America was attacked by Islamic Jihad terror November 5, 2009. U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan, incredibly serving on active duty in good standing, obeying his faith, in the name of Hamas and to the glory of allah, attacked patriotic American military personnel at Fort Hood, Texas. Led by President Obama, the Army incredibly called the attack “workplace violence.” Go ahead and speculate on President Obama’s motives (the international diminishing of America, for example). The Army (in fairness the entire United States Department of Defense) is all in for wall to wall political correctness. Never mind the attack killed 13 and wounded 32 before Hasan was shot, an Army General echoing the attitude of the Department of Defense (and much of Government) bemoaned the attack as a “serious setback for diversity.”
Last week, nearly four years after the attack, the military trial of Hasan commenced. The results of a case dominated for four years by political correctness are devastating.
Hasan did not just admit to the killings and devastation, he proudly proclaimed it as a victory in the Islamic war on civilization. Hasan has long declared his commitment to jihad learned from then Imam Anwar al-Awlaki at the Falls Church VA Mosque. al-Awlaki was never charged but he tutored three of the 19 terrorists prior to the 911 attack on America. He was never charged as the Bush Administration (to be kind) was slow in seeing the domestic reality of many imams—especially al-Awlaki—running anti-American Mosques.
Knowing his time was running our and committed to do more for the cause of Jihad, al-Awlaki emigrated before the end of 2002 and turned up in Yemen in 2005 where he became the top leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).
Prior to his November 2009 terrorist attack at Fort Hood, Hasan had numerous email exchanges with al-Awlaki. In the meantime, his performance ratings were so low he should have never been promoted. All along the Army prized Major Hasan as evidence of their commitment and progress to diversity.
The Army will not let him plead guilty or proclaim, as he wishes, he is supporting the Taliban. Make no mistake, we will watch political correctness reign throughout this travesty of a trial. In the end Hasan will be happy, the Taliban will be happy, AQAP will be happy and the Army will be happy. They will never have to utter Islamic terror or Jihad and they will get a conviction on more than 40 counts of “workplace violence.” Could there be any problems with that?
Well yes. There is the mistreatment and abuse the victims and surviving families have suffered from the Army and President Obama. Here is the shameful story from Front Page Magazine. This will leave you outraged. You’re and activist? Call you congressman.
No Justice for Victims of Terrorist Nidal Hasan
“I hear someone yell ‘Allahu akbar,’” Sergeant Shawn Manning told Army Times. “Usually something bad is going to follow after that, so I look up at him and he started shooting. He probably fired five or six shots before he shot me in the chest.”
Manning, a veteran of two deployments in Iraq, was referring to Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the U.S. Army psychiatrist who gunned down 13 and wounded 32 at Fort Hood, Texas, in November 2009. Nearly four years later the case is finally coming to trial but it is already clear that Major Hasan received more preferential treatment than his victims.
Hasan is still in the Army and retains his rank of major. The Army is still paying Hasan his full salaryand has received more than $278,000 since his arrest in 2009. The Army is also taking care of the paralyzing injuries Hasan sustained in the gun rampage. That was before Hasan shot the unarmed Sergeant Alonzo Lunsford once in the head and six times in the body. Lunsford played dead and then fled the building but Hasan chased him down and shot him in the back. The bullet is still there but Lunsford told reporters that the Army refused to cover an operation to remove it, and docked his pay when he was undergoing treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.
“We don’t get passes the way Major Hasan got passes,” Lunsford told the New York Times. “Each one of us has gotten a raw deal somewhere down the line.” Shawn Manning still carries a bullet in his back and fights for the pay he lost due to the Army’s ruling that Hasan’s attack was not terrorism, therefore the wounds were not related to combat.
Hasan had been emailing terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki about the prospect of killing infidel American soldiers, and Hasan did everything but take out a two-minute ad on the Super Bowl to announce his jihadist intentions. True to form, he yelled “Allahu akbar,” before killing 13 people, more than twice as many victims as the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. On his website, Anwar al-Awlaki was orgasmic with joy that Hasan had done his duty. Even so, the Army refused to call Hasan’s killing spree terrorism, gun violence or a hate crime. Rather, the government proclaimed the mass murder spree a case of “workplace violence.” The trial is taking the same course.
Hasan, handling his own defense, claims he was acting to protect the Taliban, the Islamist forces currently battling U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Col. Tara Osborn, the Army’s replacement for judge Col. Gregory Gross, ruled that Hasan cannot make that claim in court. Col. Osborn also barred prosecutors from using the emails Hasan exchanged with Anwar al-Awlaki. Those also constitute evidence that the government and military knew about Hasan’s terrorist intentions and did nothing to stop him.
Major Nidal Hasan faces 13 charges of premeditated murder and 32 charges of attempted premeditated murder. If convicted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice he would face the death penalty but the chances that he would be executed are virtually zero. The U.S. Army has not executed an active-duty soldier since 1961, and the process is complicated.
Fort Hood’s commanding authority would have to affirm any death sentence for Hasan, and that would launch automatic appeals in two military courts. In the event that they upheld the sentence, Hasan could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Further, any military death sentence must be approved by the President of the United States.
President Barack Obama’s first response to Hasan’s mass murder was brief, low key, and failed to ascribe any responsibility to Islamic terrorism. “We cannot fully know what leads a man to do such a thing,” the president said. Such breathtaking denial soon became official policy. The Obama administration’s Department of Defense issued Protecting the Force: Lessons from Fort Hood, which contains not a single reference to jihad or jihadists. Its only mention of “Islamic” is an endnote reference to “Countering Violent Islamic Extremism,” a 2007 FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin.
Rudy Giuliani, mayor of New York during the 9/11 attacks, recently testifiedthat “the elevation of political correctness over sound investigative judgment certainly explains the failure to identify Maj. Hasan as a terrorist.” The Obama administration’s description of Hasan’s act as “workplace violence,” Giuliani testified, wasn’t just preposterous but dangerous. The Fort Hood survivors know that is true.
Major Nidal Hasan took 13 lives but will likely retain his own. That may inspire other Islamic terrorists to embed themselves in the Army, which further places U.S. troops in peril. Based on the way Hasan’s case has unfolded, troops victimized by such terrorism can expect little help from the U.S. military and its commander in chief. So the troops might heed the counsel of Sgt. Shawn Manning. Whenever they hear somebody yell “Allahu akbar,” something bad is going to follow. To avoid death or injury, their best option could be to deal with it right then, by any means necessary.