What follows is the conversation I refer to in my post Writing About Writing About Racism. I have copied it here word for word, with all misspellings and bad behavior left intact. I have even left in the occasional comment not central to the point, and have changed everyone’s names to initials to protect anonymity. I know both the spelling and the abbreviations can make this difficult to read, but I think it is a good look at why I felt the need to discuss racism. DN is me. When you see initials in brackets[ ] that is not the person speaking, but someone referring to that person by name
Also, keep in mind that most of this was being written back and forth as the story was breaking, and has since proven to be inaccurate information. I have bolded comments by myself, PC, and REM as they are the ones that informed my post.
RC: Need better explanation for shooting at Fort Hood. Seriously people this isn’t a joke.
RC: Yes I know that, I’m speaking of the Army reports. It all stinks. I may not know much but unfortunately this is my bailiwick.
LM: Yeah, what the hell is going on? “multiple shooters” actually sounds more like a terrorist attack than a depressed soldier gone postal…
DN: Latest word I am hearing is two shooters, one caught and the other “cornered”.
PC: who knows, we can only speculate, but probbly a sleeper cell activated
DN: Way to go with the jumping to the worst possible conclusion with no evidence. How about “Who knows? I won’t speculate.” Now THERE’S an idea.
PC: oh theres a surprise reaction, why not monitor jihadist websites and defend americans, jews and christians everytime they slander them? of course not, u would never do that.
DN: My point is simple, [PC]. When something tragic like this happens we should wait for the facts. You may be right. I don’t know and I don’t guess. I think laying blame for people’s deaths before you know any of the facts is disrespectful, that is all. And your implication that I am somehow defending terrorists is abhorrent. I lost someone I knew on 9/11 – the last thing I am is an appeaser. I am just not so full of hate that I immediately assume anything.
DN: This just in from CNN: “The gunman was a soldier, and two other soldiers have been detained as suspects, said the spokesman, Lt. Gen. Bob Cone. “
DF:: little boys shouldn’t play with guns.
JB: Horizontalisation of certain Bush Sr./Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD), Dachau assets is likely.
KS: An Army psychiatrist……the irony.
DN: The tragedy.
PC: HIs name was Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. hmm do we have to worry about certain US soldiers now? Another US soldier if u guys may remember rolled some grenades and shot up his fellow soldiers cause he said american soldiers were waging war against muslims.
DN: Wow [PC], you really are just a flat out racist, aren’t you? But I guess spouting that kind of nonsense is easier than admitting you jumped the mark with your assumptions. Hasan was born and raised in Virginia, where he attended public school, he did college ROTC and the Army Medical School program.
Clearly he was a sick man. He was a psychiatrist who specialized in Combat Stress, which means he listened to war horror stories day in and day out since their is only 1 psychiatrist for every 750 soldiers returning from active duty. On top of all that, and despite his service, he was regularly abused by other soldiers because he was muslim.
So I guess the real question is was he just a sick man? If not then the real question is can we not trust him because of his name, or is the fact that he was abused by the very army he served in because of his name what pushed him over the edge? My guess is that he was just a sick man, though your comment above certainly gives credence to the idea that it must be tough to be a soldier when the very people you are defending distrust you because of your name. I can only imagine how you would have been treated serving in the US Army during WW II, especially with people like you running around.
PC: predictable response from a left wing knee jerk libera. your racist buddy al sharpton says only whites can be racist since minorities have no power. funny how liberals say profiling terrorists dont work cause muslims come in all shapes, colors and sizes. but if we speculate names or criticize it, suddenly a religion becomes a color.
actually you are being racist by saying u people. suddenly u r now accusing american gi’s of being racist. a self hating white person is so sad. might u recall most of obamas votes came from whites, now whites are racist? sad.
DN: I said “people like you”, not “you people”. I was talking about your behavior. There was no allusion to race at all. As for your rant about religion becoming a color, it makes no sense. You were the one who made assumptions by pointing out his name and going “hmmm”. His name is not muslim, it is arabic. So yes, your statement was racist. And I did not say American GIs are racists. For your information I have friends in the military, including a good friend who is a Marine that has served in Afghanistan – and is a liberal. I was pointing out statements from the news tonight that he had been abused by other soldiers because of his religion. I never said ALL other soldiers. And Al Sharpton is not my buddy, not by a long shot. Anyone can be racist – all you have to do to be a racist is prejudge based on race, such as speculating based solely on someone’s name. Period. I know that.
I have freely commented on what I think of what you say – but I have not made assumptions about who you are. You, on the other hand, without having ever met me, seem to somehow “know” my political position, who my “buddies” are, how I feel about my own skin, and where I stand on the US Military – all of which you got wrong. I guess it is easier to attack someone who points out that you are acting shamefully if you just shoe-horn them into a stereotype.
LS: I have a gut feeling this whole nightmare has something to do with combat-related PTSD, in some way, shape, or form. My heart grieves for all of the fallen here.
MJ: dave right on! [PC] read this http://boingboing.net/2009/07/09/dozens-of-us-militar.html
MJ: or this http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/15/neo_nazis_army/
MJ: or this http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=63650
PC: latest reports, the guy was super religious and started defending suicide bombers. he didnt get deployed yet, so it wasn’t combat stress.
dave, in your postings u always see the worst in america but the best in others.
typical lib stuff.
no its not racist to question names and religions especially when a certain type of or form of religion. uknow they caught a few white european converts to islam with suicide belts and in terror cells, and guess what they had arabic/muslim names too. anytime there is a terrristic act, its these types of names.
im chinese not japanese, just thought i would help u out, we dont all look the same contrary to yours and popular belief. Racist dave. Thats my new nickname for u.
Anyway with 1.2 billion, and if 99% are peaceful and as i believe, that still leaves 12 million baddies.
REM: I’m keeping out of this one; everyone knows who here I’m going to agree with.
DN: [PC] – try sticking to the facts.
– Latest reports are that he was a practicing Muslim, not that he was “super-religious”.
– Where do I see the worst in America? I love this country and what it stands for. What I can’t stand is people who say the love America but clearly have no patience for American ideals. Only someone who lives in a world of simple stereotypes can read what I wrote above and think that I always see the worst in America. Patriotism is wanting to make your country the best it can be, not believing it is the best no matter what it does. That is just blind obedience.
– You really don’t see a point even when it is staring you in the face, do you. By pointing out that you are of Chinese descent you make my point for me. Your Asian, your name is [PC], and that would have been enough to have been completely ostracized during World War 2. No one would have bothered to make the distinction, just as you assumed because the man’s name was Nidal Malik Hasan. Even if the physical differences are obvious (and yes I can tell the difference between Chinese, Japanese, and Korean when I see it – yet another gross assumption by you on who I am without knowing me).
– And yes, it is racist to question names. He could have been an Egyptian Coptic Christian and had the exact same name. It amazes me how you insist you are not a racist, and then almost immediately follow it with a racist comment.
– And nicknames? What are we, 12? If you really want to play it that way then I guess I should take your complete lack of critical thinking, blatant racism you can’t even see, god-awful spelling and grammar, and grossly inaccurate assumptions of who I am and just call you Shit-for-brains [PC].
DN: Great links, [MJ]. Thanks.
REM: ..don’t really see how precedent is racism…
PC: oh dave by the way why get angry if someone demagogues u by calling u a racist? not nice is it? since liberas love calling everyone racist who disagrees with them, i figured it’s good for u to get a taste of your own medicine. It’s so easy to push your buttons.
by the way my suspicions are correct, soldiers reported he shouted “alah akbar” as he shot people. sunds suer religious to me, shouting allah akbar and defending suicide bombers.
no were not 12, but for u to say im immature and then start acting like youre 12 yrs old doesnt bode well for someone to be so easily rattled
By the way your buddies at CAIR are already deanding police protection for muslims because they clam there will be baclash. how about u call them and tell them to STFU 🙂
PC: u might also ask how they were able to send out something so quick before anyone else made statements. Maybe because they assumed he was muslim. yes a muslim group by looking at his name assumed he was muslim by is name. so would u call them racists as well?
REM: …I mean, don’t get me wrong; I feel bad for the entire community- so many bad apples to ruin the lot. So much work to do, it must seem insurmountable every time a bad apple falls. I can feel the pain to an extent; every time some evangelical wingnut gets airtime/national press I shudder a bit, but I carry on in the knowledge that those types are the minority and don’t represent the norm. The bad apples. But I can only feel the pain to a limited extent because, you know, it never involves grenades, bullets or suicide vests…
PC: yeah shitheads like the shooter screw it up fr the 99% muslims that are good peaceful people, but why is it always non muslims who defend islam. Dont muslims get tired of these terrorists claiming to be muslims? where is the outrage? wenever an abortion clinic or doctor gets targetted, which is numbered in the last ten yrs being less than double digits. Liberals scream its the Christians!!! Christians say and condemn and say that is not christianity (which clearly it is not, most of these people say they are protecting babies and dont claim this is for Jesus) plus timothy mcveigh an avowed athiest (was declared christian by liberals, when his name sounds irish to me).
yet when these attacks like last night occur liberals arent as quick to and loathe to accuse them as muslim acts, but just loners or extremists. i wonder why the anti-christian bias? why dont they afford christians the same sympathy and slack as they do with islam?
DN: [REM] – tell Dr Tiller’s family that it never involves bullets. [PC] – The difference is clear. You are presenting racist behavior, I am not. End of story. Again you prove my point, that CAIR (my “buddies” again, even though I don’t even know who they are) reacted so quickly is smart. It doesn’t indicate they made assumptions based on his name, it indicates knowing that people like you do. You exhibit the EXACT behavior that would make someone concerned about backlash and then say they should be told to STFU when they express that concern.
Oh – and don’t mistake my taking the time to respond with my being rattled. Believe me [PC], I am not rattled. Far from it. Your arguments are way to devoid of critical thinking, common sense, or even facts to rattle me. I m just dedicated when it comes to fighting against hate speech.
BTW – did you look at the third link [MJ] sent? If so, are you going to accuse Starts & Stripes of “always seeing the worst in America” for pointing out the same concerns?
DN: When have liberals ever screamed “It’s the Christians” when a clinic is attacked or a provider is a murdered. Cite one example – just one.
DN: Or are you saying that liberals aren’t Christians themselves? What are we in your mind [PC]?
DN: As for less than double digits, hundreds of clinics are harrased each and every day. Where do you get the “less than double digits” from? Come on [PC], how about backing up your claims with some sources?
REM: Oh yes, there’s always one Dr. Tiller for every dozen “allah akbar” isn’t there!
Perhaps we liivein different regions, but I get an earfull of public, loud and unashemed rantings about “christians” all the time; like it’s perfectly natural to run down people’s beliefs in public or something- it’s a little frightening.
And to continue with [PC], I add:
..it did make me wonder about 8 years ago- where were the news conferences, the open doors with coffee and donuts saying “c’mon in and learn about us”, the general outcry.. i know, a lot to put on the innocent, but the burden of proof, to use a legal phrase, is not actually on the accused. Precedent and misfortune created the burden of proof and if you ask me it was the biggest missed opportunity in a millennia. Now it’s simply too late. We can throw around phrases like “religion of peace’ all we want, it doesn’t in and of itself change people’s minds (on either side for that matter).
PS- 99% sounds a bit high to me.
REM: words vs bombs. it’s simple. so simple even a leftist can get it.
PC: im clearly racist and yet u r not? right. . . once again liberals defending terrorists and asking for back-up when they don’t themselves.
so u r comaring protestors outside abortion clinics the same as the islamic shooters like yr buddy yesterday.
never said liberals werent christians, why so touchy. but u have to amdit but u wont cause the left is never honest, liberals have a clear bias against evangelicals always siding with the ACLU as they try and get any mention of Jesus, wiped clear and free from America.
but say allah, buddha, krishna or Gaea they dont mind.
did u know your buddies the ACLU have ben spying on cia workers taking photos of them ad showng it to gitmo detainees. treasonous!
toodles racist asian hating dave
DN: [PC] –
Where did I defend a terrorist?
Where did I compare abortion clinic protestors to terrorists? Nowhere
Where did you respond to my request to provide support for a single number you threw out?
Where did I express a bias against evangelicals?
Where is anyone trying to ram Allah, Buddha, Krishna or Gaea down anyone’s throat in a public funded institution?
Nowhere – if they did I would object to it just as strongly – just as I objected loudly at the attempt to create a muslim-centric public school in New York.
I suppose racist is the wrong word – it implies you hate simply based on race, when it is now clear that you hate simply based on any world view different than your own.
Excellent point on outreach. The Muslim community, both here and abroad missed a golden opportunity in 2002 to differentiate themselves from the radicals, but instead spent so much time screaming about how the radicals were not true Muslims instead of trying to educate people on what a true Muslim is. It was a tactical decision that does not mean they support terrorism, but as a tactical move it was really the wrong one and now you can’t unring that bell.
REM: Yeah, I think that left the whole world scratching it’s head. And all the EU protests against the notion of “you’re either with us or you’re against us” really had no teeth whatsoever in light of the just-below-the-surface fear the formerly-christian nations of the EU clearly have of their own “newer” citizenry (see London, Madirid esp.)….
I even came up with a new expression in those early years of the brave new world-
“if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and blows shit up- it’s a fuckin’ duck”.
DN: Can’t agree with the expression, but can agree with the explanation of the european reaction. It is important to remember that in the few years leading up to 9-11 there were cases in both France and Germany of entire muslim neighborhoods being attacked by anti-immigrant rioters. I am not saying that to excuse anyone’s behavior, just to point out that the modern-day animosity predates 9/11.
REM: The animosity predates even that. In the post WW2 world the ‘west” have had many opportunities to say “who the fuck are these people and what the fuck are they on about?” every time a plane was hijacked, a Jew murdered or a hostage taken. If Europeans “feared” what they didn’t understand, I would submit that they had a right to fear nonetheless. And now, all doubt has been removed and their fears legitimized. Everyone poo-poos the use of the word “crusade”, however incorrectly it is used, but does anyone remember the Moors in Spain? Yeah, there’s invasion and occupation a-plenty to go around. Egypt didn’t spring out of the ground a Muslim country any more than France did a Christian one, but change is a part of the human experience and to vilify one change-engine (the crusades) while deifying another (Islamic expansion) is just plain taking sides by people who don’t care enough about fact to try to back up their own “truths”. I don’t even remember where I’m going with this; but I think “westerners” are getting more and more fed up with the “Two legs bad, four legs good” comparisons of so-called Christendom and so called Islam. And every time we see our point as being proven, we do a little victory jig in our hearts!
PC: crusades were in rsonse to the muslim takeover of europe and africa, specifically the holy land. sure some atrocities hapened by a few, but it was not more than what saladin did and the crusaders were there to retake the holy land and not convert by the sword as saladin was trying to do.
REM: ..to say nothing of the fact that it was a damn long-ass time ago; some folks can really hold a grudge! But I meant how people freaked when Bush used the word crusade following 9-11. It was taken universally as “Crusade” and not the more common usage “crusade”. Anyone who still thinks that christians mobilized themselves for war with islam must be wondering how there are still so many loyal muslims in the US armed forces, as in US society, if we’re supposed to be fighting some kind of mythical “counter-jihad”!! They must not have gotten the memo that we are the only true mutli-cultural, pluralistic, secular experiment on the planet. The haters can hate all they want; the need only stand at the International Arrivals terminal at JFK and see how many of their countrymen agree with that notion.
DN: [PC] you may be the first person I have ever heard describe the Crusades as “sure some atrocities happened by a few” and not an attempt to “convert by the sword”. However, I will give credit where it is actually due, and it would be unfair to say the problems began with the crusades.
The biggest problem in all of this is the deals that the Arab Governments have made with the religious leaders. Essentially they have assured their continued rule and wealth by agreeing to cede domestic policy to them in turn for them not using the Mosque as a place to foment revolution against the highly privileged class. The result is schools where hatred of outsiders (us) is taught in order to keep the anger from turning inward. The poorer classes are also kept intentionally illiterate, so all they know of the Koran is memorized along with their instructor’s explanations. They lack the basic skills to take the book home with them and read it and attempt to understand it on their own.
While I do believe that our current Mideast policy, specifically the wars, breeds terrorists it is far from the only thing that does. We need to be making strong noises to Yemen, Egypt and Saudi Arabia about educational reform that allows their citizens to develop critical thinking skills.
DN: I do however sympathize with the Muslim reaction to the word “Crusade”. As a Jew, I know if someone used the word Pogrom or the like to describe an action I would go ballistic.
PC: the crusades were not a offense they were a defense against the muslim invasions of christian lands.
Crusade and pogroms do not share anything n common.
Pogroms were enacted on Jews by the Nazi’s (whom by the way the jihadists admire very much.) when they did nothing, it was a land grab and start of genocide.
Cruades were in response to the invasions. A crusade to retake the Holy land, the place of birth of Jesus Christ. To free it from this religion which allows polygamy, child brides, and did not proclaim Jesus as Lord.
REM: Well, when the formerly respected journalists said things like “It was culturally insensitive for the president to use the word crusade” all i could think was that in MY culture it is culturally insensitve to slaughter 2,000 innocents.
And as far as I’m concerned the only matter of “policy” that could possibly “breed” terrorism would be the . support from day one of the right of Israel to exist and since that’s never gonna change we’re pretty much damned if we do and damned if we don’t. People will recall, eventually, that 9-11 happened before the west’s well intentioned attempts to intervene in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan. (all of which, aghain, as far as I’m concerned, have had desireable effects. What we cannot control nor could have forseen – I think- is what a body of people chose to do with any measure of new-found freedom. They wanna kill each other in a bid for supremacy? Well then I guess that’s just their way and if anything we’ve helped them attain a level of cultural normality.)
REM: [PC] I don’t think Islam sees it that way simply because soldiers and merceneries were recruited from the entire Christian world to descend upon jerusalm. But anyway, the point isn’t what the crusades actually were, the point is that they took place a thousand freakin’ years ago!
Does anyone know what the dominant population in Jerusalem was in the years prior to 1948? It was Christian. Just throwing that out there. Now they are the minority caught in the middle with little or no voice, save the mistaken notion that The State of Israel is somehow an occupation. It is not.
My name is [REM] and I approve this message.
REM: …and then of course there was the one particular Crusade during which the mercenaries also sacked Constantinople on their way to jerusalem because they didn’t recognize that Eastern form of Christianity and thought that they must have been Saracens too. Slick….
PC: the director of the american muslim armd forces and veterans affairs council has not received a SINGLE report of a US soldier being harassed “simply because he was a muslim.
that kind of report is inconcistent with what we have heard.” says Abdul-rashid abdullah
REM: …and let’s not forget the significant number of members of the armed forces who convert to Islam while IN the armed forces- that’s been happening since at least Viet Nam.
DN: So Israel is a christian land because it was a christian land during British Occupation?
The Israel question I will not even get into here because that is a whole can of worms. Suffice it to say that Israel’s Right To Exist is not the be-all end-all for terrorism, and that an Israeli State, a Palestinian State, and a peaceful Middle East are not all mutually exclusive, just very difficult to achieve. As a Jew I will concede that the greatest road block at this moment is Israeli intransigence on settlements, but again that is the moment.
[REM] – the concept that the aftermath of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were not predictable is incorrect. They were, in fact, predicted by historians who campaigned against the war. The fighting between the Sunni and Shia? Predicted before the war. Afghanistan? Please – we were jumping into the middle of a now 35-year-old civil war in a land known for centuries as “the graveyard of empires”. Predictable. There are only two things to do with your army if it is standing in the middle of a civil war, leave immediately or commit to staying forever or until you are finally worn down to a nub…. Read More
First and foremost, get your history right within at least SEVERAL DECADES AND HUNDREDS OF MILES if you are going to argue based on it. The Pogroms were not commited by the Nazis. The Pogroms were the forced expulsions and slaughter of Jews under the Cossacks in Russia in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. One half of my family came to the US fleeing the Pogroms in 1904, long before WW I, let alone the Nazis.And again you completely missed the point anyway, which was about cultural sensitivity, not a comparison of the Crusades and the Pogroms.
Lastly – ” A crusade to retake the Holy land, the place of birth of Jesus Christ. To free it from this religion which allows polygamy, child brides, and did not proclaim Jesus as Lord.” Jews do not claim Jesus as lord, so I assume it would be OK with you if they were killed in the Holy Land as well, despite Jesus himself having been a Jew? You just admitted that The Crusades was a holy war, that these people were killed for their religious beliefs, and then claim it is ridiculous for Muslims to remember it painfully even after all these centuries, even after you passionately defend it after all these centuries?
REM: No,there were Christians in Jerusalem long before the British. It’s where jesus was executed, you know; the followers had their HQ there. A little history, please.
And after the diaspora, well, there they were. And there they grew, until the islamic take on things centuries later, and by the 20th century, well, Jerusalem was simply a more traveled to pilgrimage site by Christians than by Jews and Muslims combined.
And so, if the fighting between Shia and Sunni is the natural state of things.. then… well, there it is, the natural order has been restored; no need to thank us, just try not to blow us up, k?
DN: And there were Jews in Jerusalem long before there were Christians. We could go on like this forever. If it had been up to me in 1948 would I have necessarily chosen that location for a Jewish State? Almost certainly not. However, it was chosen and now we need to find a way to make it work.
And the fact that a Shite/Sunni slaughter was predictable does not make it the natural order, just the inevitable result of modern Iraqi history. Who are we to determine another nation’s natural order, especially one that posed no threat to us at all?
REM: The first Christians were Jews, that’s kinda the point.
Funny, Germany posed no threat to us at all beyond commercial shipping either, but, you know, sometimes a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. (yes, it’s tru, one can always play the hitler card to make a point in almost any argument- works, just try it. My favorite is, “that sounds an awful lot like something hitler would have said”… instant conversation ender.)
DN: LOL. Yes, the Hitler card is way over-played these days. So much so that it concerns me, as if somehow the evilness of Hitler is being “diluted” every time someone on the right accuses Obama of acting like a Nazi and every time someone on the left accuses the Tea Partiers of acting like Nazis. There is a lot of hate and vitriol being spewed, but so far no one is acting like a Nazi.
Of course Germany was a threat. They were trampling all over our trading partners. Anyone who is ACTING on taking over the Western World is a threat. Someone like Saddam, who fantasized about it, is not.
PC: wow dave u r a stupid FUCK, but thanks i didnt know Jesus was Jewish, shoot now i will give up believing in him.
its sad how much u love jihadists.
you do know that chritians are yr friends.
jihadists will slaughter jews first.
and they wont care that u r defending them.
u wont be able to point out this facebook pot and say “hey im on yr side i defended u against those nasty evil christians.” they wll say “boy are u liberals stupid!”
keep believing what u believe, sigh. . . so sad. .
DN: Wow [PC]. You really are pathetic. Never a response to a single question asking you to prove a single fact. Just more and more anger and assumptions. Just going to ignore that you got history completely wrong and confused the Czar with Hitler? Whatever.
Oh btw your racism is showing again. I have been discussing Muslims while you keep saying Jihadists. I know the difference. I know what a Jihadist thinks of Jews, but I know that muslim does not mean jihadist any more than evangelical does. Anyone who can read what I have written here and assume I am a knee jerk liberal who sees Jihadists as his buddies and blames everything on Christians has to be a really special kind of moron. Write someday if you ever pass high school history and/or English. Otherwise, goodbye.