I've never written a word about him. Prior to this entry, if you did a search of "Naser Abdo" of this site, you would have gotten this message:
Here's the screen snap.
Now if you do that search now, you should have 1 result, this entry.
Two hours ago, I was going into the e-mails for something specific and saw all these e-mails with Naser Abdo's name in the title. I read the first ones and even replied to the actual first e-mail which insisted I had written of Naser Abdo. That man had replied back by the time I gave up trying to read all the e-mails on this topic. He writes that he Googled The Common Ills and Naser Abdo and found I had repeatedly written of him.
No. Here's a screen snap of Google with those terms.
All those results? They aren't anything I've written. They're the headlines to a link that appeared today on the right hand side of this site where our permalinks run up and down. Specifically, they are Iraq Veterans Against the War's announcement on him. We'll put that in right now and then come back to what I did or didn't write:
IVAW Statement on Naser Abdo Arrest
Abdo is not now and has never been a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War.
In August 2010, IVAW supported his application for Conscientious Objector status to reflect our commitment to protecting G.I. Rights for all service members and access to a fair C.O. application process in accordance with Army Regulation 600-43 and DoD Directive 1300.06. In October, IVAW publicized a statement by Abdo condemning Islamophobia. Finally, in November 2010, Abdo offered his support at Ft. Campbell to SPC Jeff Hanks, whose own battle with combat-related trauma earned him the support of IVAW’s Operation Recovery Campaign.
IVAW has not been in contact with Naser Abdo since that time.
As we await additional information on the details of Abdo’s arrest, IVAW reiterates its commitment to non-violence, as outlined in our 2009 Resolution on Non-Violent and Peaceful Actions. Per the organization’s mission, IVAW supports the health and safety of all American troops, and never condones the threat or use of violence against military or civilian establishments or individuals.
That's IVAW. I never wrote of Naser Abdo. Why? Honestly, I felt he was using a tragedy.
We didn't use that tragedy or any other to point a finger at Muslims. Individuals are responsible for their actions. Someone going on a killing spree is someone with issues and I wouldn't consider any of those issues to be either a strong grasp of reality or a firm belief in a religion. There's a tragedy that took place in Oslo. We didn't write about that. We're not Danny Schechter using a tragedy to work out his hatred towards White people.
We don't play that game here. I think it's tacky as well as irresponsible. And I don't do tacky. (I've been called irresponsible many times, however.) A tragedy is a tragedy. It doesn't need to be politicized. But there's always a group of assholes on one side or the other willing to grab on to an issue and try to make it say something that it really doesn't say.
Right now with Debbie Wasserman Schultz screeching "DICTATORSHIP!" one day and something worse the next at the GOP, I'm honestly wondering where this ends? I think there's a chance the tangent may end in violence. Weren't we supposed to be alarmed by the 'tone' not all that long ago? But now Debbie's screeching? Like a Holler Monkey? About Republicans.
If some Republican leader is attacked, we won't say, "I told you so!" Because whomever decides to use violence decides to use it. We're responsible for our own actions. If a Republican is injured or killed, I won't say (or screech), "Debbie Wasserman Schultz, it's blood on your hands!" It won't be, it will be blood on the hands of whomever does an attack.
And we won't use Little Debbie, as disgusting as she is (and, yes, she is tacky) to score political points should violence take place.
Naser Abdu struck me as someone using a very tragic event, a crime, to score political points. That he was supposedly on 'my side' didn't change my disgust with his actions.
This is the first time I've written of him. I'd still be ignoring him were it not for the non-stop e-mails telling me I've written of him. None of you can quote anything I supposedly wrote about him so that should have been the first clue that you were (a) confused, (b) mistaken or (c) misinterpreting the results from Google.
Since I am writing about him, I will note that he's supposedly confessed to wanting to do an attack on Fort Hood. I don't know the details, I don't want to know the details. If he has confessed to what he's said to, then he has some serious issues. And those issues may include delusions. Meaning his confession could be nothing but a cry for help. I have no idea. I don't know him. But if this is a case you plan to follow, do try to remember that there may be some insanity involved and, if so, Naser Abdo is not going to make a very credible witness. That includes when he's testifying against himself. Most judges (I would hope all) know how to judge such testimony (even when attorneys do not always know how to handle it). Reporters?
Reporters are about having the 'big story' of the day. So if you follow this trial or story, remember that and remember that things will get hyped to hold interest. I don't know him, he may be innocent. He may have confessed and be innocent. It is possible. Again, his confession could be a cry for help.
Having noted that, I'm going to repeat: We didn't cover him. He didn't interest me because I found him (and others like him) tacky. When there's a tragedy, you don't rush forward before facts are known to pimp your little "Oh and that's how they are on the other side! Let me tell you . . ."
No. Don't. Just shut up. Seriously.
And although the right may end up having a field day with Naser Abdo (he self-checked out of the military, went AWOL and was or attempted to be a resister), the left has it's tacky side as well. I've already noted that Danny Schechter only found something other than South Africa to write about when he could tell you that Oslo revealed a lot about those kind of White people he hates.
It really is amazing how tacky some people are, how willing to use a tragedy to advance a political agenda. When a tragedy takes place, only the ambulance chasers try to score from it. It used to seem that was just lawyers and tabloid journalists. These days the category has expanded many times over. And it encourages the sort of hate and ignorance that is also useful when selling illegal wars.
It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)
Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4477. Tonight it is [PDF format warning] still 4477.
The e-mail address for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org.
i hate the war