General Music Chat

This asswipe doesn't know what it's like to be hammered by name calling! Those were compliments, compared to some of the names Phil's called me!

It's one thing to be called names by a relative stranger. It's quite another to be picked on & reviled by ppl you're supposed to be able to depend on in a live fire situation, esp when you're supposed to be taking care of those same ppl, Craig.

This nut job had expressed concerns about being sent to Iraq &/or Afganistan. His superior officers knew about his concerns, had seen his o/l activities, & yet they chose not to address the issue, & to ignore his cries for help. He had gone so far as to get a frikken lawyer to help his cause. We need to remember that ours is now a volunteered armed service, & when someone starts to question his decisions to volunteer, for whatever reason, perhaps we need to pay more attention.

I'd say this guy had a bit more stress than you, Craig.

I'm not defending his actions in any way, but there have been plenty of indicators that he was not in a good place, either physically, emotionally, or mentally, & therefore should probably not have been handed a frikken gun...DUH!

When it comes to these crazies, there are always indicators before they explode in violence. One would think that the psychiatrists &/or psychologists that he was seeing should have been able to foresee some sort of huge event on the horizon...but then, there's the argument that these "sciences" are pure fluff, isn't there? Time & again we see ppl under one or more head-Dr's care that go off "without warning." Bullspit!

Look at Columbine, & compare those events to this. All I can say is "Beware, you bullies! The meek can get guns!"

Craig, on a side note - when you say things like "I support the positions I believe in..." & claim to be purely fair in all your assessments of events & such, all I can say is that you are still coming at things from your own paradigm, your own spin, your own agenda, & your own religio-philosophic background. Yes, you DO have an agenda. You DO have your own preferred bias, whether or not you follow "the other sheep." Your "truths" are no more believeable than any others, man, however much you may like to talk about how unbiased & pure your assertions are.

If this were a whacko Christian fundamentalist, would you REALLY be as up in arms? I doubt it, but that's a useless argument. You seem to have a real problem with moslims, & the fact that this whacko was one looks like it fueled your anger & angst a bit more than the usual run-of-the-mill whacko, & sparked your knee-jerk reactions to CF & the situation as a whole. It's yet another moslemic attack on your American & christian values, as far as your response shows, & your emotional response lashes out more than it would if there were no moslem involved.

Perhaps it is time to take a step back, take a deep breath, & reassess just how much your own feelings about others reflect in your own reactions. Seriously, how can you say that you are unbiased with this statement - I'll quote it again - "I support the positions I believe in..."?

That says it all, if you wanna look at it from a "purely unbiased position."

A sad day yesterday. Rather than complaining about the coverage, perhaps some prayers for the families of the dead would be in order. Danger is part of a soldier's job description but not at home, that's what so terrible about this IMO.

S__T the shooter was born here too. I read that his parents,, now both dead did not want him to join but he said he had a duty to serve his country. I wish he'd skipped that The account I read said that he was a psychiatrist and provided therapy to vets who returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. Supposedly hearing those accounts of their time in war zones made him decide that he did not want to deploy. He tried to get out of it. Denied and rightly so. I think he should have shot himself. This is nuts. He's still alive? What not spare the others and just do yourself. What a coward.

My sentiments exactly Dessalines!

.

Colors,

I feel bad about what I said to you. But I don't think it should be unusual to be concerned about an event such as this. I'm still wondering why a rampage on a military base, would not concern you as well though?

Man.. how do you add 2 + 2 and get 11? WTF is wrong with you?

I never said I wasn't concerned - I didn't express anything about how I felt about it, because that's personal. I don't need to express my feelings about this.

You blasted the media for not covering it. I immediately checked every news outlet on the web that I typically reference and every single one of them had it on the front of their web pages. It was "dominating" the news. I was just trying to counter your argument that the news agencies weren't covering this.

Jesus Christ man... I was in the f*cking military. So shut your f*cking pie-hole about MY concern.

Phil,

You are taking my comment out of context. EVERYONE for the most part, follows what they believe in. My statement, is that "what I believe" is not bound by a particular idiology or framework. Many people, where politics are concerned for example, fit neatly into the party mold. Ted Kennedy is evil, because he is a liberal Democrat, and liberal democrats are all socialists and God haters. That is a little bit extreme of a description of their views perhaps, but it "IS" the TYPE of attitude many have. I tend to vote Republican, because of my belief in a strong military, low taxes and small government. But I CHALLENGE my party on the extreme-religious-right's influence over it, and on issues like choice and gay marriage. I don't think Rush Limbaugh is evil, and sometimes he has valid points. I don't think Obama wants to ruin our country, but HE IS making it more socialist through His policies.

I think the fact that you will find me being supported at times by Democrats as well as Republicans, and by religionists as well as atheists, depending on the subject matter, shows that I am my own man. I don't buy into any AGENDA. I consider everything on it's own merits.

I test things excrutiatingly, especially, things like the Bible or religions. I research them, pray about them, study books that both support and criticize them, look to nature and history, for additional confirmations, etc...

I am more open minded than you seem to realize.

I hold to the truths I find in the Bible, and believe that Christianity is the highest understanding of God among religions, because I have spent decades testing it and studying it all.

But even after all that. I will switch my beliefs if they can be disproved, or if shown a better way. I would BE a Muslim Phil, if I found that to be a better revelation of God than Christianity's. Same with my country. I judge it where I find fault, and I praise it where I find merit.

I love my country. I am a patriot. But I am a child of God first. Might doesn't make right. We are a HUMAN SPECIES first (for me) and not an American first. That is because I believe and cling to God over anything else. And America is NOT the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. It is just a nation. An important nation, and one God has used in powerful ways, but it is still just a nation among nations.

God desires the WORLD, not one country.

.

I'm so sick of the use of the word "terrorism" every time someone has a middle eastern or muslim background. Are all black people criminals too? All asians drive bad? All mexicans are freeloaders?

Here's the simple and un-sensational truth:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/24805

Below is the most common definition of terrorism - prior to 9-11. Since then, the use of the word "terrorism" has itself become a form of terrorism.

"All criminal acts directed against a State and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or the general public"

This is simply a criminal act by one disturbed individual that should have been prevented had the proper authorities done their job. The military is totally to blame for allowing him to remain in the forces.

Kramer,

I believe you are right that the term "terrorist" gets oversued and misused. And you may be right, that this should not be called a "terroristic" act, since we don't know if the purpose was VENGEANCE or to incite TERROR, which in general is the purpose of "TERRORism"

However, his religion, in my view, is the fundamental root of his actions in this particular situation. Clearly, it was a struggle for him, between loyalty to his country and OATHS and loyalty to his religious views and background.

I started off with that term because it appeared at first that there were a GROUP and not a lone shooter. Suspects were apprehended, some witnesses testified that they saw ANOTHER shooter. I had no reason to disbelieve this, particularly when it is difficult for a single shooter with only two handguns to kill that many people, and wound even more. That is before I realized that the Military personel do not carry weapons where he was, but lock them down.

If there were 3 shooters, or even 2, then this is a conspiracy. A planned attack, by a GROUP, and not a lone shooter.

Now that this is known to NOT be the case, I don't have a problem reconsidering that label.

But it "IS" religious based.

Clearly he struggled over all it's implications for him.

I think the Military is partially at fault, since warning signs were present, in not providing some mental couneling, or some screening process, particularly considering his background, and his apparent postings to some sites that suicide bombers were comparable to soldiers laying on a grenade to protect others, in that he felt neither was suicidal, and other statements that the Muslims should RISE UP against their AGGRESSORS (us apparently).

They will be reforming some of those policies after this.

.

I couldn't argee with you more, jimmy, except that I also believe that this person IS responsible for hia own actions, even more so than the misguided military, even though it's clear he's sick in the head. Sick in the head doesn't give anyone the right or excuse to take this sort of action, but the military definitely should have handled it far better than they have.

Craig - there you go again, blaming the evil moslem religion! WRONG!!!!

This is a person lashing out at forces beyond his control in inappropriate ways, to put it as mildly as possible. It is the act of an INDIVIDUAL, Craig, NOT a religion!

This is simply a criminal act by one disturbed individual that should have been prevented had the proper authorities done their job. The military is totally to blame for allowing him to remain in the forces.

Too simple of a position.

There are many variables here.

Why should he have not remained a soldier? What do they kick him out for? For a few statements left on websites? Because he didn't want to fight in Iraq? Because he was Muslim? It is a fine line, between making the right decisions, and violating someone's civil rights. Surely YOU of all people here, can appreciate that?

This is the military here.

We are at war Jimmy.

If everyone could avoid fighting and facing potential death, by merely stating they don't want to go, and hiring a lawyer, and yet not losing their positions and careers, then maybe many more would do so?

It is a fine line.

Explain why this was a simple decision that could have been made?

I think the military treads on serious legal ground if they make the wrong call. He had not had a good review recently, but other than that?

The soldiers I know, call Ft. Stewart... "Ft. Stupid"

Does that show disloyalty?

If you cannot be Mulsim and be in the armed forces, it is like what happened to the Japanese previously, with internment camps.

Their only real error, was in not having a psychological review done, BEFORE sending him overseas, or transferring him to Ft. Hood, that "might" have revealed the potential for danger.

.

This guy grew up in the American societal norm, as far as I can tell, Craig, the same as the twits at Columbine, OK city, or the unibomber. He took the same actions as they did. The moslem religion has nothing to do with it, however much you'd like to tie it in, with your zeal to show us all the evils of that particular religion.

He was responding to what he perceived as bullying from his fellow soldiers, as they responded to his religious & political & philosophic views, true, but his Koran did not tell him to shoot at those men & women.

I agree with Craig on this one.

And now the news is trying to use this incident as a way to say that we should have never started the war. Saying that the soldiers are coming home traumatized and killing their friends...Which is obviously not the case here.

Notice how, on this thread, it's the uber-religous people who are so quick to point the blame at another religion.

I find that to be a really weird commentary... I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

Craig-

Please read the link I provided. This was clearly not a religious "strike".

It's frankly a guy who was so distraught at the idea of going back on redeployment to the middle east, that he snapped and a lot of innocent people died.

There are underlying issues, no doubt. It would seem he's also been the victim of bullying within the military simply because of his genealogy, and if you really think religion has something to do with it, well then every buddhist, christian, and shintuist, who commits murder is also a terrorist by that math.

Timmy McVeigh - was a terrorist, and a christian, so are all christians suspect of terrorism?

Another example-
VA Tech massacre - a bullied kid who snapped.

Be honest with yourself Craig- the fear of fear itself has gripped the sensationalist news agencies, don't let it suck you in.

Notice how, on this thread, it's the uber-religous people who are so quick to point the blame at another religion.

I find that to be a really weird commentary... I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

Yeah - I'm trying real hard to diffuse that notion... not doing well at that task though.