Search This Blog

Saturday, August 28, 2010

Pentagon Released Report on Fort Hood Shooting

The primary problem with Keynesian Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. - British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan killed 14 and wounded 30 in his jihad at Fort Hood in November. According to the Defense Department, the incident wasn't a terrorist attack but merely a case of workplace violence. This is typical of government efforts to paper over the growing domestic Muslim threat.

On Aug. 18, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates released the final Fort Hood follow-on review, in which he proposed initiatives to "mitigate internal threats, ensure force protection, enable emergency response and provide care for victims and families." Radical Islam is nowhere to be found.

The Washington Times reports that some passages hint at the nature of what took place, such as the need to clarify the rules for religious accommodation "to help commanders distinguish appropriate religious practices from those that might indicate a potential for violence or self-radicalization." PowerPoint briefings that describe the duty of jihad against the unbelievers - as Maj. Hasan presented to a military audience - probably don't fall in the "appropriate" category. The report also calls for increased counterintelligence awareness of the potential for linkage to international terrorism. For example, if someone already showing signs of radicalization exchanges 18 e-mails with a Yemen-based al Qaeda field commander over six months, as Maj. Hasan did, it's probably worth looking into more closely.

A vaguely worded passage recommends firming up the process whereby individuals act as "ecclesiastical endorsers of chaplains." These are people who vouch for those who serve in the military chaplaincy. The original Fort Hood incident report found that "DoD standards for denying requests for recognition as an ecclesiastical endorser of chaplains may be inadequate." A majority of the Muslim chaplains in the U.S. military were validated by the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, part of Cordoba University in Leesburg, founded by Taha Jabir Al-Awani, president of the Fiqh Council of North America. A fatwa from this institution on Muslims serving in the U.S. military states, "We abide by every law of this country except those laws that are contradictory to Islamic law." In other words, Shariah is supreme to the officer's oath to the Constitution. An endorsement from this group should be considered a red flag, not qualification to serve.

The Defense Science Board currently is examining "behavioral indicators of violence and radicalization," and the report recommends a better force protection reporting system for suspicious behavior. This is where the system breaks down. Maj. Hasan didn't slip under the radar because of an inadequate reporting system or lack of indicators that he was a problem. He escaped strong scrutiny solely because he was Muslim.

In the prevailing politically correct climate, few officers want to risk reporting anything to do with a Muslim for fear of official retaliation. Those who report Islamic extremists in the ranks, or even try to give poor fitness reports to troops who happen to be Muslim, are more likely to be the subject of investigation or suffer administrative harassment. The force cannot be protected until military members are convinced they can report on Muslims without placing their careers in jeopardy.

The latest Fort Hood report fails to face the Islamic problem head-on. It reinforces the generally understood rule that Muslims are a privileged class in the American military who - figuratively speaking - can get away with murder.

On a similar note counter terrorism expert Michael Scheuer told Newsmax Magazine that construction of a mosque near ground zero would be viewed as a “symbol of victory” by Muslim extremists — and calls New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg a “windbag” for voicing support for the mosque.

Scheuer, who headed the CIA’s secret unit charged with tracking Osama bin Laden, also says al-Qaida will definitely use a nuclear weapon if they obtain one, and warns that if Israel attacks Iran the Iranians will use their “terrorist infrastructure” to launch attacks in the United States. To read more click here.

Both of these examples illustrate the political elite’s unwillingness to confront the issue of radical Islam and Islamists. These elites have no problem demonizing Christians but will go out of their way to recognize the threat from radical Islam. Even after the murder of 14 soldiers at Fort Hood by a declared jihadist President Obama refused to recognize this fact. As Americans across the nation tuned into live TV for the President’s reaction to the massacre of American troops on U.S. soil, they encountered a strange scene. Speaking at the conclusion of a conference on Native American issues, Obama opened his speech by good-naturedly praising the “extraordinary” conference, giving a bizarre “shout out” to “Dr. Joe Medicine Crow,’ and declaring that continuing the conference’s business was “top priority” for his administration. Then, he gave a few minutes of eerily dispassionate lip service to the victims of the “horrible incident” at Fort Hood before finishing his remarks by praising the results of the conference. My God, “top priority” for a Native American Conference when 14 U.S soldiers were just murdered and 30 wounded on U.S. soil. This man is the Commander-in-Chief. Where was his priority?

In a similar incident turned heads at the May 17, 2010 signing of the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act, with his ludicrous comments on the Islamic terrorists beheading of Daniel Pearl, a Wall Street Journal reporter by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed . Obama told reporters, “Obviously, the loss of Daniel Pearl was one of those moments that captured the world’s imagination because it reminded us of how valuable a free press is.” No, Barak it had nothing to do with freedom of the press. They beheaded Daniel Pearl because he was an American and a Jew and they we Islamic radicals. Today Daniel Pearls widow stands firmly against the building of the mosque at 51 Park Place.

The intelligentsia and political elite is near unanimous that the only possible reason for opposition towards radical Islam is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration's pretense that we are at war with nothing more than "violent extremists" of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour.

As Glenn Beck so often says, “The truth will set you free, but it will make you miserable first.”

No comments:

Post a Comment