Buchanan was only trying to alert readers


Allow me to make a few comments in defense of Craig Buchanan. From my point of view, all he was trying to do was to alert readers to the very real and ongoing threat of radical Islamists who are pushing their radical beliefs on our courts, legislatures, school boards and libraries all across this great nation of ours.

Their weapons are fear and intimidation and are supported by millions of dollars from Middle East terrorist organizations that are determined to take over the U.S. from within.

I believe they want to replace our constitutional law with Shariah Law, which would allow the cutting off people’s hands if caught stealing or stoning to death if they’re homosexuals or unbelievers (Christians or Jews). Then there’s Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a fanatical Muslim and a prime example of what real hatred is all about. He’s being tried for having murdered 13 unarmed U.S. soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas. Maj. Hasan went on his killing spree because, as a Muslim, he was taught to hate all nonbelievers and what he did was in keeping with jihad (holy war). Yes, Allahu akbar!

Please note that Maj. Hasan is not indicative of the preponderant peace-loving Muslims who live among us. As with most people, there’s usually that one percent that cause all the trouble.

One percent of a billion or more peaceful Muslims means there are a million or more who aren’t peaceful but are ready, willing and able to do what Maj. Hasan has done.

And that’s all Mr. Buchanan was trying to get across, only some failed to see the big picture.

As a final note, I hope some of your readers will be more careful about what they have to say to us war veterans. I served in the Korean War.

We’re kinda sensitive to demeaning, patronizing and misinformed comments that belittle our sacrifices that have not only protected their rights of free speech but all of their rights.

Until they’ve been there and done that, as Craig Buchanan has, they need to be more judicious in what they have to say and how they say it.

Philip C. Shivell

Walla Walla



fatherof5 says...

I respect that the tone of this letter is civil and that the writer is attempting to bridge a perceived gap in understanding. I get that, and that's great. He even emphasizes that the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving. And we are reminded not to forget the sacrifices of our veterans, even on those occasions when we disagree with their politics. So that's all great.

But oh my goodness, do people really and truly believe this stuff about Muslims imposing Sharia Law on our Constitutional rights and infiltrating our school boards and libraries? Where is this happening?

Of course, we do have one U.S. congressman who is a Muslim. He is from that great bastion of Sharia Law now known as Minnesotastan. Did you hear that in Duluthibekistan, they've got Lutherans chopping off people's hands just for stealing a plate of lefse? Really! I saw it in an email.

Okay, I'm done. Let's just keep it real.

Posted 15 August 2013, 10:25 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

Your letter hits the nail on the head - especially - the Fort Hood massacre in which the government had monitored this Jihadist for over 2 years and didn't want to offend anyone by intruding on the relationship between the correspondents being Muslims. Then to totally offend the entire military and victims families making this tragedy a "work place violence" judgment. This is just one example of the total failure of this administration to adhere to the laws and justice in America. Not only has the Jihadist been getting a paycheck but the wounded cannot even get medical care provided by the terrorist situation. What a pathetic day in the Good Ole US of A.

I also see where some already think that Sharia Law is something out of a coloring book. It seems that there have been acts of Sharia Law already committed in the United States - daughters being murdered for falling out of line with Sharia Law - and I'm sure there are others that haven't really been brought to public attention yet.

Posted 16 August 2013, 11:05 a.m. Suggest removal

VinoTinto says...

NamVet: Your comments always get in the way of more meaningful content.

Posted 16 August 2013, 3:24 p.m. Suggest removal

VinoTinto says...

When the Tea Party quits being overly critical, disrespectful and racist to THEE President of the United States, then maybe I'll consider NEVER commenting on the Holy Word of a veteran. Are you serious? Please return to reality!

Posted 16 August 2013, 11:32 a.m. Suggest removal

ImJustSayin says...

Have examples to back up your charges against the Tea Party?

Posted 16 August 2013, 12:49 p.m. Suggest removal

downhillracer says...

Here ya go, I can find about 486,000 more for ya.

Posted 16 August 2013, 2:13 p.m. Suggest removal

fatherof5 says...

So, downhillracer, I just watched the video. Are you suggesting there is a disrespectful, and perhaps even racist, component to the Tea Party?

I've only come across about 483,000 examples of this, but you say there are 486,000? lol

How can this be news to anyone?

Next you will tell me that the 100 most popular conspiracy theories about our Jeramiah Wright-loving Christian/Muslim, Kenyan, Socialist (but in bed with the corporations), terrorist president are not all true, and that the irrational hysteria about Obama has nothing to do with the non-stop repetition of well-crafted talking points by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Republican politicians.

Posted 16 August 2013, 4:57 p.m. Suggest removal

PearlY says...

Seriously? ANYBODY who criticizes Obama or even blesses someone who criticizes him is a racist? There were certainly a few racist shots in that bunch (although whether they were in any way related to Tea Party activities is impossible to know), but most of them were just disapproving. And what is "overly" critical? Hitler comparisons aren't my thing, but they've been used against every president since WWII.

Somehow I doubt you or fatherof5 were at all distressed by what he calls the "irrational hysteria" about Bush during his term. Maybe you and he even participated in it.

This constant refrain of racism against anyone who expresses disapproval of Obama's policies has accomplished only one thing, and I don't think it's a good thing. It's trivialized the charge of racism and taken much of the sting out.

Posted 21 August 2013, 3:40 p.m. Suggest removal

VinoTinto says...

Honestly??? They're everywhere!!! I just went to the internet to grab an example and was overwhelmed by what I could choose from. What a motley looking group of disgusting individuals. A bunch of bottom feeders, for sure!

Posted 16 August 2013, 3:22 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

You have the Rights of the First Amendment - Thank a Veteran.

The majority posting are the most pathetic lot of miscreants to be in Walla Walla or in America!

Posted 17 August 2013, 8:45 a.m. Suggest removal

VinoTinto says...

Based on your logic, only veterans make contributions to society, freedom, and our GDP? That is the most ego-centric comment I've ever heard!

Posted 19 August 2013, 4:32 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

Maybe you should take a course on comprehension like a couple of your cronies who has nothing to post but ignorance.

Posted 21 August 2013, 3:35 p.m. Suggest removal

VinoTinto says...

If we all had your intellect NamVet the wheel would not have been invented yet.

Posted 26 August 2013, 4:41 p.m. Suggest removal

fatherof5 says...

Namvet, earlier this week a Marine vet who lost his leg in Iraq was booed by Christians when he spoke at a city council meeting in San Antonio. He is gay and was speaking in support of a city ordinance that would protect gay people from discrimination.

Mr. Shivell's letter advised people to be "careful what they say to us war veterans" and you seem to echo that sentiment above. Is it safe to assume that you believe people should be sensitive and respectful to veterans even when the vet is gay and standing up for gay rights? Just asking. (Here's [the link][1] to the story.)

[1]: http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/...

Posted 17 August 2013, 10:10 a.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

I'm am saying that there is no place in America to degrade or condemn a veteran serving his country to protect the freedom for one and all.

Posted 17 August 2013, 4:05 p.m. Suggest removal

fatherof5 says...

Okay, namvet, I'm glad the principle applies on both sides. Also, I assume we both agree that our men and women in uniform deserve our support and gratitude as they are serving and also when they come home. They deserve both the governmental services they were promised, as well as our thanks for the risks they took and sacrifices they - and often their families - have made. I think we are in agreement here. (I would add that I have an elevated level of respect for firemen, policemen, and teachers, who also serve our society in sacrificial ways -- different from the military, but still honorable.)

So, if we agree on that (the military part, at least), then it's easy to say we should show respect when a veteran is arguing for more funding for military families or more psychological or VA services at home. That's easy too.

What do we do if a veteran argues for segregated schools or raising the income tax rates to 75% across the board? What if - like in these extreme examples - their argument doesn't really relate to their military service and we think their argument is really harmful or offensive?

They are still veterans, but can we disagree? Can we disagree loudly if they offend us? Can we boo like the Christians booed the Marine in San Antonio, or the Republicans booed the gay solder - speaking live and in uniform from a war zone - during the 2012 debates?

Speaking for myself, when I disagreed with Mr. Buchanan's original letter, my response had nothing to do with his military service. I wasn't really aware of it or considered it relevant to the subject. My focus was on what I considered to be three really offensive implications that: (1) some of our fellow Americans - who happen to be Muslim - should be disallowed from certain jobs....or (2) that we shouldn't invite foreign exchange students here from Muslim countries...or (3) the crazy notion that our president - our Commander in Chief - is a Christian killer.

I'm not sure how my strong disagreement - and that of others - became demeaning to a war veteran, as the letter above describes. I honor war veterans for their service. But I deplore actions and words that reek of bigotry and ethnocentrism - and that's what I was responding to.

Posted 17 August 2013, 6:09 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

fatherof5 - This is a very nice dissertation but I was posting to context of the letter as written.

If you check some of the above posts (yours included), they deterred from the context of the letter, condemning and degrading the letter writer. The convoluted attempt at changing the make-up of the letter was attrocious. There was no mention of a political affiliation even mentioned but ignorance was in order.

Also checking your post and some that you have submitted in the past you seem to have a vivid infatuation of Christians inciting violence. Are you insinuating that all Christians incite violence? Are Christians the only people who create violence? If you deplore racism and bigotry are you knocking on the door of hypocrisy?

Very interesting?

Posted 19 August 2013, 11:15 a.m. Suggest removal

fatherof5 says...

Oh, namvet. Sigh. If you can find evidence of my vivid infatuation with Christians inciting violence, then you are a better reader of my writing than I am. I am a Christian, by the way, but I believe my only references to this subject have been to say that no one religion can claim purity when it comes to violence.

Posted 19 August 2013, 4:07 p.m. Suggest removal

downhillracer says...

Sigh, indeed. I mean, ".. If you deplore racism and bigotry are you knocking on the door of hypocrisy?"

What is "vet" trying to infer? Yeah, I can't tell either.

This, coming from the crowd that shriek how their 1st Amendment rights are being infringed upon when called out for expressing their righteous indignation of immigrants, gays, muslims, etc.

I'm surprised he didn't shout "Benghazi" on more time..

Posted 19 August 2013, 5:04 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

downhillracer - I also understand why you moved back to a small town - couldn't handle it in a big city. Maybe you should try moving to the country like Canada.

Posted 20 August 2013, 5:52 p.m. Suggest removal

downhillracer says...

Hey, that's a great idea. Maybe I can borrow Ted Cruzs' renounced citizenship. In typical fashion, someone who disagrees with you is invited to "love it or leavt it". But you're right, I could only handle the 'big city' for 30 years or-so.

Posted 21 August 2013, 10:59 a.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

fatherof5 - You got it - when any mention of racism or bigotry comes up your normal reply states different acts of violence by Christians as that is the only religion referenced as a rebuttal. With all the religions in the world when one references only one (Christians) makes it rather interesting? Wouldn't you say?

It's also interesting how these comments have taken a 180 to the context of the letter.

Posted 20 August 2013, 6:31 a.m. Suggest removal

fatherof5 says...

Okay, I where you are coming from. If you (or someone else) implies that Islam is a religion of violence and extremism, and if my counter-argument is that it is historically no different than other religions in that respect, I have chosen (a couple times???) to highlight Christianity because I think it is the religion that you or whomever would be most likely to think is "better" than Islam.

I could just as easily point to examples of Jewish extremism, but the point I'm trying to make is that there are - and have been - fanatics in all religions. We shouldn't blame the whole religion (i.e. Islam, Christianity, or Judaism) for the nut jobs. Since my guess is that you think Christianity is more peaceful than Islam, that is why I would choose Christianity to point out as also having flawed followers. Make sense?

Realistically, these are tough times for a number of Islamic nations in the Middle East and North Africa. One could easily point to the first half of the 20th century as a bad time for many Christian nations. It seems to go in cycles.

Posted 20 August 2013, 6:26 p.m. Suggest removal

NewInWW says...

With respect, Christianity, Islam and Judaism - the three major mono-theistic religions are (well maybe the Jews trail a bit) drenched in blood. Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Confucians, etc. not so much.

Posted 20 August 2013, 9:24 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

fatherof5 - Thank you - and one can point to multiple areas of violence in the world today.

Posted 21 August 2013, 7:15 a.m. Suggest removal

downhillracer says...

"Namvet" only supports First Amendment rights for those thoughts and beliefs of his own. I don't refer to those with opposing viewpoints as "miscreants" or any of the other biased, bigoted measures. I'm sad for their choice to remain ill-informed and willfully misinformed. A mind is most functional when open.

Posted 17 August 2013, 11:16 a.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

Your ignorance is overwhelming. Take a drive to a Veterans Memorial and let me know the preferences of entry to the cemetery for the last entombment. It doesn't matter what race, ethnic or political mind set you have. If you read your post above and insert yourself into the analogy you will have it right. Your a very troubled individual.

Posted 17 August 2013, 4:11 p.m. Suggest removal

downhillracer says...

I'm only troubled trying to make sense of your ramblings and tee-tottering hypocrisy.

Posted 17 August 2013, 8:20 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

That's OK - I understand - when you have comprehension deficit you have a difficult issue of trying to post a credible response!

Posted 19 August 2013, 11 a.m. Suggest removal

JustWondering says...

Using one's status as a 'vet' is about as valid as using one's status as an academic or a Christian or an educator to validate one's access to the truth. My husband is a vet and he does not believe he enlisted in 1967 and put his life on the line in Vietnam because he was protecting those of us in the United States from losing our constitutional rights. He paid attention in High School and knew the conflict was between the north and the south with economics motivating US troop support for the south. I see young people today (my son's age) enlisting because they need the cradle to grave support the military provides. Yes - being killed or badly injured physically and mentally should be a consideration. And those individuals so impacted have all my sympathy. I gratefully support the portion of my taxable income that goes towards their treatment and support of families.

Posted 21 August 2013, 6:43 p.m. Suggest removal

Iopine says...

JustWondering - not arguing with you but when you enlist in the military service you take an oath to serve and uphold the constitution of the United States. Also, not all enlisted personnel are as enlightened as your husband to find what out the what, why and where of a war or conflict that they might be involved in. My posting was of the demeaning nature of some of the comments in the previous posts.

Posted 22 August 2013, 2:57 p.m. Suggest removal

Log in to comment