Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Ft. Hood, II

One of the things that really bothers me about the Ft Hod shooting is that I hear more cries of "Don't Blame All Muslims!" than I do "How did the Army miss this" or even concern about the victims. (But not `of fascination with The Gun.  Boy, howdy, do they live drooling over the eeeee-vil mind control rays that pistol sent out, causing the crime...)

Things we now know:  The shooter...

Look, I am NOT going to sully my blog with his name. Chuck Ziegenfuss refers to him as "TMSOS", Laughing Wolf from Blackfive calls him "The Ultimate Blue Falcon"; both terms break out to use language I have tried to avoid here since I started. I'll just call the scumbag UBF, 'cuz I think I like Laughing Wolf's phrase better.1

...shooter was a lifelong Muslim, not a convert as originally reported.  He was native-born in the USA, to Palestinian parents, but is reported to have listed his nationality as "Palestinian."  He got in trouble for proselytizing for Islam "on the job", spoke favorably about homicide bombers, and hung out with radicals.

He was apparently a member of some advisory committee to His Imperial Majesty Barack Hussein Obama's transition team.

He shouted "Allahu Akbar" while murdering and attempting to murder his fellow soldiers, Army civilians, and possibly Army dependents.
***
While I don't think Islam is "inherently evil",  I do think that Muslims, and those who would defend Islam and Muslims, need to come to terms with the fact that Islam is inherently a far more militant religion than Christianity--Crusades and religious wars notwithstanding, Jesus' message was one of peace2.  "Blessed are the Peacemakers"3, and all that.

Islam OTOH, was fighting for it's existence from the moment Allah first spoke to Mohamed, and, after mere existence was assured, continued fighting to a) spread the word, and b) get those pesky fighters away from here and give them something to do.  Then they realized they were making money...
***
Some make a distinction between "Greater Jihad" and "Lesser Jihad", saying that the  peaceful conversion of Infidels to Islam is the greater; I'll leave that argument to theologians.  All I know is that those who follow "The Lesser Jihad" seem to get all the press...
***
I think what bothers me most about the "Don''t Blame All Muslims" hand wringing is that I've not seen any attempt to say "See?  You just can't trust 'em."  But, by golly, some Muslim whacko goes off and kills people, and the loudest chorus is those who try and talk us out of something we never gave thought to!4

***
Never liked Army shrinks.  Never had much contact wit them, but, as an MI Geek, the idea that this guy cold yank my clearance and end my career if he was having a bad day or took a disliking to me, pretty much conditioned my response to them as (at best) suspicious distrust.

That said, UBF was paid by the Army--had his schooling and licensing paid for by the Army!--to care for soldiers.  Thus the sacred trust which The Nation places in any officer was even greater, since The Government had at least some right to expect to get some value for the money they had invested in his education on top of the normal expectations of Duty, Honor, Country.

So, he betrayed his Oath of Office, the Hippocratic Oath (...do no harm..."), and, worse, he murdered soldiers, whom he was supposed to care for.

I understand that they have retired the gallows at Ft. Leavenworth; The Needle is too quick and painless for what he really deserves, but I suppose that, if that's the only alternative.5
***
It's not that personal firearms are "forbidden" on military installations, it's that carriage of a firearm other than on duty or under very strictly circumscribed circumstances (hunting, at designated recreation range) is prohibited.  If that is not spelled out in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, it is the topic of a policy letter that I remember reading while serving as a First Sergeant back in the Clinton days.  You can have your own guns, but you have to register them with the post; if you are living in barracks, they have to be stored in the arms room.  Other than barracks, I never lived in on-post housing, but I do not recall that my buddies who did were not allowed to keep their guns in the quarters.

Maybe that was ignored as much as the requirement to register all guns that were stored off-post was...
**
 All for now.  I've run out of steam, and have to get ready for work.

I have deliberately not linked to articles.
***
1. "That Murderous Sack Of $---" and "Ultimate Buddy F---er".
2.  "...let him sell his cloak and buy a sword" is, in my admittedly non-expert opinion, an exhortation to self-defense, not an advocacy of "Convert or die."  That said, almost anything in the Bible can be interpreted two or three ways...
3.  Let's just avoid the Life of Brian references, shall we?
4.  Admittedly, I have not read every single post on The intardnet to confirm that no one is saying "Lock 'em all up!", but people are still saying "You Right Wing Whackjo Gun Nut Veterans want to lock 'em all up like FDR did to the Nisei!"
5.  Although, the treatment that Tom Kratman proposes in his novels A Desert Called Peace and Carnifex does have it's charms:  First, perform a sex change operatin, then send the Jihadi to Allah as a woman...


3 comments:

Don said...

I'd happily volunteer to participate in a firing squad that ends this worthless sack of protoplasm.

I've got a 30-06 that could use the work.

As to being armed on base, I spent the last five years asking every military officer (and the garrison commander, twice!) on Ft. Knox why it is that someone with a CCW permit and a security clearance couldn't be trusted to carry concealed (at least in their vehicle) on post. IMHO at least all active duty military personnel should have the option to be armed at all times during a time of war. But I guess that would make too much sense. GRRRRR...

Don said...

I forgot to mention that when I was active duty (Air Force) we were allowed to keep our firearms at home in base housing. You were expected to register them with the SP's, but I always...ummm...forgot...to do that.

Larry said...

I'm in the mostly "don't trust'em" camp. I don't want to lock them up, or deprive them of any other civil rights. I just want them to know I have my eye on them. I want them to have to respond to open criticism and defend their ideas or change them under social pressure (mostly the latter).