This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
Identity based politics leads to crime
Published on November 7, 2009 By Bahu Virupaksha In Current Events

The horrific incident at Fort Hood, Texas, should come as a wake up call to all those in the American academia who promote identity based politics:Gays, lesbians, minority, sexual preference, etc etc. Now the Muslim identity is becoming increasingly problematic in the USA and I believe that years and years of promoting identity politics has left the country without the means of even admitting to itself that the islamic identity clashes head long with that of a secular nation state. The US media is already concluding that Major Hassan's crime does in no way reflect upon the patriotism of the Muslim-American population. May be so. My point is that the growing alienation of the Muslims from the mainstream of western collective life is contibuting to the sense of unease and the killings in Fort Hood stems from that feeling of unease.

Let me at the very out set condemn in the strongest possible manner the violence against the  armymen and women at Fort Hood. My point is not to justify the crime but to say why it happened. Major Nidal by all accounts was being radicalised and his peers at Walter Reed had drawn attention to a presentation he made in which he seems to have justified suicide bombings. If thiswas indeed the case why did the Army not pay any attention. The practice of identity based sensitivity forced the authorities to turn a blind eye to the increasing radicalisation of one of their own. In a conflict between secular law and identity based fith based customs the Army must enforce the secular law and in the name of minority rights it cannot permit the radicalisation of its members.

Major Nidal seem,s to have been harassed for his muslim beliefs and humiliated for praticing his religion. By the same token, if an armyman or woman is humiliated the authorities concerned must make a full and complete inquiry and set right the fraying human relations. This is absolutely essential in a heterogenous army.

Finally, it would be a good idea not to deploy Muslims in the Army to serve in Irq and Afghanistan as they would have to fight fellow muslims. Secularists may not understand this, but practicing Muslims put faith above politics and the State.


Comments (Page 3)
6 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last
on Nov 09, 2009

But aside the deficiencies in the article, the critique about generalizing is not wrong.

Generalizing is not the issue.  We need simply to not ignore what is staring us right in the face.

on Nov 09, 2009

By my last count most Iraqis were still alive.

Never said they weren't, but some did die thanks to their own people. Iraqis who were simply going about their day, probably hating American soldiers for being around and all of a sudden, boom, they die thanks to one of their own who thought a bomb in a crowded place was a great way to get their msg across.

on Nov 09, 2009

And what is that?

People on every level slipped up and didn't notice the signs or take them seriously enough that there was something seriously wrong with Hasan. Who would have guessed that a psychiatrist treating soldiers for PTSD would end up being a mass murderer? If this were fiction, it would be classic dramatic irony. But what I mentioned earlier is true for every other case were someone you would never have guessed ran amok.

Quotes like "he was so nice and friendly, always said hello, quiet, polite, never would have thought him to be capable  et cetera" from neighbors/vendors/co workers can be found for most cases where someone runs amok.

I am really curious as to what the investigation will find out in this case in regards to motive - if it fits with what people assume or if it was some sort of psychotic breakdown. You'll have psychiatrists evaluating a mad psychiatrist - lets hope they stay sane.

on Nov 09, 2009

Not to 'generalize,' but you know what they say: 'sane psychiatrist' is an oxymoron.

on Nov 09, 2009

Looks like ABC News has found the connection that most people (correctly) assumed. Apparently Hasan's former Imam also ministered to two of the 9/11 terrorists, and he skipped off to Yeman to continue his "work" with Al Queda. Hasan was in contact with his spiritual leader as late as 2008.

The window appears to be closing for the Muslim terrorist apologist's and deniers. Of course nobody should assume all Muslims are terrorists, but let's call a spade a spade.

on Nov 09, 2009

Anti-American frontlash after frontlash after frontlash, with dead American innocents all around, and all the 'progressives' worry about is a hypothetical anti-Muslim backlash.  Makes me want to puke (Bob Beckel being the latest apologist I've seen/heard).

on Nov 09, 2009
on Nov 09, 2009

I'll cheer when Major Nidal Hasan Unibrow gets the electric chair

on Nov 09, 2009

'sane psychiatrist' is an oxymoron
I read the article and I agree that it was wholly inapproprite and callous.  I do not understand the point of this tirade against Virginia. All of us do remember the Virginai TEch massacre but that in no way indicts all Virginians.

I think we have to be sort of wary of disciplines whose logic is inherently self-validating and circu;lar like the one Major Nidal claims as his speciality.

on Nov 10, 2009

Our capacity for inane stupidity appears to be boundless.

He's not actually being politically correct by ignoring the facts. That's why he never stated his opinion because it wouldn't be politically correct even though his opinion is the same opinion that the state run media has been pumping out that this has nothing to do with him being muslim and everything to do with the illegal wars that we are fighting.

He's logic is flawed as well.  Its like calling an orange a tangerine.  There may be very similar appearing and even after people point out that its a orange.  The easiest way would be just to go and try it out for yourself to see.  I doubt he would do that......

utemia
And what is that?

Quotes like "he was so nice and friendly, always said hello, quiet, polite, never would have thought him to be capable  et cetera" from neighbors/vendors/co workers can be found for most cases where someone runs amok.

You'll hear that said about any individual here in the States.  If you watch the news you'll always hear someone commenting about the serial killer that lived next door 'oh, he mowed his lawn and always said hi to me when I saw him.  He just kept to himself.'.  Its because most people in the States, due to the individualistic/independent attitude, don't know their stinkin neighbors are.  You don't see people inviting one another over for coffee or dinner anymore.

Everyone wants to stay in there own little world of escape.  Riding the bus everyone is listening to some type of musical device ignoring what's going on around them.

I get the feeling that most people in the States (I live here and am from there) are escapist and some what deluded from reality. Nor do they actually want to know what reality is.

on Nov 10, 2009

In all cases of massacres and amok runs that I know of, there were signs that could have been interpreted in a way that would have prevented anything from occuring. Hindsight and all that, right?

It stands to reason that even the slightest complaint or doubt about a person's (woman are almost never the perpetrators in such violent crimes) stability or oppinions will have severe consequences from now on and won't be ignored in the future. I am sure the military is already working on tightening the protocols for that.

Can someone explain the difference between a terrorist and a regular (sorry for sounding callous) amok killer? Allegedly shouting "god is great" in arabic doesn't quantify as alot to make this an act of terrorism. It was his workplace so he shot and killed and injured those that were there which happened to be soldiers. Had it been a walmart employee shooting customers shouting the same, would that have been classified as terrorism as well? Not that it makes a difference, I am just curious as to the criteria.

on Nov 10, 2009

I'll cheer when Major Nidal Hasan Unibrow gets the electric chair

That, unfortunately, may never occur. This case appears to fall under Army jurisdiction, and the Army hasn't used the death penalty in a long, long time. I fear we will be feeding this rat for the rest of his life.

on Nov 10, 2009

In all cases of massacres and amok runs that I know of, there were signs that could have been interpreted in a way that would have prevented anything from occuring. Hindsight and all that, right?

Agreed. Maybe this guys tirade on the merits of suicide bombing at a conference was his "sign". Hindsight or fear of the PC police?

on Nov 10, 2009

Several "Muslim" Web sites call him a hero who did the right thing when he heard that he had to go fight Muslims.

I disagree.

He was a coward who preferred shooting unnarmed and unsuspecting comrades rather than go and fight against the terrorists who kill Muslims in Afghanistan.

 

on Nov 10, 2009

Maybe this guys tirade on the merits of suicide bombing at a conference was his "sign". Hindsight or fear of the PC police?

Yeah. But the really interesting issue here is the freedom of speech and what is allowed and what isn't. His ramblings about the merits of suicide bombings - do they fall under his constitutional rights or are they a reason to arrest him? It's not exactly a new issue, but I suppose the debate will come up sooner or later. Is someone (who is just) talking about killing people actually committing a crime or not?

6 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last