Reply to: The case of Zachari Klawonn is an excellent example of someone in the military being abused because of people like you. EofO

First, I’m accused of being a “racist” and “teacher of hate” Why? Because I said a religion was just a front for terrorists. It doesn’t sound like I’m spreading hate, but the terrorists are trying to condition their members with “Defense mechanisms” so they won’t think too hard about what they’re hearing. One Defense Mechanism is “The Prophet Mohammed heard this from the Angel Gabriel.” If you’ve grown up with a religion that talks about angels delivering messages from God, you don’t question the angel Gabriel talking to Mohammed.

But the truth is, people have dreams. Much of the content of dreams is nonsense. Your mind pulls random memories, mostly because they have intense emotions associated with them, and weave them into a DREAM. Mohammed may indeed have had a dream where an angel spoke to him, and wrote it down. Which means the core of Islam is nonsense, because Mohammed’s dream was composed of nonsense.

I’m going to use the term “inferiority complex” because it’s MY theory, but you may come up with a better one. Jews exhibit wealthy. Arabs feel inferior, and so, think they deserve a religion which is superior to the religion of the Jews. And they invest their self-esteem in the belief that Mohammed is the greatest religious figure in human history, and God sent the angel Gabriel to deliver a message to mankind through an Arab Prophet.

This explains the reaction of “Observer of Equity.” If Islam is false, then he was duped and that makes Arabs feel even more inferior. Eventually this results in… the kind of violence that Hasan planned.

From a trial in England at “Old Bailey” where a juury has heard (courtesy of a British newspaper).

Muslim cleric Abdullah el-Faisal, 39, made the claim in a video recording of him addressing a study group after the 11 September terrorist attacks in New York.
Their rewards in paradise would include 72 virgins and eating from the fruits of paradise, he said.
“Religious martyrs are not dead. Do not cry for them. There is a conspiracy against Jihad”, he added.
“Democracy is not the way forward. The only way to liberate land and man is Jihad.
“The way forward is the bullet. Our motto is `might is right’.”
The video was played at the trial of the preacher, who is charged with nine offences, including inciting race hate and soliciting murder.
Mr el-Faisal, of Albert Square, Stratford, east London, told the gathering that Muslims were only allowed to sacrifice their lives fighting for Islam. In the video he says

*** it is the duty of women to bring up their sons “with a Jihad mentality -***

not be wimps” and boys should train as soldiers for Islam when they were 15.
He said: “Is it sensible for you to be soldiers without Kalashnikov training?
“So when you are on holiday from school or college, you must have Jihad training – this is your holiday.” The prosecution allege the Jamaican-born convert stepped outside his role as a spiritual leader to preach race hate and murder. (end of article from British newspaper)

This is how a terrorist organization works. They create a buzz word like Jihad, and tell their victims that Jihad is a “religious duty.” But, look at what they’re talking about.

A terrorist says, “I want you to write a Holy Book. In this Holy Book, God has condemned Jews, Christians, and anyone who does not confess that Mohammed is a more important political leader than their politicians and other royalty. YOu must stress that a religious leader’s authority comes from God, and is thus superior to human authority. The Holy Book must justify killing our enemies. Other than that, you can add anything you want.”

That’s the Qur’an and the Islamic law that has grown up since the Qur’an was written. That’s how the terrorists recruit and condition their victims.

Go back over Hasan’s actions. He sat down at a table and prayed. Then he jumped on the table and shouted “God is great” in Arabic. I think he was clearly conditioned by a terrorist group, using a great deal of deception, and it started when he went to a mosque and he was told to read the Qur’an and memorize verses that had to do with the authority of Islam being superior to the authority of human rules.

And other American soldiers are being conditioned in a similar fashion, by going to mosques while off-duty, and reading from a Qur’an. And if anyone says, “You’re being brainwashed by terrorists,” the automatic Defense mechanism, “You lie because you’re teaching racism and hatred.”

The Army has and had a clear duty to warn soldiers against the brainwashing effects of this phony religion, and they’re ignoring it. I think you can ask other psychiatrists from Walter Reed, and they will tell you they felt uneasy because they ignored their clear duty.

Conditioning. If you repeat the words “Allah is good” ten thousand times, you enter a delusional state where “Allah is good” takes on a larger and more important dimension. You start to define yourself in terms of “Allah is good.”

The objective is to condition the victim into responding in a set, predictable way. This is the opposite of the normal human reaction, where people think, examine and display curiosity.

Reply to: Mr. Hays, are nothing more than a teacher of hate and intolerance.

This is how Islam works.

Without thinking, victims will have a “knee-jerk response” to any critical examination of Islam. They will respond with catch phrases like “you teach hate” and “you teach intolerance.”

Yes, the US military is intolerant – and rightfully so – of any foreign government that attempts to condition American soldiers with this kind of response.

I do not teach hate.

I ask a question. Why did Hasan CHOOSE to kill 13 people in his attempt to commit suicide?

Because Islam had conditioned him. Islam made him believe that his self-esteem and self-worth depended on Islam being “good.” It’s not a deep or even rational thought. It’s a sound bite, and a form of conditioning.

“Allah is good.”

“Anyone who says Allah is not good is a teacher of hate.”

That’s how the terrorists want their victims to respond. And then, the next step, they want their victims to feel justified in murdering anyone who is critical of Islam.

Reply to: You failed to answer any of my questions, e.g. definition of terrorism

Yes, and I refused to answer your questions on purpose, for a clear reason. I wanted to show that your self-esteem depends on being able to spread Islam. Your self-esteem depends on being able to RECRUIT for Islam. When someone shows disrespect and refuses to answer your questions, you can’t deal with it. You immediately fall into a response pattern and scream, “You are a teacher of hate.”

When you meet a victim who has been conditioned, or has an addiction they can’t control, you have to ask the questions. No one asked those questions at Walter Reed when Hasan showed signs of irrational behavior. We paid a high price for that.

The name “Observer of Equity” is a warning sign. He’s already taken one step into the delusional world where he sees himself as a righteous avenger for the cause of Islam. but Islam is NOT good.

Allah is not good. Allah is a delusional state used to condition victims so they will die for a cause.

If I was making this argument a day BEFORE the tragedy at Ford Hood, you might laugh me off. Now, you can’t. The bodies of thirteen innocent victims means you can’t. Go talk to the surviving victims who were shot. Learn the true consequences of “Allah is good.”

Shariah verse 2.1- Allah Most High sent Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), the Qurayshite unlettered prophet, to deliver His inspired message to the entire world, Arabs and non-Arabs, jinn and mankind, superceding and abrogating all previous religious systems with the Prophet’s Sacred Law [Shariah] ….He has obligated men and jinn to believe everything the Prophet has informed us concerning this world and the next….

This kind of conditioning does in fact “obligate men to believe…”

Not think, but simply to respond in the way they are programmed.

Yes, after years of conditioning, victims may honestly THINK “submission to Islam” is important, but, in reality, the Prophet didn’t know anything about “the next world.” There’s no substance behind the theology. It’s just a cult using religion as a front.

Have you ever heard the word “demonize”? To inspire hate, the bad guys pick one group and portray them as “demons” who have incurred the Wrath of God for their misdeeds and evil thoughts.

Let’s see if Islam does that.

Qur’an 5:17 “Verily they are disbelievers and Kafir who say, ‘The Messiah, son of Mary, is God.’”

Qur’an 5:72 “…Lo! Whoever joins other gods with Allah or says He has a partner, Allah has forbidden Paradise, and the Hell Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.”

Qur’an 5:73 “They are surely disbelievers who blaspheme and say: ‘God is one of three in the Trinity for there is no Ilah except One, Allah. If they desist not from saying this, verily a grievous penalty will befall them – the disbelievers will suffer a painful doom.”

Qur’an 72:15 “But the Qasitun are the firewood of hell.”

Qur’an 5:35 “As for the disbelievers, if they had everything on earth, two times over, to give as ransom for the penalty of the Day of Doom, it would never be accepted from them. Theirs will be a painful torment. They will desire to get out of the fire, but they shall not be released from it. They shall have an everlasting torture.”

Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.”

Kafir… is an Arabic word often incorrectly translated as Infidel, literally means one who “covers”, in the sense of hiding. Also, a person who does not recognize the one God (Allah) – which includes atheists and polytheists. In the Qur’an, Christians are called “those who strayed away” and

Jews are called “those who’ve angered God” and “Arrogant ones”.

Disbelievers. “Those who have angered God.” Or, folks like me, who “disbelieve” in any form of organized religion which has a supernatural component like Allah or a Holy Spirit.

As I said, Hasan had a choice. He could have gone AWOL, taken a bus to Vegas, visited every strip club and taken enough pills to put him to sleep permanently.

But he chose instead to take the lives of 13 innocent people. He fired enough shots to kill 40 or 50.

Why?

If you’ve decided to commit suicide, why kill innocent people first?

The answer is Islam. Islam filled him with a desire to jihad (fight) against the enemies of Islam. Against the disbelievers. Read the verses again.

Reply to: Mr. Galligan wants transparency. …, he is learning that the system isn’t what we advertise it to be to the world.

Well, you missed my earlier point. In most countries, if a Major inside a military base opened fire on his own troops, there wouldn’t be a trial.

The fact that Hasan will eventually be executed in no way indicates that due process wasn’t followed.

The American justice system is exactly what we advertise. It is fair. I think there should be more provisions for forgiveness (ie, the use of a Presidential pardon) for people who simply made a single dumb mistake. If Hasan will admit that he made a stupid mistake, I’ll try to help him. But I don’t see that the prosecution is being unfair. The “right to a speedy trial” usually means that a probable cause hearing is held quickly, so that the case can be evaluated and the charges narrowed down. Part of “due process” is getting the Article 32 hearing finished without undue delay.

Reply to: Mr. Hays honestly, you have a hidden agenda here.

I don’t think Islam should be considered a religion. I think it should be considered a political movement that is recruiting stupid people to commit criminal acts. If I’ve hidden that agenda from you, it wasn’t intentional.

I might as well raise the possibility of a Presidential pardon.

Barack Obama was a lecturer in Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. He was President of the Harvard Law Review. If a case presents a unique problem in Constitutional Law, it might get his interest.

If Major Hasan’s defense is, “I’m now an agnostic because I have learned a lot about religion. I don’t see any evidence for a God apart from wishful thinking and belief. Looking back from the perspective of an agnostic, I now realize that Islam is a political movement, not an authentic religion. In order to unite Arabs under a single government, a leader created a phony religion. The US Army had a clear duty to warn soldiers that Islam presents a clear and present danger, and is constantly recruiting martyrs. I do not think Islam deserves the protection of the First Amendment because it’s not really a religion, but was manufactured by terrorists to take over governments “in the name of religion.”

President Obama doesn’t have to state why he grants a Presidential pardon. After reviewing this case, that might be your only chance. But you would have to raise the precise Constitutional issue early in the proceeds. When an Article 32 returns a recommendation for court martial, your first pleading should raise the issue.

Again, this opinion might not win a Moot Court competition, but you never know.

*** the defense is not presently entitled to a government funded mitigation specialist ***

as a matter of right.” (end)

I don’t see a denial of your right to employ a mitigation specialist.

ONLY that you’re not entitled to a government funded one…. UNTIL the decision to convene a court-martial has been made.

Reply to: It is time for them to stop playing games.

If you really wanted to stop playing games, you’d hire a mitigation specialist at your own cost and get started.

What I found: An article 32 hearing is required before a defendant can be referred to a general court martial, in order to determine whether there is enough evidence to merit a general court martial. Its name is derived from UCMJ section VII (“Trial Procedure”) Article 32 (10 U.S.C. § 832), which mandates the hearing.

Generally there are four recognized purposes:

(1) to inquire into the truth of the matter alleged in the charges,

(2) to consider the form of the charges,

(3) to make a recommendation as to disposition of the charges and

(4) discovery (See 405a discussion and United States v. Roberts, 10 M.J. 308 (C.M.A. 1981).

Other purposes include… showing weaknesses in the governments case to improve the negotiating posture, or winning the case.

3. BURDEN OF PROOF: The Investigating officer must determine whether

*** “reasonable grounds exists to believe the accused committed the offense.” ***

R.C.M. 405(j)(2)(H). Reasonable grounds may arguably be translated as “probable cause” or “having more evidence for than against.”

The recommendations of the Article 32 Officer are advisory only…

WITNESS PRODUCTION: Defense counsel should request the personal appearance of all relevant witnesses including witnesses requested by the government.

11. KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED: The accused has the right to cross examine witnesses, to present evidence in defense mitigation and extenuation and to make a statement in any form including an unsworn statement. Generally, the defense is given broad latitude to cross-examine witnesses. R.C.M. 405(h)(1)(A).

So, in layman’s terms, the purpose of Article 32 is to decide whether there’s enough of a case to hold a court-martial. It’s a “probable cause” hearing. Does probable cause exist to think there was a crime?

In military terms, that makes a lot of sense.

The Article 32 hearing, basically, forces the government to reveal their case. Would a mitigation specialist offer any relevant testimony to prove the crime itself didn’t take place? Therefore, there’s no reason to have a continuance to allow one time to work.

The government is absolutely correct in their position.

If you think a mitigation specialist is going to help your case, hire one at Hasan’s expense.

Once the decision has been made to proceed to court-martial, additional funding for the defense should become necessary under Due Process.

A top-notch defense team wouldn’t wait for the system to catch up. while the OJ Simpson case isn’t exactly on point, the prosecution failed because it asked the jury to believe the wrong theory of the crime. OJ Simpson had been given a pair of expensive leather gloves by his ex-wife. After they got wet and shrunk, he gave them to his kids, and his kids left them outside on the ground. The prosecution tried to prove that OJ had been wearing the gloves. OJ knew the gloves were too small to fit him, and immediately agreed to a demonstration in front of the jury.

Until you get your theory of Hasan’s defense in place, you’re subject to the same mistakes. Let’s look at:

Major Hasan’s behavior leading up to the shooting bespeaks a troubled man full of contradictions. He lived frugally in a run-down apartment, yet made a good salary and spent more than $1,100 on a pistol.
He was described as gentle and kindly by many neighbors, quick with a smile or hello, yet he complained bitterly to people at the mosque about the oppression of Muslims in the Army. He had few friends, and even the men he interacted with at the mosque saw him as a strange figure whom they never fully accepted into their circle. He invited Osman Danquah, the co-founder of the mosque to dinner at Ryan’s restaurant and asked him how he should counsel young Muslim soldies who might have objections to the wars.
Mr. Danquah, a retired sergeant, told him the soldiers could file as conscientious objectors.
“I got the impression he was trying to validate how he was dealing with it, Mr. Danquah said. Major Hasan also applied to become a lay Muslim chaplain on the Army post,

So, here’s my problem. Once Major Hasan decided to commit suicide, he had several choices:

(A) Go AWOL, run up a huge hotel bill in Vegas. Gamble until the casino cuts off his credit and let his body be found in a tub, pr

(B) Stick a gun in his own mouth, or

(C) Sit down at a table, say a few prayers, and then start shooting. He killed 13 and wounded another 30. You could argue a “clear intent” to kill many more than he did.

Why did Hasan choose the third option?

That’s the key question on the table.

Hasan would not be considered a terrorist if he had chosen Option A. Or B.

Why did he choose C? Because Islam recruited him as a terrorist. Not the local Muslims, necessarily, but the greater “Islam” which has developed over centuries and has spread into many countries.

If there’s a better explanation, I’m willing to hear it.