Posted on 04/25/2010 6:04:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Obama administration recently issued a report from the Defense Department on the Fort Hood shootings of last November. The report has sparked controversy in Washington. On Capitol Hill, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Sue Collins (R-Maine) are demanding more documents from the Pentagon.
Lieberman chairs the Senate’s Homeland Security Committee where Collins is the ranking member. Both senators sharply criticized the administration for its failure to turn over documents on the handling of Major Nidal Hasan. Lieberman and Collins are now issuing subpoenas to enforce their call for the documents.
The Pentagon report on the Fort Hood shootings was a whitewash. It never mentioned radical Islam or noted the religious motivation of the Army psychiatrist who killed fourteen people at Fort Hood in Texas in a shooting rampage last November.
We now know that Major Hasan had a history of radical jihadist statements and that he was allowed to get away with marginal or even unsatisfactory performance for years. Political correctness, in this case, allowed a Muslim zealot to preach jihad and to threaten “infidels” with retribution.
Sen. Lieberman has called for an “independent, bi-partisan congressional investigation” of the shootings. We need one, since it’s obvious that the Pentagon is not going to investigate itself over this appalling terrorist attack on the homeland.
Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin knows something about political correctness in the military. Gen. Boykin, a highly-decorated combat veteran was dragged through the mill by the liberal media back in 2003 for expressing his Christian beliefs in Christian churches. They charged the general was calling for a Christian crusade against the Muslims.
“I hope he’s not long for this world,” said NPR’s Nina Totenberg on WUSA’s Inside Washington TV talk show. When fellow panelists, mostly liberals, protested, asking whether Totenberg rally wanted to issue a fatwa on the offending general, she quickly backtracked. She said: “in his job, in his job, please, please, in his job.” Well, that’s reassuring. Totenberg only wanted the heroic general fired. She wanted him removed from any role in directing the war on terror. She didn’t want him beheaded.
Major TV networks denounced Gen. Boykin as a “Holy Warrior.” They ridiculed his Evangelical Christian faith on prime-time television.
Compare that treatment with what we see in the treatment of Nidal Hasan. This man yelled “Allahu Akbar” (Arabic for “God is great!”) even as he squeezed the trigger in the worst case of terrorism here since September 11th. Yet, the media is very hesitant to demand accountability of the military brass. Army Chief of Staff General Casey made the rounds of TV talk shows the first Sunday after Hasan’s shootings. He said it would be “a tragedy” if the Army’s diversity was a casualty of the Fort Hood murders.
How could Hasan be allowed to spew anti-American and anti-Christian comments for years? Where was the enforcement of the oath—taken by all members of our all-volunteer military—to defend the Constitution against “all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
We now know that Hasan’s emails to radical American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al Awlaki were intercepted by U.S. intelligence. But for some as yet unexplained reason, Hasan’s contacts with this known terrorist leader did not result in Hasan’s arrest, or at the very least, a serious investigation into his activities. Fourteen dead Americans are victims of this failure to take timely, effective action.
Awlaki has taken to taunting President Obama: “His administration tried to portray the operation of brother Nidal Hasan as an individual act of violence by an individual. The administration practiced the control on the leak of information concerning the operation in order to cushion the reaction of the American public.”
We cannot wait for the media to probe this case. We need a full congressional investigation to get to the bottom of this story—before some jihadist in a “sleeper cell” is activated and we see a repeat of this horror on our own shores. It is literally a matter of life and death.
It appears in this instance that Major Hasan was allowed to get away with disloyal statements and treasonous conduct for years because he fit into someone’s erroneous idea of diversity. All Americans, and especially all members of our all-volunteer military, have a right to expect that treason and terror will be dealt with quickly and strictly. Political correctness in this case, was fatal.
Unfortunately and sadly true.
General Boykin’s a great guy.. here’s what he’s called to do now a days:
http://kingdomwarriors.net/
This incident isn’t a priority with the president—it’s about our soldiers being murdered, it’s a terrorist incident, it makes yet another Muslim look bad, and it can’t be blamed on Bush. Nothing to interest Obama.
This was one of those “investigations” where some General decided what he wanted to please 0bamao, and passed the word to some over-zealous underling.
Political Correctness rules in this country, including within our armed services. Besides, the Army is not about to admit it's own malfeasance in this case. It comes from the top down.
the army’s learned nothing since ft hood
because they dissed,
disinvited, the rev franklin graham.
political correctness rules the u.s. army,
at the expense of our freedom.
Two of the Ten Commandments were broken here when our military officers raised their hand and swore to defend the Constitution:
** Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain.
** Thou shalt not bear false witness.
So are you saying they should not defend the constitution? It is their duty to do so
It was the Pentagon who disinvited Rev Franklin. You can not blame in on one branch of the military
What more do we need to know than that this murdering jihadist was a member of O’s transition team.
ok.
so what has the pentagon learned from ft hood?
No, he's saying that they're NOT defending the Constitution, thus, they're taking the Lord's name in vain AND bearing false witness. Is that right, wintertime?
No, he’s saying that they’re NOT defending the Constitution, thus, they’re taking the Lord’s name in vain AND bearing false witness. Is that right, wintertime?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Exactly!
How could Hasan be allowed to spew anti-American and anti-Christian comments for years? Where was the enforcement of the oath—taken by all members of our all-volunteer military—to defend the Constitution against “all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
The bold is the first sentence in wintertime's post and is is part of the 10th paragraph in the article. I stay by that he is saying they should not defend the constitution
Barack Akbar.
They held up their hand and swore before God that they would defend the Constitution. They did not, and are not, defending the Constitution, therefore, they broke two important Commandments:
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Thou shalt not bear false witness
They should honor their oath before God and defend the Constitution.
I have YET to get a CLEAR UNDERSTANDING of just WHO posted
HASAN to HOOD Given his statements of JIHAD and the CONSTITUTION....................
THIS ALONE SUGGESTS OTHUGO had SOMETHING TO DO with those orders..............
The fact is much of what was happening, happened after 9/11 and that was under President Bush!!!
Bush and his Administration always were claiming that a number of terrorist incidents that occurred were "isolated incidents" and not tied to "terrorism" but rather various individual cases NOT tied to Islamic Terrorists!
Under Obama, this blatant lie is continuing with a vengeance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.