Originally Posted by Jazzy

The thing is; Hassan is not crazy. His problem is with his Muslim religion in conflict w/his sworn obligation as a military officer of the United States.

It is my opinion that he is just the tip of the ice burg in terms of just how many radicalized Muslims have infiltrated the armed forces and even US Intelligence Services.

Originally Posted by Jazzy

The thing is; Hassan is not crazy. His problem is with his Muslim religion in conflict w/his sworn obligation as a military officer of the United States.

It is my opinion that he is just the tip of the ice burg in terms of just how many radicalized Muslims have infiltrated the armed forces and even US Intelligence Services.

Hassan has already been shown to hold anti-American sentiments and sworn his first allegiance to Islam, not to his country.

Plenty of evidence existed before the shooting and since that he should have been court martial ed or, at the least, been given a dishonorable discharge long ago. But, they'll probably implement the "don't ask, don't tell" policy resulting in another attack.

Sorry folks; I have zero confidence in the US Government being able to protect it's population....soldier or civilian...from enemies foreign or domestic, swine flu, bird flu or rabies.

9/11 demonstrated how all happened right out in plain view....just like allowing a bunch of radical Muslims into the armed services to pick off targets like fish in a barrel.

Originally Posted by Tanngrisnir3

Allrighty, then, how many have infiltrated the US forces and services, and how do you know?

A 'bunch'? Who are these other ones, where are they, when were they allowed in and how do you know?

Originally Posted by John Drake

So we should just throw all the muslims out of the military?

Originally Posted by Jazzy

I know because I am all-knowing in these matters.

Now get back into your corner with the other sheeple and let others make the decisions.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

You should contact the authorities and fill them in with your knowledge to prevent another attack. Otherwise, you're just aiding the terrorists...

Originally Posted by Jazzy

LOL...Oh, I have ! Trust me, I have.

Originally Posted by Jazzy

Exactly. When a known virus is infecting a flock, eradication of the entire flock to end the threat is in order.

Originally Posted by Swoop187

I agree...

That's the absolute correct way to assess a bad situation. GET RID OF THE PROBLEM.

Tolerance for bullshit is bullshit.

The facts are liberals want us to tolerate Muslim violence, terrorist attacks and extremism. Not only that, these liberals EXPECT us to just ignore the fact that they all share one thing in common, their MUSLIMS.

Of course these are the same people that cant tolerate Rush Limbaugh.



Astounding.

Originally Posted by Sunshine

So what you are suggesting that this entire discussion board should shut down just to get rid of YOU!

Originally Posted by Swoop187

No I was actually insinuating that the entire site get rid of everyone else and leave me standing..

You know the 2009 way of doing things.

Originally Posted by O'Sullivan Bere

Of course, my points exactly.



1) Hasan is a terrorist, and became a terrorist the moment he started indulging himself in militant jihadist AQ doctrines. He not only should have been removed from the military the moment his AQ sentiments, attempted contacts to AQers and jihadist sentiments were being noticed, but arrested as a terrorist the moment his intents were detected and given the law's severest sanctions in order to remove him from society as a terrorist.

2) I see it both as an issue of law enforcement and war. AQ and its thematic adherents are an immediate and material threat to US and global security, and criminals in the laws of nations (US included) as well as UN declarations and mandates declaring them to be so and legitimate targets for eradication.

I see guys like Hasan who start wanting to contact AQ and get involved in AQ militant Islamic thematics as enemies of the state no more than a person who would have gone out on December 8, 1941 until the war's conclusion making seditious speeches and threats of assistance and violence against the US and/or her allies in favour of Imperial Japan and seeking to court and/or render material aid, assitance, sabotage, etc, for Imperial Japan against the US and its allies.

And it's not just a matter of war. It's a matter of the domestic laws on their own merit too. None of that stuff is protected speech in my view under the First Amendment. Some of the rhetoric is an act as well as speech, and regardless, encouraging and calling for violence and sedition is not protected--and it is and should be criminal--and prosecuted to the fullest extents of the law to remove all such people who pose a threat to the peace and welfare of the US and others.

Originally Posted by John Drake

No, but after being here for a while I just may qualify.

Look, you seem a reasonable man, do you honestly think that wanting all the muslims in the military to resign is reasonable?

And yes, that is tantamount to putting them on cattle cars and shipping them off to "the east". You're throwing one religion out of a very important and necessary aspect of existence in the US, the only means of livelihood most of them have and may ever had had or wanted and where thousands have given exemplary service, even to sacrificing their lives. Once you accept that you can treat a whole class of people this way, whether they are guilty of anything or not, where does it end?

I'm sorry, I just think Steve's "suggestion" reflects discredit on the military, and you seemed to imply support of him. If you didn't I apologize