X-Post: Climate Conspiracy Trutherism

American Nihilist X-post
-------------

It's just what the world needs... Climate Truthers (More here.)

I accept that global climate change is a theory, and that there are scientists who believe it either isn't happening, or that it is, but that the actions of human beings play little to no part in creating it, and can play little to no part in slowing or stopping it. I think it's important to pay attention to the political/social/economic backgrounds of those who speak passionately for or against the theory of climate change, and weigh their words accordingly.

However, the idea that a whole bunch of scientists are getting together and conspiring to fake data and lie to the public in the name of propagating a particular theory as to whether & why the climate throughout the world changes--and that the proof of this is to be found in e-mail "confessions"--strikes me as being right up there with the folks who cannot accept that the Towers fell because of damage sustained by the planes, Oswald acted alone, Obama was born in Hawaii, and Lennon/McCartney really did write all those hit songs themselves.

Of course, I'm sure that that's all just what they want me to think...

The truth is out there, nutbags... The truth is out there...

(As you read these guys, just ask yourself the great conspiracy theorist question: "Who benefits?")

X-Post: "But it's obviously terrorism!! Hasan is a MUSLIM!!!: Wingnut bigotry

Wingnuts & Moonbats X-post
--------------------

(Disclaimer: I started working on this a few days ago, but got "distracted" by my wife being admitted into the hospital with breathing problems. My mind just hasn't been on it, since... But I figured I'd post what I had, before it got too stale. Maybe after things get back to normal 'round here, I'll whip up a new post containing the rest of this one, as I envisioned it. - repsac3, 11/14/09)
---------------

A meme is emerging among many on the Con right, that the extreme left (comprising everyone except them, natch) refuse to accept any possibility that the Ft. Hood shooting could have anything to do with his being a radical Muslim, and deny all facts to the contrary. Many blame the political correctness of everyone in our society --except themselves, who're "brave" enough to call Muslim's what they are; ticking terrorist timebombs, waiting to go off-- for allowing Hasan to commit these murders.

Of course, it's 99% bullshit, fueled mostly by partisanship (I hope), and in a few cases (though more than I'd like to believe exists), bigotry.

The meme goes like this:

"So far, so good. Let’s see if the self-deluded liberal scribes intent on ignoring the obvious have the nerve then to lump Robinson in with the “bigots” in the right blogosphere who’ve been saying this for a few days now." - Commentary - It’s Good for Diversity! - JENNIFER RUBIN - 11.10.2009 - 8:23 AM

"The tide of pronouncements and ruminations pointing to every cause for this event other than the one obvious to everyone in the rational world continues apace. Commentators, reporters, psychologists and, indeed, army spokesmen continue to warn portentously, "We don't yet know the motive for the shootings."

What a puzzle this piece of vacuity must be to audiences hearing it, some, no doubt, with outrage. To those not terrorized by fear of offending Muslim sensitivities, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's motive was instantly clear: It was an act of terrorism by a man with a record of expressing virulent, anti-American, pro-jihadist sentiments." - Dorothy Rabinowitz: Dr. Phil and the Fort Hood Killer - WSJ.com - NOVEMBER 9, 2009, 11:36 P.M. ET

"A consensus seems to have formed here at The Atlantic that the Ft. Hood massacre means not very much at all. >>SNIP<<

It seems, though, that when an American military officer who is a practicing Muslim allegedly shoots forty of his fellow soldiers who are about to deploy to the two wars the United States is currently fighting in Muslim countries, some broader meaning might, over time, be discerned, especially if the officer did, in fact, yell "Allahu Akbar" while murdering his fellow soldiers, as some soldiers say he did." - The Atlantic.com - When Muslims Commit Violence - Jeffrey Goldberg - 08 Nov 2009 09:37 am

And that's to say nothing of the myriad of lower level Con bloggers echoing posts like these.

The thing is, many of these kinda posts are reacting yesterday or today to posts cautioning folks not to jump to conclusions on Thursday or Friday, when most of the information about Hasan --aside that he was a Muslim--was not yet known. In some cases, the con bloggers trying to smear those bloggers, politicians, and media heads who urged caution are the same ones who saw his name & posted JIHAD!!! on Thursday afternoon or evening.

American Power: Twelve Killed in Fort Hood Shootings‎: President Obama, "A Horrific Outburst of Violence" - UPDATED!! Muslim Jihad in America!

MUSLIM TERROR ATTACK:'TWELVE shot dead' 12 30 Wounded, Mass Shooting at Fort Hood, US Army Base - Atlas Shrugs

American Power: Jihadist Attack at Fort Hood! - Nidal Malik Hasan Said 'Muslims Should Rise Up' - U.S. Islamists, Leftists in Damage Control! (Notice that Donald Douglas was already starting to attack anyone who dared say it might not be terrorism, by this point. He saw the guy's muslim-sounding name. He knew.)

The fact that further information released in the days since has bolstered the likelihood that Hasan's understanding of his faith did play a large role in the motivation for the killings --I refuse to play the terrorism/war crime game so many are playing. To me it was likely all of the above, and a tragedy, too. --in no way justifies bigots like Dr. Douglas & Pamela Geller who saw his name on Thursday and immediately "knew" what happened. Don't let people like this justify what they essentially said about all muslims because further information has bolstered their initial, uninformed bigotry about this one muslim.

The same people that are pissed off that General Casey was concerned about a backlash against American muslims serving honorably in the military, and claim there has been no backlash, are often the ones who support screening all muslims for extremist views (FoxNews), or tossing them out of the military altogether (Bryan Fischer - American Family Association). They fail to see that they ARE the backlash. While I’m relatively certain that the sentiments of people like Donald Douglas, Pamela Geller, that ass Brian Kilmede on FoxNews, and Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association do not represent the thinking of most Americans--or even most conservatives (indeed, there is a rebuttal & repudiation of Fisher’s bigotry linked right there on the AFA website:Fairness for All, Including Muslims)—the ideas they express about muslims and about America are harmful to the ideals for which this country stands.
---

(That's as far as I got... But here are more of the links I was lookin' at for possible inclusion in this post --most of 'em are the BAD examples to which I'd find--or write--the rebuttals later. If nothin' else, it'll give you an idea of where I was going with this.)
-----
Ft. Hood Victim's Family Speaks Out Against Anti-Muslim Sentiment (VIDEO)
memeorandum: Army Chief Concerned for Muslim Troops (Joseph Berger/New York Times)
memeorandum: When Muslims Commit Violence (Jeffrey Goldberg)

memeorandum: Fort Hood Gunman Gave Signals Before His Rampage (New York Times)
Fort Hood Gunman Gave Signals Before His Rampage - NYTimes.com
American Power: Nidal Malik Hasan Gave Signals Before His Rampage

“That’s not a crime to call up al Qaeda, is it?”
Gateway Pundit
MUSLIMS IN AMERICA ‘cheering’ Fort Hood Massacre - Bare Naked Islam's Weblog
“Acted Alone”?: Hasan Attack Was 3rd Planned Islamic Domestic Attack on U.S. Military Tied to Yemen; Fort Dix 6 & Hasan’s Imam

Dorothy Rabinowitz: Dr. Phil and the Fort Hood Killer - WSJ.com

Commentary - Blog Archive - It’s Good for Diversity!

X-Post: The Stupak "Coathanger Amendment" Democrats

Final Vote Results for Roll Call 884
Democrats:
Altmire
Baca, Barrow, Berry, Bishop (GA), Boccieri, Boren, Bright
Cardoza, Carney, Chandler, Childers, Cooper, Costa, Costello, Cuellar
Dahlkemper, Davis (AL), Davis (TN), Donnelly (IN), Doyle, Driehaus
Ellsworth, Etheridge
Gordon (TN), Griffith,
Hill, Holden,
Kanjorski, Kaptur, Kildee,
Langevin, Lipinski, Lynch,
Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Melancon, Michaud, Mollohan, Murtha,
Neal (MA),
Oberstar, Obey, Ortiz,
Perriello, Peterson, Pomeroy,
Rahall, Reyes, Rodriguez, Ross, Ryan (OH),
Salazar, Shuler, Skelton, Snyder, Space, Spratt, Stupak,
Tanner, Taylor, Teague,
Wilson (OH)

There you have 'em... Your coathanger amendment Democrats for 2009. I look forward to donating to as many of their pro-choice Democratic (or Green, or Libertarian, or...) challengers as possible, when these folks next come up for reelection.
---

Wingnuts & Moonbats X-post

In Reply: Some Muslims are Terrorists; Some Aren't. Some Muslims are Murderers; Some Aren't. Some Murder is Terrorism; Some isn't.

In reply to this post, and the following comment in particular:

Donald Douglas said...
Sorry, Dana, but gotta disagree:

"On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting "Allahu Akbar!" committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.

What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Ft. Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of non-denominational shoplifting.

This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it’s an act of terror. Period."

From Ralph Peters.
---

With all respect due Ralph Peters, investigators are still determining whether the guy was an extremist, how much planning there was, and whether or not his actions had anything to do with protesting our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics. Once those facts actually are determined--and as I said, I expect they will be--it won't be jumping to conclusions to say so.

Those who said so late Thursday or early Friday, however, based primarily on his name & religious affiliation, jumped to conclusions without benefit of this later information, making folks wonder whether they were & are just bigots. (Same goes for those bigoted asses on FoxNews who floated the idea of screening American Muslims before allowing them to serve in the military. I'm all for screening out violent or objectively anti-American statements and behaviors --and perhaps if the military had, this wouldn't've happened, given all the flags Hasan seemed to've raised--but I can't support screening soldiers or anyone else based on religious affiliation, alone. In addition to islamist radicals like Hasan more'n'likely is, there are reports of far right radicals, unrepentant gang members, wife/child abusers, folks with bad psychological profiles... I doubt there's many of any of these types in the service, but as Hasan shows, sometimes it only takes one... I'm all for trying harder to weed any/as many of 'em out as possible...)
---

Posted November 7, 2009 5:40 PM AmPow blog time
---

Blog Link:
American Power: Terrorism or Tragic Shooting? More Deadly Political Correctness on Fort Hood Massacre

In Reply: "Terrorist is not defined as 'Muslim who commits or attempts to commit murder.'"

In reply to this post, and the following comment in particular:

Dana said...
To say that it is an act of terrorism carries some baggage with it: it leads people to infer -- even though it doesn't necessarily imply -- that this was part of some larger plan by our enemies.

At least so far, this looks like the action of a disgruntled soldier, very displeased with his orders, who finally went off the deep end. Maybe with more information later, that will change.
---

Interesting... I'd go further than Dana and say that the guy's understanding of his faith almost certainly played a role in his dive off that deep end -- much the same way an abortion clinic bomber's understanding of his faith plays a part in his actions -- but, because there is nothing to suggest collusion with any other person or cell, and no note, video, or manifesto claiming he did this in the name of any cause or group (any/all of which may be discovered later, changing my assessment), I'm not ready to label this a terrorist attack. Terrorist is not defined as "Muslim who commits or attempts to commit murder." (And since when is "devout" a synonym for "fundamentalist" or "radical"? Are there no devout christians anymore, and isn't being called one generally seen as a positive thing, especially by one's fellow christians? So why is it some view his being called "a devout muslim" by his brother considered a bad thing--apart from the fact that he obviously wasn't, I mean?)

Posted November 7, 2009 1:17 PM (AmPow blog time)
---
Blog Links:
American Power: Terrorism or Tragic Shooting? More Deadly Political Correctness on Fort Hood Massacre
Common Sense Political Thought