashing civilizations much? You might find the pursuit both enlightening and terrifying - because when you meet the enemy, you realize he is us.

Here's an example. A buddy of mine worked for a high-powered consulting company owned by Israelis. He made friends with a practicing muslim originally from Pakistan, and they had many deep conversations. Here's what the guy had to say on the subject of freedom of speech and Islam:

Moving on to the topic of speech in Islam. In Islam, it's not a matter of freedom, rather respect. You can't just go about blabbing things at will. Allah has set ground rules for us in this World that we are follow. When you submit yourself, you submit yourself entirely, i.e., you follow what is prescribed and you are to gain knowledge of what, how, when and why so your understanding is thorough - something that separates us from animals.

Whether we follow these rules or not, is our choice - a choice we must answer for in the Hereafter. However in this world, one may not go around slandering the religion publicly, it's rules and regulations, and all the Prophets & Messengers etc, just because one 'believes' in his myopic, perhaps delusion and pride stricken mind to be right, worse yet of superior views. Living under the Islamic government and calling yourself a Musalmaan (muslim), you are held liable for what you do publicly. Why? Because your behavior may plague others minds and before long it might be considered a norm thus triggering the entire society into a dowward spiral.

Simple example - as a good parent, if your child goes about calling you with bad names in your house because he/she thinks that right, what would you do? Reprimand him right? Hardly will the thought cross your mind that he has the right to freedom of speech, because you know he's lost it. And if you don't take action, others kids may join in. A double wrong.

These bloggers don't care to study the religion and understand the how's and why's. They read something here and there and don't care to understand the wisdom behind it. Instead, they use their own 'wisdom' off of the two liner to draw conclusions which invariably results in more gross misconception, misassumption and eventual rebillion. Before long, they read everything with the mindset of somehow debuncking the divine message. Nothing new nowadays irrespective of the religion.

So yes, you live by the divine rules and not by the humanly created idea of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is a western concept brought about due to circumstances people faced here, not in Islamic countries.

LM

[Guest Godless]

So, are you saying that someone who goes on a killing spree (due to religious extremism or gets a sexual thrill while killing or some other seemingly irrational belief) is mentally ill? That implies to me that all murderers (at the very least all serial murderers) have no accountability since there is something mentally wrong with them.

No, I'm just saying that something is mentally wrong with them. And that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions. Like I said, just because there's something mentally wrong with them doesn't mean they're crazy.

[Guest Godless]

See, I still want to take issue with that. Not everybody shares the same foundational concepts. What's rational to one culture is not rational to another. "I'm right and they're all crazy" is a rather irrational stance to take, wouldn't you agree?

Correct. But I don't think there's a single culture in existence that condones mass murder, only fringe groups.

For example, the concept of civil liberties, basic human rights, and the intrinsic worth of an individual are western concepts, and very much NOT shared in many parts of the world. These are also relatively new concepts, unheard of and unshared across the span of human history until it gained popularity in the last two or three centuries.

There's a pressure to dismiss anyone so radically unlike us as crazy, but at the end of the day, it's a difficult definition to hold. In other words, if you can't for the life of you see why someone would want to do what Hassan did without being crazy, then the human race has been crazy for most of it's history.

I understand that the freedoms we enjoy here in the West are very foreign to much of the rest of the world. I have seen numerous different cultures over the years, and have spent a good deal of time in the Middle East in particular, and I think it's important to try to understand foreign cultures even if you don't agree with some of their values. Like I said though, mass murder is wrong no matter what culture you come from.

It just dawns on me who I'm talking to - you are an athiest, right? I've noticed this thought process from other athiests I know (that people who kill just have something wrong with them). Have you studied clashing civilizations much? You might find the pursuit both enlightening and terrifying - because when you meet the enemy, you realize he is us.

Our war in Iraq is a classic case of "clashing civilizations", and I've experienced that one first-hand. Do I think that everyone who's trying to kill Americans over there has a mental deficiency? No. I've seen what our war has done to the local population in places where the initial fighting was pretty bad. I'd be upset too. Even though I would kill such people in order to protect myself and my comrades, I can understand their reasons for trying to kill us. The people I don't understand are the suicide bombers who commit acts of violence against their own countrymen. Those people, I believe, have allowed their religion to consume them to the point of mental breakdown.

[beefche]

No, I'm just saying that something is mentally wrong with them. And that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions. Like I said, just because there's something mentally wrong with them doesn't mean they're crazy.

I think it's the compassionate part of us that wants to believe that anyone capable of murdering many people must have something mentally wrong with them. I'm not saying that there aren't mentally ill people who are serial killers, but I do truly believe there are some who are not mentally ill and still commit such atrocities.

[Guest Godless]

I think it's the compassionate part of us that wants to believe that anyone capable of murdering many people must have something mentally wrong with them. I'm not saying that there aren't mentally ill people who are serial killers, but I do truly believe there are some who are not mentally ill and still commit such atrocities.

It depends on the motive. You're right, someone can be 100% mentally stable and commit murder. In this case, religious extremism is at the root of the problem, and I believe that that is a sign of mental instability. And FYI, LM was on the right track when he suggested that I've reached this conclusion because I'm an atheist. I don't believe that all killers/murderers are mentally unstable, but when religion is the primary motive....