November 10, 2009
Failing to Connect the Terror Dots—-Political Correctness Run Amuck
I just watched President Obama’s talk to an audience assembled at Fort Hood to honor the memory of thirteen service members killed by army Major Nidal Malik Hasan.
Given the legal complexities yet to play out at Hasan’s upcoming trial, the president probably struck the proper tone. However, he avoided the implications of failed intelligence by responsible agencies and why, given the shooter’s history and past terrorist sympathy, no one connected the dots.
Both the FBI and military intelligence were aware that the major was communicating on a frequent basis with a rabidly-militant Muslim cleric in Yemen and yet choose to downplay the connections.
But why? Has “diversity” and “sensitivity” toward Muslims become something that has trumped common sense – not only in the nation’s corporate sector, the mainstream media, university campuses and government, but now within the military as well?
Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, made the rounds of this past Sunday morning new shows. He sounded more like a corporate public relations flack, trying to manage a crisis, than a military man searching for the truth. Apparently operating from talking points, the General stressed the “diverse” nature of the army and spoke about the “sensitivities” involved – cautioning against “speculation.”
Political correctness was the order of the day, and not just from the army spokesman, but from mainstream media figures as well; they almost all seemed intent on making us believe Hasan was as much the victim as those he shot.
The ABC’s Diane Sawyer said on air that she wished Nidal Malik Hasan was named “smith.” And why would she wish this?
But this claim is as false as it is slanderous. The view that America is a nation of rabid Islam-hating bigots, with a hair-trigger for violence, is simply fiction. Even after the 9/11 attacks that left 3000 Americans dead at the hands of Islamic killers, with the exception of a handful of incidents nationally, there was no significant “backlash” against American Muslims. Americans have the ability to target their anger at those responsible for heinous acts, and not broader populations of innocent people.
Demonstrating the extent of the politically-correct approach in the face of what was clearly an act of Muslim extremist violence, even the celebrity television psychologist, Dr. Phil, presented the Fort Hood killer as a victim. The pop television psychologist argued that “stress” may have been the cause, along with the pressure Hasan “endured” while counseling returning service personnel. However, what appeared to send Dr. Phil over the top was a guest who happened to mention Major Hasan’s religion. Dr. Phil reacted to this revelation as if the guest had used the N-word.
But why is there reluctance to identify Major Hasan’s murder spree as the act of a Muslin fanatic? Here is a life-long Muslim who had ongoing links to Anwar al Awalaki, a well-known international terrorist figure, was someone who once gave a lecture in which he stated that infidels should be beheaded and have oil poured down their throats, once attended the same San Diego mosque as two of the 9/11 hijackers, hands out copies of the Koran shortly before the shooting, and yells “Allahu Akbar” while mowing down his victims.
Yet, the FBI has offered this mealy-mouthed assessment. “The investigation to date has not identified a motive, and a number of possibilities remain under consideration…”
So, according to this pronouncement, Nidal Malik Hasan’s religion had nothing to do with his actions. If this is true, then religion also played no role in the actions of the nineteen 9/11 terrorists, and Osama bin Laden’s devout religious beliefs are coincidental to his declared war against America and the West.
It’s time to push aside this kind of political correctness. Misplaced “sensitivity” will prove increasingly dangerous. Don’t agree? – just ask the dozens of surviving victims of Major Hasan’s deadly attack.