When us infidels hear "Allah akbar" before a guy shoots or crashes a plane or whatever, we infer him to mean he thinks he's doing the action for Allah who either commanded or at least approves of the action. But, I feel like there may be subtleties there that I don't understand. Can a genuine Muslim tell me if there is more to this expression, or should we take it as the media intends us to?
via the Chicago NBC affiliate's site, Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting [rquoter]President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships. After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective. But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him? Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur. Indeed, an argument could be made that Obama should have canceled the Indian event, out of respect for people having been murdered at an Army post a few hours before. That would have prevented any sort of jarring emotional switch at the event. Did the president's team not realize what sort of image they were presenting to the country at this moment? The disconnect between what Americans at home knew had been going on -- and the initial words coming out of their president's mouth was jolting, if not disturbing. It must have been disappointing for many politically aware Democrats, still reeling from the election two days before. The New Jersey gubernatorial vote had already demonstrated that the president and his political team couldn't produce a winning outcome in a state very friendly to Democrats (and where the president won by 15 points one year ago). And now this? Congressional Democrats must wonder if a White House that has burdened them with a too-heavy policy agenda over the last year has a strong enough political operation to help push that agenda through. If the president's communications apparatus can't inform -- and protect -- their boss during tense moments when the country needs to see a focused commander-in-chief and a compassionate head of state, it has disastrous consequences for that president's party and supporters. All the president's men (and women) fell down on the job Thursday. And Democrats across the country have real reason to panic. [/rquoter] and for those of you unable to see the video, here's a transcript of the President's remarks, via justoneminute commnenter bgates: [rquoter]OBAMA: What up, First Nations? It's great to be here. Mad props to the Department of Interior for their conferencing skillz. I gots ta give a shout out to Joe "Two Crows", winner of the...Imperial Legion of Merit. You da man, Joe! No, you da man! OK, I'm da man. Hey, so, somebody shot a couple dozen soldiers a few minutes ago. At times like this, our hearts are with the families of the victims, especially the children. And speaking of "chill", y'all squaws got to settle down. Earlier I was like, "hey sweetie, get me a soda", and the b**** got all up in my grill like, "Pardon me, Mr President, but I'm the Deputy Undersecretary for Indian Affairs." I mean, how does that get me a soda? It's not really what I wanted to talk about, but let me effortlessly - no, use "graceful" in the writeup, guys, let me gracefully segue back into a real Presidential moment about how deeply we feel the loss of the Marines. Army guys? Was it-they're all Army guys, though, right? Anyway, it's a tough loss for anybody's country when your soldiers get shot, and we're no different or better than any other country when it comes to that. It hurts whether the deaths come in one of Bush's senseless wars - I mean, his senseless war in Iraq, or in the war in Afghanistan that I'm totally locked in on finding out whether we ought to leave after nine years of Bush's indecision, or whether the deaths happen here in one of the...states. Our brave men and chicks in uniform know that their service is honored, but also kind of a gamble with their lives. But I don't need to tell y'all about gambling, right? Dawg, I was in the casino before, and I was like, "damn, they went all Moe Greene up in here!" Off da hook! So in conclusion, much love to First Nations, let me apologize for what the White Man did to you, almost as bad as the slavery my people experienced, and if anybody wants to help out with the wounded from the Army thing - I think it's like 18 dead and 40 wounded or something - just remember that we're committed to making sure they're all treated by the Army doctors. Which is government health care, basically. And I don't want to get all partisan at a time like this, but Republicans hate government health care, so I guess they'd rather just let our wounded bleed to death. Something to think about. Peace![/rquoter]
I am no fan of religion, but even I think that people overblame religion for all man's ills because it is an easy way out of analyzing our real problems. The human brain favors simplicity and we like to categorize things into good and evil, only great thinkers and real intellectuals among us are interested in understanding things and examining the facts, they understand the world is more complex than we like to admit. Real problems do not have to do with religion, religion does not help feed you or shelter you and it does not grant you citizenship or a passport. Those are the REAL issues people grapple with in their daily lives, it is what they experience first hand. Religion helps them cope with their experiences and helps them to make sense of it all, and as such can help them decide on a course of action to address whatever issues they might have, and that course of action can be peaceful or violent, depending on the person and the circumstances. So to blame religion for all things is just misguided, IMO. It is missing the big picture which is that there are real problems at the core of most of our actions. I see religion more as an instrument but hardly think it is the real reason behind our actions. It is an easy scapegoat though for ideologues.
you have to be taught, carefully taught, before it's too late before you are six, or seven, or eight.
No kidding. Some of y'all are literally down my throat on here if I post something insensitive. Why are y'all excusing the President for acting like I do? (FWIW, I see this as a non-issue. Just pointing out the hypocrisy, yet again.)
So here's what we're hearing so far... 1. he woked up that morning, put on religious attire and passed out korans to people in his apartment complex and gave away all his possessions. 2. he loaded up with a gun and ammunition and opened fire unexpectedly, killing 13 and wounding about 30, shouting "Allah akbar," right before doing so. 3. It appears he did some blogging where he likened suicide bombings to soldiers willing to jump on a grenade to save their comrades. oczom's razor points towards the idea that this man's brand of his religion contributed pretty significantly to his actions yesterday. you have to do a fair amount of spinning to suggest otherwise, frankly. you'd have a very difficult time convincing me it wasn't motivated out of his politics shaped by his religion.
you're overstating my position. i'm not scapegoating religion at all. i'm saying it's ridiculous to suggest that someone's beliefs about God and humanity won't shape their views on politics, fairness, justice, etc. as a person of faith, i find that view to be utterly absurd. of course my faith shapes my worldview. it shapes how i view every human being on the planet.
Do you REALLY not understand the distinction between soldiers getting killed by the enemy in a war on the other side of the world and soldiers and civilians getting killed in a rampage carried out by another soldier on an American military base?? You really can’t see the difference?? [cue the Twilight Zone music]
via Gawker --- The gunman who killed 12 people today at Ft. Hood appears, based on current media reports, to be Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan who was listed as a participant in a Homeland Security Policy Institute's presidential transition task force last year. The task force was not officially affiliated with the White House. It was a project of the Homeland Security Policy Institute, an independent thinktank housed at George Washington University, aimed at drafting policy recommendations for the incoming Obama administration.
Please, please, please, don't tell me you believed that was an actual transcript of Obama's remarks. And to add to that, it's incredibly offensive that basso is posting this racist parody at all, and even more so, in this thread.
That's because it isn't justifiable, and no one is trying to justify it. Despite your obvious wishes that someone would. Or does rationalization and justification mean the same thing to you?
Uhhhhhhhh. I don't think anyone would think that was the actual transcript. I watched the video. (I should've edited the bottom portion of his response instead of lazily hitting "reply.")
Is trolling as a 50 year old father as satisfying for you as it is for us 20 or 30 year old douchemonkeys? I always though having kids was supposed to change you blah blah blah. I mean I do it as an escape from boredom and ennui of routine. For example, I took about a week off from the BBS cause I was in Argentina for about 6 days on vacation. So no need to stave off stultification by posting. What are you trying to escape from? And is it still as much fun? I want to know how long my trollery will last. It's 6 years and counting.
Sorry, the question about Allah akbar was more of a sidebar question. I wasn't trying to spin anything anywhere. Honestly, it just reminded me of that Egyptian pilot who used the same expression before crashing his plane and there was more uncertainty about what he meant by it. It was just a sincere question to satisfy a curiosity.
