Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to Stand Trial in New York: Attorney General Holder Gets Some Satisfaction for Terror-Backing Democratic-Left

It's big news. From CNN, "Accused 9/11 Plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Faces New York Trial."

And perhaps a bit dangerous. From Red State, "Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to Be Sent to New York for Trial."

There have been reports in the past month about another potential terrorist attack disrupted in New York City. Bringing these high profile terrorist leaders to New York will just put a target on New York again.

Even worse, the White House is going to subject these terrorists to criminal trials in civilian courts. They will get all the due process rights of citizens in court and potentially will be able to get access to material evidence in a civilian court that could reveal intelligence we’d prefer them not to have.

But see London's Telegraph, "Analysis: New York Trial for 9/11 Mastermind Risky but Bold":

President Barack Obama's decision to put the 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on trial on American soil is risky but bold.

Courtrooms and prisons could become the target of terrorist attacks, and their localities subjected to months or years of intensified security.

Defendants will be entitled to the full constitutional protections enjoyed by average felons, while Mohammed will undoubtedly use the court as a platform from which to denounce the US, praise the Taliban and al-Qaeda and proclaim his desire for Islamic martyrdom ad nauseam.

His lawyers will argue that any incriminating evidence gathered from a man who was water-boarded 183 times and held in a secret CIA prison for three years and then three years in Guantanamo cannot be trusted.

Embarrassing details are likely to emerge of his treatment at the hands of American agents. Evidentiary requirements will also be tougher in a civilian court than the military commissions that had begun for the five alleged plotters at Guantanamo before Mr Obama ordered their suspension.

Fortunately for the prosecution, Mohammed actually admitted to al-Jazeera television that he was the prime architect of the suicide attacks on the US before he was captured in Pakistan in March 2003. So it is hard to imagine him walking free. But some of the others, the bag carriers, may in the end only face charges of material support for terrorism and could receive less-than-life sentences, prompting public outrage.

More at the link.

The most significant implication of the announcement is that the transnational alliance of America-haters will get first-hand information on America's counterterrorism and intelligence programs -- the great hope of the terror-backing neo-communist left, at home and worldwide, is that the Obama administration will continue to build a case for torture trials for former Bush administration officials.

See Andrew McCarthy, "Holder's Hidden Agenda, Cont'd ...":

This summer, I theorized that Attorney General Eric Holder — and his boss — had a hidden agenda in ordering a re-investigation of the CIA for six-year-old alleged interrogation excesses that had already been scrutinized by non-partisan DOJ prosecutors who had found no basis for prosecution. The continuing investigations of Bush-era counterterrorism policies (i.e., the policies that kept us safe from more domestic terror attacks), coupled with the Holder Justice Department's obsession to disclose classified national-defense information from that period, enable Holder to give the hard Left the "reckoning" that he and Obama promised during the 2008 campaign. It would be too politically explosive for Obama/Holder to do the dirty work of charging Bush administration officials; but as new revelations from investigations and declassifications are churned out, Leftist lawyers use them to urge European and international tribunals to bring "torture" and "war crimes" indictments. Thus, administration cooperation gives Obama's base the reckoning it demands but Obama gets to deny responsibility for any actual prosecutions.

Today's announcement that KSM and other top al-Qaeda terrorists will be transferred to Manhattan federal court for civilian trials neatly fits this hidden agenda. Nothing results in more disclosures of government intelligence than civilian trials. They are a banquet of information, not just at the discovery stage but in the trial process itself, where witnesses — intelligence sources — must expose themselves and their secrets.

Let's take stock of where we are at this point. KSM and his confederates wanted to plead guilty and have their martyrs' execution last December, when they were being handled by military commission. As I said at the time, we could and should have accommodated them. The Obama administration could still accommodate them. After all, the president has not pulled the plug on all military commissions: Holder is going to announce at least one commission trial (for Nashiri, the Cole bomber) today.

Moreover, KSM has no defense. He was under American indictment for terrorism for years before there ever was a 9/11, and he can't help himself but brag about the atrocities he and his fellow barbarians have carried out.

So: We are now going to have a trial that never had to happen for defendants who have no defense. And when defendants have no defense for their own actions, there is only one thing for their lawyers to do: put the government on trial in hopes of getting the jury (and the media) spun up over government errors, abuses and incompetence. That is what is going to happen in the trial of KSM et al.

More at Memeorandum.

See also, Blasting Caps and Dynamite, "Obama, Don't Try Guatanamo Detainees in Article III Courts!" And, Right Truth, "Coming to America ..."

Image Credit: Donatella Della Ratta, A Hussein at the White House: What the Arab world thinks about Barack Obama.

Gallup Poll: Health Coverage Not Government's Responsibility

From Gallup, "More in U.S. Say Health Coverage Is Not Gov’t. Responsibility":

More Americans now say it is not the federal government's responsibility to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage (50%) than say it is (47%). This is a first since Gallup began tracking this question, and a significant shift from as recently as three years ago, when two-thirds said ensuring healthcare coverage was the government's responsibility.

Note that President Obama's near-year long campaign for ObamaCare has actually turned the public away from government-sponsored health coverage. This is obviously not the outcome the radical leftists would have you believe, and no doubt they'll spin these results in every which way but the truth. Ed Morrissey has lots more (here), and Glenn Reynolds adds, "Americans seem to be becoming steadily more libertarian. Thank you, Barack!" (Via Memeorandum.)

Orlando Tea Party: Friends and Patriots Stand for Liberty

This is Carolyn Tackett overjoyed to meet Robert Stacy McCain for the first time. They are joined by Andrea Shea King:

Robert has a report at the American Spectator, "Tea Party Nation":

Nine months ago, commodities analyst Rick Santelli was interviewed from the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade about the stimulus-and-bailout policies of the new administration. At 8:11 am. Eastern time on Feb. 19, Santelli launched into a rant that instantly became a YouTube classic.

Turning to the commodities traders in Chicago, Santelli asked: "How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor's mortgage who has an extra bathroom and can't pay their bills?" He was answered with a chorus of jeers.

"President Obama, are you listening?" Santelli then asked. "We're thinking about having a Chicago tea party in July. All of you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I'm going to start organizing it."

Santelli didn't have to organize. His rant on CNBC inspired other Americans to emulate the spirit of the original Boston Tea Party in 1773. They spontaneously staged rallies in their communities, far from Chicago. The Tea Party movement begun that February morning has been supported by major conservative institutions -- including FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity -- but the movement itself is organic, generated by the passions of the people who turn out for the events.

More at the link.

And don't miss lots more awesome comments and pictures at Carolyn's Robert's and Andrea's.

Sleaze-Blogger E.D. Kain Interviews Despicable Libel-Blogger Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs

E.D. Kain, the dirtbag blogger who once giddily published my work at his now defunct "hardline" neoconservative portal, Neo-Constant, has an interview with Charles Johnson at the League of Ordinary Gentlemen, "The Evolution of Blogging: An Interview with Charles Johnson."

With the exception of perhaps the harebrained Conor Friedersdorf, I can't think of more perfectly suitable blogger to interview the Mad King of LGF (Charles pumps up the interview here). It turns out E.D.'s now a featured contributor at True Slant. It notes there, at his bio-blurb, that he's also a "writer at David Frum's site, New Majority" (now called the "Frum Forum," and circling the drain as I write this). Beyond his abject dishonesty and spinelessness (discussed here), E.D.'s made a name for himself with his incoherent ramblings at the Ordinary Gentlemen. He's a stream-of-consciousness smear-master who's never learned the meaning of terms like "concision" and "parsimonious." Not only that, he's an Andrew Sullivan myrmidon, which raises obvious questions of integrity (if not sanity) all by itself.

So now, with the interview of C.J. at Ordinary Gentleman, E.D.'s now gone all in, breathlessly and irreversibly, with the weasely so-called postmodern conservatives who are increasingly being revealed as mindlessly useful idiots for the radical left. A quick case in point is Andrew Sullivan, who gleefully links the interview (off a hat-tip from airhead Mother Jones blogger Kevin Drum).

And you know what? All of these folks have unsurprisingly found a consensus focal point on this gem of a libel-quote from the interview with King Charles (compete with the softball lead-in question):

At that point in time you were fairly well aligned with much of the conservative blogosphere which unified behind the war on terror. Lately that seems to have changed. More and more LGF seems to be distancing itself from the right. What’s changed? Has national security become secondary to economic issues, or does it run deeper than that?

National security is still an important issue. But the main reason I can’t march along with the right wing blogosphere any more, not to put too fine a point on it, is that most of them have succumbed to Obama Derangement Syndrome. One “nontroversy” after another, followed by the outrage of the day, followed by conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory, all delivered in breathless, angry prose that’s just wearying and depressing to read.

It’s not just the economic issues either. I’ve never been on board with the anti-science, anti-Enlightenment radical religious right. Once I began making my opinions known on issues like creationism and abortion, I realized that there just wasn’t very much in common with many of the bloggers on the right. And then, when most of them decided to fall in and support a blogger like Robert Stacy McCain, who has neo-Nazi friends, has written articles for the openly white supremacist website American Renaissance, and has made numerous openly racist statements on the record … well, I was extremely disappointed to see it, but unfortunately not surprised.

I’ve always written the truth about my opinions, and I have no intention of changing that policy now, just to fit in with a “movement” that has gone completely off the rails.

Robert Stacy McCain is currently in Orlando, Florida. He texted me today to give me the heads up on his son Jim's scuba-diva lessons at their fabulous hotel. Robert hasn't responded at his blog to the Ordinary Gentlmen smears. He's busy, mostly likely, having a fun-filled business trip, although it's possible he's not aware of the latest salvo in Charles Johnson's campaign of libel smears. Of course, Robert's replied numerous times to these scurrilous attacks before (see, "Charles Johnson's Quantum Physics"). What's interesting here is how E.D.'s essentially given Johnson's ravings the patina of credibility outside the fetid fever swamps of the LGF commentariat and of the dungeons of a few hangers-on across the neo-communist blogosphere.

For the truth is that this campaign of fabrications of Robert Stacy McCains' "racism" is actually unintelligible except among those trolling the narrow ideological confines of the radical, unhinged postmodern left. No serious writer on the right today gives these allegations credibility. (No offense, but A.J. Strata recently proved, in his attack on Robert, that he doesn't know WTF is going on, so cross him off the list of right-wing respectables).

Interestingly, the first comment at the Ordinary Gentlmen post -- no doubt from a friendly but brainless "post-mod" -- sums up perfectly the non-conservative bone fides of Charles Johnson's leftist sycophants:

My theory on LGF ... is that he was never really a conservative at all. His original understanding was that the War that began on 9/11 was ultimately a LIBERAL war, i.e., a defense of those Enlightenment values he mentions above.

There's more of that (classic) comment at the post; and notice how it's a essentially an attack on the "evil" neocons as "illiberal" -- with the added bonus of smearing the reputation of former President George W. Bush. No doubt we'd find similar rants in the totally fubar comment threads at Daily Kos.

It's worth noting that Serr8d showed his mettle with a comment there as well, where he suggested that:

Charles Johnson is a hateful, spiteful little man who uses his ‘custom-designed software’ to form and shape his hand-picked commentariat to echo his own thoughts. It’s a classic methodology to assauge his desire for positive feedback. He’s selected Robert Stacy McCain as his target du jour, and in fairness, Ordinary Gentlemen, you should give RSM an interview as well.

Indeed, in fairness, by all means.

Matthew Yglesias on Veterans Day: Unbelievably Putrid Anti-Americanism

I couldn't write about this yesterday without soiling myself in putrescence. From Matthew Yglesias, "Veterans’ Day / Armistice Day":

I sort of wish we called our November 11 observance Armistice Day like they do in other countries.

Something that I think is missing from American political culture is the thing that in Europe is taken to be the lesson of World War One, namely that a war can be bad for reasons other than it being lost. France and Britain were ultimately victorious in the war, but it was ruinous nonetheless. What was needed from the political leadership of the time was a way to avoid the war, not a way to win it. In America, though, evaluation of military endeavors is ruthlessly governed by considerations of efficacy. To lose a war, like in Vietnam, is a bad thing. But there seems to be a growing conventional wisdom that the surge has somehow redeemed Iraq and that the only thing we’re allowed to talk about with regard to Afghanistan is whether we can or will “win.”

These sentiments are so freaking off the charts that event Yglesias' own commenters took issue - and that's saying a lot, since Think Progress is simply one of the most hateful hellholes on the web.

RELATED: "Matthew Yglesias: Nidal Hasan Terrorist Threat 'Not That Big a Deal'."

Employers for a Healthy Economy - 'Skyrocket - National Ad'

The website is here.

RELATED: Noah Finley, "Oily Health Bill Fails to Build Trust":

Despite the president's "Don't worry, trust me" assurances that the reforms will deliver universal coverage with superior care and at a lower cost without disrupting current coverage, more than half of Americans aren't buying -- and it's not because they're frightened by Republican hainty tales. They know what snake oil smells like.

They don't trust the cost estimates, and for good reason. Taxpayers are being asked to swallow the incredible claim that the cost of the bill will be offset by savings gained from efficiencies and taxes on the wealthy. But as the Wall Street Journal notes, even confiscating 100 percent of the income of the truly rich won't raise enough revenue to pay for this bill. And the New York Times reports most analysts say the savings estimates are unachievable.

Big shock. Americans know this drill. In 1965, Medicare Part A was estimated to cost the nation $9 billion by 1990. Actual cost: $67 billion, according to the Cato Institute.

Similarly, in 1988, when a home health care benefit was added to Medicare, the cost was pegged at $4 billion. Actual: $10 billion. And the Medicare Part D drug benefit doubled in cost in the time it took to move from Congress to the president's desk.

Americans are also too familiar with how the federal bureaucracy works to trust that government management of care won't mean more hassles and hardship. Most Americans have had a least some contact with bureaucrats, and it's rarely pleasant. The House bill will increase the frequency and intensity of those contacts.

It sets up panels to dictate what procedures will be covered, panels to choose who can deliver the care, and panels to decide whether the treatment is necessary.

Americans are asked to trust the bureaucracy to be competent and compassionate at a time when competence and compassion can mean the difference between life and death.

Anyway they turn this bill, it still comes up looking like a first step to a federal takeover of health care.

Sarah Palin on Oprah Winfrey Show

Okay, the video's got clips of two segments from Oprah Winfrey's interview with Sarah Palin, airing Monday. At the first snippet, Palin's smart to confess that she bombed her Katie Couric interview during last year's campaign. I'm frankly trying to remember it. I have a better recollection of her stint with Charles Gibson at ABC, which wasn't the best performance either. Nevertheless, those were big league trials and Palin's now got a wealth of experience to help her prepare for a 2012 run, which is looking all but inevitable. Matthew Continetti's got an analysis, "Can Sarah Palin Make a Comeback?" (And recall that Continetti's the author of a recent, acclaimed book on Palin, The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star.)

At the second clip, Oprah asks Palin if Levi Johnston will be invited to Thanksgiving dinner:

"That's a great question because it's lovely to even think he would even consider such a thing," Palin said. "Because of course he is a part of the family ... He needs to know he is loved ... This can all work out for good, it really can. We don't have to keep going down this road of controversy and drama."

Considering how big of a prick Levi has become, I'd say Sarah Palin's practicing exemplary Christian values. It must take a lot to hold that cheery smile while mentioning the dude. I saw Johnston on Entertainment Tonight (or some other show) a couple of days ago. He's clearly got problems. All the media attention's gone to his head and he needs a good butt-kicking. But he is the father Palin's grandson, so I think she's doing right, as any good family matriarch would.

Feds Seize Four Mosques, New York Skyscraper Linked to Iranian Government

At the New York Post, "Feds Move to Seize Mosques, NYC Skyscraper Possibly Linked to Iran":

Federal prosecutors Thursday took steps to seize four U.S. mosques and a Fifth Avenue skyscraper owned by a nonprofit Muslim organization long suspected of being secretly controlled by the Iranian government.

In what could prove to be one of the biggest counterterrorism seizures in U.S. history, prosecutors filed a civil complaint in federal court seeking the forfeiture of more than $500 million in assets of the Alavi Foundation and an alleged front company.

The assets include Islamic centers in New York City, Maryland, California and Houston, more than 100 acres in Virginia, and a 36-story office tower in New York.

Seizing the properties would be a sharp blow against Iran, which has been accused by the U.S. government of bankrolling terrorism and seeking a nuclear bomb.

A telephone call and e-mail to Iran's U.N. Mission seeking comment were not immediately answered.

It is extremely rare for U.S. law enforcement authorities to seize a house of worship, a step fraught with questions about the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

The action against the Shiite Muslim mosques is sure to inflame relations between the U.S. government and American Muslims, many of whom are fearful of a backlash after last week's Fort Hood shooting rampage, blamed on a Muslim American soldier.

The mosques and the office tower will remain open while the forfeiture case works its way through court in what could be a long process. What will happen to them if the government ultimately prevails is unclear. But the government typically sells properties it has seized through forfeiture, and the proceeds are sometimes distributed to crime victims.

More background at the Guardian, "U.S. Mosques and New York Skyscraper Seized Over Iran Links":

Prosecutors claim that the foundation and the company have been engaged in money laundering, with the cash sent back to Tehran.

The move could be designed to punish the Tehran government at time when its relations with the US are already strained over Iran's alleged nuclear weapons programme.

But the Obama administration also risks incurring the anger of American Muslims if the mosques, all Shia, are seized. The takeover of mosques would also raise constitutional questions around the right of freedom to religion.

The move comes at a sensitive time, with a debate under way in the US over the loyalty of American Muslims after the shooting at Fort Hood last week. Major Nadil Malik Hasan was yesterday charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder.

The Alavi Foundation, on its website, declares its mission to be the promotion of charitable and philanthropic causes through educational, religious and cultural programmes.

"The foundation does this by making contributions to not-for-profit organisations within the United States that support interfaith harmony and promote Islamic culture and Persian language, literature and civilisation," it says.

It says it funds these activities through rent from the Fifth Avenue skyscraper, Piaget, which was built by a company owned by the Shah of Iran in 1978 and whose ownership passed to the Iranian republic after the 1979 Islamist revolution. Tax records show that the foundation earned $4.5m in rent in 2007.

New York prosecutors alleged that the foundation, through the company Assa, illegally funnelled millions in rental income back to Iran's state-owned Bank Melli, which the US claims has been involved in Tehran's alleged attempts to secure a nuclear weapon.

Plus, Bare Naked Islam, "FEDS MOVE TO SEIZE 4 MOSQUES AND NYC SKYSCRAPER OWNED BY MUSLIM GROUP."

GET READY TO SEE A LOT OF ARRESTS OF MUSLIMS, EVEN MORE RADICAL THAN THE FORT HOOD JIHADIST.

And Rusty Shackleford exclaims, "Wow. Just, wow. I mean, this is a first, right? .... Somebody in the AG's office has found himself a pair!"

Also, Atlas Shrugs, "Biggest Counterterrorism Seizures in U.S. History: Feds Seize N.Y. Skyscraper, 4 Mosques."

Obama Orders Government-Wide Investigation Into Fort Hood Massacre: Administration Won't Say Whether Nidal Hassan's Al Qaeda Ties Prompted Review

From the Wall Street Journal, "Obama Wants Probe of Hasan Intelligence":

President Barack Obama ordered a government-wide investigation into whether federal agencies, including the Pentagon and the U.S. intelligence community, properly handled information on alleged Fort Hood gunman Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan before last week's shooting that left 13 dead.

Mr. Obama originally asked the heads of the Defense Department, Federal Bureau of Investigation and U.S. intelligence agencies to conduct the inquiry during a White House meeting the day after the shooting, according to a White House official. But Mr. Obama formalized the review in a presidential memorandum Thursday.

The White House official wouldn't say whether Maj. Hasan's links to a radical imam in Yemen prompted the review, but Mr. Obama was shown copies of some of the emails the alleged shooter sent to the imam, Anwar al-Alakwi, the day of the shooting and ordered the review the following morning.

The communications between Mr. Awlaki and Maj. Hasan consisted of between 10 and 20 contacts over the past year and turned up in an intelligence sweep in a probe of Mr. Awlaki that didn't target Maj. Hasan. The imam knew three of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers and hailed Maj. Hasan as a "hero" after the Fort Hood shooting last week.

But terrorism investigators assigned to an FBI joint terrorism task force, which included a Defense Department investigator, reviewed the communications and concluded the contacts didn't merit further investigation.

According to a person familiar to the investigation, Mr. Alakwi's responses to Maj. Hasan's emails appeared restrained, indicating the imam may have been suspicious about why an U.S. Army officer was reaching out to him.

Terrorism investigators concluded that Maj. Hasan's research work as an Army psychiatrist at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and his work toward a master's degree explained why he was communicating with Mr. Awlaki.

The presidential memorandum asks Defense Secretary Robert Gates; FBI Director Robert Mueller; and Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair to identify all personnel and intelligence files relevant to the Fort Hood shooting, particularly those on Maj. Hasan.

"I directed an immediate review be initiated to determine how any such intelligence was handled, shared, and acted upon within individual departments and agencies and what intelligence was shared with others," Mr. Obama said in the memorandum.

More at the link.

Med School Confidential: Nidal Malik Hasan Long Known for Militant Islamist Views; Plus, Army Spc. Logan Burnette, 'There Was Blood Everywhere'

Now they tell us!

From CNN, "Classmates: Hasan Defended Suicide Bombings, Held Islamist Views":

Those who knew Nidal Malik Hasan before he was a major in the Army -- and the suspect in last week's mass killing at Fort Hood -- say he was long known for militant Islamist views.

Doctors who crossed paths with Hasan in medical programs paint a picture of a subpar student who wore his religious views on his sleeve.

Several doctors who knew Hasan spoke to CNN, but only on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation of the shooting, which left 12 soldiers and one civilian dead and dozens of other people wounded.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist who faces 13 counts of premeditated murder, "was clearly espousing Islamist ideology" during his time as a medical student at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, one of his former classmates told CNN.

Plus, at the video, Army Specialist Logan Burnette is interviewed by CNN's Sanjay Gupta, "There was blood everywhere ...":

Islamic Message Board on Fort Hood: 'OMG! 12 Maggots Got Killed, 31 Squashed but Still Alive! Poor Maggots ...'

From Gavin Atkins, "Words Chosen Carefully":

Following the massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, some Muslim forums have been advising commenters to show restraint – for example here:

would just advise everyone to choose their words very carefully. Regardless of how you feel, certian words can be construed as sedition. Why be locked up for celebrating on the forum the death of 12 people? not worth it.. so think about it

So having thought about it carefully, here are some of the responses:

OMG! 12 Maggots got killed, 31 squashed but still alive!

Poor Maggots...

And from “Abu Abrahim” of Talahassee Florida:

Ameen. al- Haqq. Do not delude yourselves into thinking we will not be called to account for our complacency and participation in the overt war against Allah and His deen, and yes I mean all of us living in the US, UK, AUS, NZ and the other houses of kufr and shirk.

And from Al-Siddiq of Boulder:

Indeed. We should all stop just relaying words and rather turn them into action. the state won't establish itself by sitting at home in front of a laptop/computer, nor will our ummah be delivered.

Let us make dua that Allah aids us in bringing His blessings back into the land. Ameen.

Hat Tip: John Hawkins and Conservative Grapevine.

Nidal Malik Hasan Charged With 13 Counts of Murder: Defense Attorney Raises Questions of 'Fair Trial at Fort Hood'

From the New York Times, "Hasan Charged With 13 Counts of Murder in Ft. Hood Attack" (note that the Times has misspelled Hasan's name):

Military prosecutors have charged Maj. Nadil Malik Hasan with 13 counts of premeditated murder in last week’s shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Tex., a spokesman for the Army criminal investigation division said Thursday.

Major Hasan, 39, an Army psychiatrist, is accused of opening fire with two handguns in a Soldier Medical Readiness Center, where troops receive medical attention before being deployed or after returning from overseas.

Of the 13 people who were killed, , four were officers, 8 were enlisted soldiers and one was a civilian. Major Hasan was eventually subdued by civilian police.

The 13 charges against Major Hasan are “initial charges,” said the Army spokesman, Chris Grey, “and additional charges may be preferred in the future, subject to the ongoing criminal investigation.”

“It is important to remember that the preferral of charges is the first step in the court-martial process,” Mr. Grey said, “and that a charge is merely an accusation. The accused is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.”

Col. John P. Galligan, a retired Army officer, who is representing Major Hasan, has questioned whether the suspect will be able to get a fair trial at Fort Hood.

For now, Mr. Grey added, “Major Hasan is currently under pretrial restriction while receiving medical care.”

Major Hasan is reported to be in stable condition in an Army Hospital in San Antonio, where he is recovering from four gunshot wounds.

But see also the Houston Chronicle, "Legally, 'We're in for a Long Haul': Case Against Soldier Accused in Mass Shooting Faces Many Hurdles."

In addition potental change of venue issues, Hasan faces court martial, as well as a possible death penalty. See, "Prosecutors to Seek Death Penalty When Nidal Malik Hasan Faces a Court-Martial." And,"Fort Hood Shooting: The Death Penalty Would Make Nidal Malik Hasan an Islamic Martyr."

Hasan's Pakistan Connection: Fort Hood Killer May Have Sent Cash to Taliban Insurgents

Nope, no terrorism here. Move along ...

From the Dallas Morning News, "Fort Hood Shootings Suspect May Have Wired Money to Pakistan":

A Pakistani father mourns death of his son after a car bombing in Charsadda, Pakistan, Tuesday, Nov. 10, 2009.

*****

Authorities have been examining whether Fort Hood massacre suspect Nidal Malik Hasan wired money to Pakistan in recent months, an action that one senior lawmaker said would raise serious questions about Hasan's possible connections to militant Islamic groups.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., said sources "outside of the [intelligence] community" learned about Hasan's possible connections to the Asian country, which faces a massive Islamist insurgency and is widely believed to be Osama bin Laden's hiding place.

Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, would not identify the sources. But he said "they are trying to follow up on it because they recognize that if there are communications – phone or money transfers with somebody in Pakistan – it just raises a whole other level of questions."

More at Memeorandum.

Image Credit: Islamization Watch, "Pakistan: Car Bomb Blast Kills at Least 34 in Busy Street."

Mission Accomplished: Racial Guilt Healed, Now Let's Put Conservative Back in Charge

From Gary Andres, at the Weekly Standard, "Mission Accomplished: Why Democrats Lost Ground in 2009":

Pundits and analysts are scratching their heads to explain Democratic defeats in Virginia and New Jersey last week, particularly examining what caused massive shifts toward the GOP among independent voters in those two states.

Explanations include brilliant Republican campaigns, bumbling Democratic efforts, tea-party conservatives surging, or dispirited liberals just staying home. Some even argue the issue matrix flipped again--last year voters wanted more government intervention; now suddenly they want less.

All of these explanations are plausible. And some even include a few kernels of truth. But there's one you may not have heard. Call it the "mission accomplished" thesis. It goes like this:

Barack Obama's victory was more about a cause than a campaign. It transcended issues such as health care reform, climate change, or embracing a new progressive agenda. It was in part about repudiating eight years of George W. Bush, especially his efforts in Iraq. But it was also about achieving a moral imperative--helping elect the first African-American president who promised to change the language of politics in this country ....

And then Obama won--a victory these voters savored.

Yet his 2008 win also contained another conclusion: Mission Accomplished. They could move on.

More at the link.

Andres mentions this theme as the central metaphor in HBO's documentary, By the People: The Election of Barack Obama.

Obama Rejects Afghan War Reinforcements! Wants Plan for Cut-and-Run from Deployment!

President Obama continues to stall on reinforcing American troops in Afghanistan. Multiple news sources indicate that the administration is rejecting all proposals for a troop surge, and the Huffington Post is reporting that the president want details on a cut-and-run from the theater:

President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

More at the link.

It turns out that U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry is a significant influence on the president's thinking. See, the Times of London, "U.S. Ambassador Warns Against Afghanistan Troop Surge."

More at Memorandum. See especially, THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS, Below The Beltway, BLACKFIVE, JammieWearingFool, Jules Crittenden, Moonbattery, Power Line, Stop The ACLU,

Extreme Political Correctness

Michael Ramirez's cartoon captures the truth surrounding our great national nightmare of Nidal Malik Hasan:

Many others have expressed better than I can the utter depravity of American culture today. I did not jump to conclusions when I first heard of the shootings. But within hours it was clear to anyone with a half functioning brain that Malik Hasan was a bloodthirsty terrorist. There's a lot of frustration around the country among people in disbelief. What has happened to our national culture whereby we refuse objective truth when it's slapping in the face (and kiling our soldiers and citizens)?

Bride of Rove has a post up today that shows a temperment on the edge of packing it in at the insanity. It captures much of my unhappiness with our national denial. See, "A Bad, Bad Man in a Land of Complete Morons:

You may or may not have noticed that I’ve been unduly parsimonious with the posts here of late ... A wave of complete and total disgust for my fellow man has overwhelmed me to the point where I can’t even bring myself to rant. It’s not you. You are probably perfectly normal. It’s everyone else.

It’s Time.com and their un-fucking-believable article appologizing for subjecting the mass murderer Hasan to stress conditions that may or may not have caused him to aquire a never before diagnosed mental disorder that only a craptastic magazine writer like Mark Thompson of Time could give life to called PTSD-By-Proxy with a side of trigger twitch causing Hasan to accidentally on purpose contact Al Quaeda and – upon discovering that even THEY thought he was too fucking crazy to be a proper terrorist and rejected his overtures – driving him into a full bore not even his fault because he is a muslim fit of completely understandable and clearly a cry for help – MASS FUCKING MURDER.

What? Too harsh? At what point did the people in this country extract the section of their brain that allowed them to face the reality in front of them and call it like it is. Hasan is a bad, bad man. Worse. He’s an Al Quaeda wannabe who could not even get the secret handshake because he was too fucking stupid to consider the very real possiblility that Al Quaeda thought that an officer in the US Military contacting them for suggestions on Jihad COULD be a goddammed set up for a sting operation.

Look! Al Quaeda rejected him so he CAN’T be a terrorist.

More at the link.

Words are Nice (But Never Nearly Enough)

Jules Crittenden is way more charitable than I've been, "Great Words, Great Deeds"

It was a good speech. He said all the right things and didn’t say any of the wrong ones. White House transcript. It’s being hailed as the “best ever,” but they seem to say that every time he opens his mouth. Unlike his other great rhetorical moments, no one gets thrown under the bus in this one. He could have gone farther than “more incomprehensible” in my view, as there is nothing really incomprehensible about it at all. We’re a long way down this road. We’ve been here before.

But after that sopping drivel about diversity and being unwilling to speculate, it was good to see something close to an acknowledgement that this was an act of war, and that these soldiers died in combat. It was masterfully lawyerly in skating close to that line. Which is why it was not a great speech. A great speech would have ended with Obama awarding Purple Hearts. Perhaps a denunciation of treason, or for a better rhetorical note, an expression of deep and profound sadness that from within the embrace of America, treachery and cowardice can yet emerge. Perhaps some praise for such a great nation that, quite apart from the official incompetence that enabled the killings, accepted even the killer up to the moment of his deadly act, and in the wake of repeated provocations, has been restrained and measured in its response. With few and isolated acts of bigotry and vigilante violence.

Read the whole thing (you don't want to miss the additional discussion of the deeds).

Rachel Maddow P'wnd

From Chicks on the Right, "I Can Only Hope Rachel Maddow Sees This, Because If She Does, She Has No Choice But to Admit She's a Moron":

This is the most brilliant mash-up of photos and audio I have EVER SEEN EVER. I don’t know who the jackoff is that Rachel Maddow is interviewing, but to listen to both of them feign moral outrage over Obama and Hitler comparisons is positively HILARIOUS given the pictures being displayed. And Rachel’s conspiracy theory that Obama/Hitler comparisons are actually secret coded messages for conservatives to become violent – is she HIGH? What in the holy hell?

Notice the International ANSWER signs at about 1:30 minutes (of course).

More good stuff at Chicks on the Right.

Islamization of America!

From Atlas Shrugs, "It is Not Political Correctness .... it is Shariah":

In surveying the cultural carnage in the wake of the worst terrorist attack on a military installation in US history, it bears noting that there have been seismic shifts in America. When America was free of the shackles of Islam, say, fifty years ago, the response to such an attack by an enemy faction would have been unthinkable. .

I have watched in abject horror the stunning reaction in this country to this act of war. The denial, the submission, the excuses, the dodging, the self-flagellation, the shame, the deceiving of the American people by the media, the military, society, law enforcement, authorities and politicians, all the way up to and including the White House, is the enforcement of sharia law.

We are witnessing an Islamicized America. This is well beyond political correctness. We are enforcing shariah law. We will not insult Islam. That is shariah law. We self censor. That is shariah law. We disrespect ourselves, our nation, so that we might respect Islam. This is dhimmitude. We should be raging. We should be outraged. We should be strategizing for this worldwide conflict. We should be debating about which leader will best handle Islam's war on the west. And yet we have not one leader who begins to understand the conflict -- that's how feared the subject matter is. Not one leader.

Islam's best ally is not the devotion of its followers, but the confusion of its enemies. To fight it, we must understand it.

Lots more at the link.

Nidal Malik Hasan's Jihadi Doctrines Backed by Muslims Worldwide

Be sure to read Andrew Bostom's, "Which Muslims Share Nidal Hasan’s Vision of Islam?" Bostom makes reference to Nidal Hasan's PowerPoint presentation to Army doctors at Walter Reed:

Our immediate, urgent task is to understand the extent to which Nidal Hasan’s orthodox vision of Islam is a shared vision—and by which Muslims, in particular.

The seat of Sunni orthodoxy Al Azhar University—which functions as a de facto Vatican of Sunni Islam, repeats in “Reliance of the Traveller” its widely distributed manual of Islamic Law, which “conforms to the practice and faith of the Sunni orthodoxy,” circa 1991,

“Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and, is etymologically derived from the word, mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion [of Islam]…The scriptural basis for jihad is such Koranic verses as ‘Fighting is prescribed for you’ (Koran 2:216); ‘Slay them wherever you find them’ (Koran 4:89); ‘Fight the idolators utterly’ (Koran 9:36); and such hadiths as the one related by (Sahih) Bukhari and (Sahih) Muslim [NOTE: cited in slide 43 of Hasan’s 6/7/07 presentation] that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: ‘I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And the final reckoning is with Allah’; and the hadith by (Sahih) Muslim, ‘To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.’ ”

There's more at the post.

Bostom link to a 2007 survey from the World Public Opinion organization, "Muslim Public Opinion on U.S. Policy, Attacks on Civilians and al Qaeda."

The survey was conducted in Egypt, Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan. The results are deceptive. While large majority express opposition to violence against Americans, there's widespread support for the establishment of the Islamic caliphate in order to stop the spread of Western values over Islam. For example, "Most respondents express strong support for expanding the role of Islam in their countries—consistent with the goals of al Qaeda---but also express an openness to outside cultural influences. Large majorities in most countries support the goals of requiring a strict application of sharia, keeping out Western values, and even unifying all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state."

Bostom notes that this is perfectly in line with the jihadi doctrines of Nidal Hasan and his al Qaeda-backing mentors:

The findings from the University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org poll are ominous—indicating plainly to any rational mind willing to comprehend—the vast underpinning of support for Nidal Hasan’s orthodox vision of Islam, from the creed’s most respected religious leaders, to ordinary Muslims. Our self-righteously ignorant elites—particularly those in political and military leadership positions—must be held accountable by the American public for their ignorance, and worse still, deliberate obfuscation of these plain Islamic realities.

Lou Dobbs Quits CNN: Leftists Claim Firebrand Anchor Left 'Under Pressure'

I watched Phyllis Chesler's appearance on Lou Dobbs show this morning (the first time I'd watched the CNN broadcast for some, mainly since I've long had the feeling that Dobbs is more the opportunist that a culture warrior). So now, clicking on Memeorandum, it was way surprising to see the top headline there, "Lou Dobbs to Quit CNN":

Lou Dobbs, the longtime CNN anchor whose anti-immigration views have made him a TV lightning rod, said Wednesday that he is leaving the cable news channel effective immediately.

Sitting before an image of an American flag on his television set, he said “some leaders in media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond the role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem solving as well as to contribute positively to the great understanding of the issues of our day.”

“I’m considering a number of options and directions,” Mr. Dobbs added. A transcript of his remarks is available here.

There's lots of reaction to the announcement, especially among the lefties. Pam Spaulding's ecstatic, "Glory be ..." Media Matters has this banner headline up right now, "Under Pressure, Dobbs Announces Immediate Departure From CNN," and their YouTube title reads, "Dobbs' History of Hate and Paranoia." Think Progress claims Dobbs had become a "publicity nightmare" for CNN, and gay hate-merchant Joe Sudbay announces, "CNN's On-Air Racist, Lou Dobbs, is Gone After Tonight's Show."

Of course, these are the same folks who fist-bump the degenerate Keith Olbermann, and there was no outcry on the left when the MSNBC host attacked Michelle Malkin on air, for what he said was her "total mindless, morally bankrupt, knee-jerk, fascistic hatred without which Michelle Malkin would just be a big mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it."

It's all power no principle with these totalitarians.

See CNN's announcement as well, "Lou Dobbs leaving CNN."

Act of Terrorism? Phyllis Chesler vs. John Nichols on CNN

From Phyllis Chesler, "Talking 'Bout Ft. Hood Terrorism on CNN: Pajamas Media vs. Nation Magazine":

Last night I was on the The Lou Dobbs Show on CNN to talk about whether the Fort Hood massacre was or was not a terrorist attack. I’ve been writing about this very subject rather steadily right here. I was “facing off” on CNN with someone who writes poppycock about “Islamophobia” for The Nation. What greater joy could there be? And I was flying the colors of Pajamas Media, which is how I was identified. (I was, of course, also identified as a professor, author, etc.) Dobbs was a gracious and seasoned host, and his producers were impressively organized and very friendly. The makeup artist was a genius. I’d go back daily just for her.

As it turned out, Dobbs wanted to take The Nation guy on as much as I did, and he did so quite effectively. He made my job a bit easier. John Nichols was effectively neutralized. Once I distinguished between radical, jihadic Islamism, and Muslims in general, including the Muslim and ex-Muslim feminists and reformers with whom I work—Nichols had no Straw Woman to oppose. Of course, some of my esteemed colleagues and commenters at this very blog site wanted me to denounce all of Islam, every Muslim—but I did not do so. I will deal with this very subject in a future column.

I have been around television studios for the last 40 years. I was on the David Frost Show (yes, the same Frost who interviewed Nixon!) and on Donohue when he was still in Dayton, Ohio. Over the years, I’ve done all the major network programs many times including The Today Show, Good Morning America, Merv Griffen, Geraldo, Oprah, Sally Jessie, the Mac-Neil-Lehrer Report, and C-SPAN.

I was on The O’Reilly Factor even though I’m not young or blonde. And yes, he was very kind to me.

I’ve been on CNN many times. In January of 1986, I remember sitting with the entire CNN staff in Washington, D.C., as the shuttle Challenger blew up before our stunned eyes. In 2003, when Judy Woodruff bravely interviewed me about anti-Semitism, two of the cameramen came out from behind their cameras to shake my hand. This was truly a first.

Trust me: This is unusual. And last night, as I was leaving CNN’s very spiffy headquarters in NYC, a tall and handsome CNN man stopped me and said: “You spoke very well. Thank you.” The guest who followed me said, “I agree with you.”

Folks: I am talking about CNN, not FOX. I think, maybe, perhaps, possibly, my God, if not now when, that things might be beginning to change. (The realist in me is scoffing; the optimist has her fingers crossed).

Jamie Glazov at NewsRealBlog thought I “scored big.” Thanks, Jamie. And for me? It’s just another day in my life.

Had there been time enough, here’s what I wanted to say.

'On Her Own Terms': Charla Nash Shows Face on Oprah Winfrey Show

My wife is home today with our two sons. They were watching the Oprah Winfrey Show when I got home (the boys are off from school today for the Veterans Day holiday). So, I normally wouldn't be watching Oprah, but I'm glad I did today. Oprah's guest today was Charla Nash, the Connecticut woman who was eaten alive by a 200-pound chimpanzee in February (see, "Charla Nash Lost Eyes, Nose and Jaw in Chimpanzee Attack").

The story is at Oprah.com, "The Will to Live." It turns out that photographers have been staking out Ms. Nash's hospital room, trying to get a picture of her without the veil she wears to cover her injuries. Ms. Nash was mauled beyond recognition. Oprah said she'd never seen anything like the extent of her injuries. I have to admit that viewing the show was even hard from me -- and I have a strong stomach. The Huffington Post has the full story with pictures, "Charla Nash, Chimp Attack Victim, Shows Face On "Oprah" (PHOTOS)."

Here's a picture of Ms. Nash with Travis, the chimpanzee said to have attacked her:

It seems almost unreal that an animal of that relative size could inflict such a devastating attack. According to Oprah's page:

On February 16, 2009, Charla went over to the Stamford, Connecticut, home of her friend and employer, Sandra Herold. According to news reports, Sandra called Charla because Sandra's 14-year-old pet chimpanzee, Travis, escaped and she needed help getting him back inside.

When Charla arrived, Travis savagely attacked her. Sandra called 911, and when police arrived, they found Charla in a devastating state. "I would never have imagined that an animal could have done that," emergency worker Andrea Repko says. "[Her hands] honestly looked like they went through a meat grinder."

Ms. Nash lost her eyes due to infection, and she's not a candidate for a face transplant. Oprah said that after sitting and talking to Ms. Nash, it was less upsetting to view her injuries.

Oprah interviewed Ms. Nash on her 56th birthday. She announced a couple of times that Ms. Nash wanted to reveal her looks to the world "on her own terms." There's a YouTube with a partial clip of the show here.

Also, check the support website, Friends of Charla Nash.

'Honoring All Who Served - Veterans Day 2009'

America's Military Stands Tall

From David Ignatius, at the Washington Post, "Standing Tall in Harm's Way":

In the aftermath of the Fort Hood shootings, some commentaries have examined the damage to the U.S. Army from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A few have spoken about the alleged shooter, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, as an extreme version of what can happen with an overstressed force.

This picture of a traumatized military is misleading. Certainly, the Army and the other services are stressed by the demands of combat. But what's striking to me this Veterans Day is how healthy the military is, given all the weight it has been carrying for the country these past eight years.

Facing a new and disorienting kind of warfare, the military has learned and adapted. Rather than complain about their problems, soldiers have figured out ways to solve them.

In truth, the U.S. military may be the most resilient part of American society right now. The soldiers are clearly in better shape than the political class that sent them to war and the economic leadership that has mismanaged the economy. (I'd give the same high marks to young civilians who are serving and sacrificing in hard places -- the Peace Corps and medical volunteers I've met abroad and the teachers in tough inner-city schools.)

Through all its difficulties, the military has kept its stride. That sense of balance comes partly from the fact that soldiers are anchored to the American bedrock. This includes the stereotypical small towns in the South and Midwest that have military service in their DNA. But it also counts plenty of hardworking, upwardly mobile Hispanic and African American families in urban America that produce some of the best soldiers I know.

More at the link.

Matthew Yglesias: Nidal Hasan Terrorist Threat 'Not That Big a Deal'

Thirteen people were killed and 29 wounded during Nidal Malik Hasan's jihadi rampage at Fort Hood. President Obama spoke today, and the PowerPoint transcripts of Hasan's Army doctors' lecture have been made available. Of course, I've been covering the story extensively. I've noted the remarks of a number of extremely pernicious leftist commentators, but Matthew Yglesias' post today - coming at the same time as this new information paints a damning indictment of Hasan's propensity to fanatical violence - really takes the cake for willing blindness, even complicity, on the radical leftist:

I think a pretty good case can be made that this kind of situation actually is the main face of the terrorist threat. Not a big well-thought-out plot centrally directed from a “safe haven” in South Asia and undertaken by brilliant covert operatives, but the desperate violent act of a clearly disturbed individual. It’s going to be very hard to prevent this sort of thing. As long as the United States remains a country in which firearms are widely available—for the foreseeable future, in other words—we’re going to be unusually vulnerable to mentally ill spree killers of various kinds, including spree killers who nod in the direction of Islamist thinking.

But the larger point is that while these incidents are serious crimes and major tragedies for the victims, they hardly rise to the level of a major macro-level social crisis. They’re certainly not a first-order national security threat. And even put in the lower-stakes context of violent crime in America, the whole set of mentally disturbed spree killers is a pretty minor slice of the pie. Reducing the volume of these incidents isn’t going to inspire gun rights enthusiasts to support major curbs in firearms availability, and certainly shouldn’t convince Americans to contravene our commitments to diversity and non-discrimination. Simply put, if this is the terrorist threat then the terrorist threat isn’t that big a deal.

Of course, it's not like Yglesias is sympathetic to Islam:

Related: From Mere Rhetoric, "Matthew Yglesias: Anti-Semitic Genocidal Maniacs Are Hip, Terrorists Are Fashionable (UPDATED AND BUMPED: Yglesias Article From Today Predictably Anti-Semitish)."

FBI Says Anwar Al Awlaki May Have Encouraged Nidal Hasan; Yemen to Search for Fanatical Islamist Preacher

From Fire Andrea Mitchell, "Anwar al-Awlaki 'May Have Encouraged' Fort Hood Gunman Nidal Malik Hasan":

Lamar Alexander has told radio station WOAI (and their web site) FBI Director Robert Mueller says the bureau is investigating whether a radical Islamic imam in Yemen Anwar al-Awlaki ‘had been encouraging’ Fort Hood gunman, jihadist, and terrorist (Yes I said it, TERRORIST) Nidal Hasan to commit violent acts against U.S. soldiers.

“They had no real early warnings,” U.S. Rep Lamar Smith (R-Tx), who is the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, reported Mueller as telling him earlier today. Smith spoke with 1200 WOAI’s Michael Board. “He said they had some of the intelligence that we have heard about, the connection to the radical, but because the individual in question seemed to be a major in good standing, they didn’t pursue it as much as they might have.”

Awlaki wrote on his blog Monday that Hasan ‘is a hero’ and a ‘man of conscience.’ Awlaki has been identified as the imam at a mosque in Falls Church Virginia, where Hasan and his family occasionally worshipped.

“I have been told that the individual who had been perhaps even encouraging the major in these violent acts, had previously had contact with three of the terrorists that were involved in the 9/11 attacks, so this may be a widening story, and the major may well have been in touch with those who were known terrorists, and if that is the case, this really opens up this situation to the fact that we need to be very very careful in the future, and we need to perhaps pay more attention to any red flags that may come to our attention.”

Smith said he is worried about the FBI and other agencies ‘covering up’ any ties between Hasan and ‘radical Islam.’

“In the future, when that comes to our attention, we shouldn’t try to diminish it or play it down,” he said.

Also, from Jawa Report, "Yemen Decides to Search for Anwar Al Awlaki":

Yemeni-American terror advocate and penpal to murderer Nidal Hasan, Anwar Awlaki was never charged with a crime in Yemen or the US. He had one of those "Saleh" deals - he promised to refrain from all violent activity within Yemen and they let him released him from jail. Its quite a common arrangement. But he stopped checking in nine months ago.

AP -- A radical American imam who communicated with the Fort Hood shooting suspect and called him a hero was once arrested in Yemen on suspicion of giving religious approval to militants to conduct kidnappings. Yemeni authorities are now hunting for Anwar al-Awlaki to determine whether he has al-Qaida ties.

Al-Awlaki, who has used his personal Web site to encourage Muslims around the world to kill U.S. troops in Iraq, disappeared in Yemen eight months ago, according to his father (former Minister of Agriculture and previous head of Sana'a University). Yemeni security officials say they believe he is hiding in a region of the mountainous nation that has become a refuge for Islamic militants. ( In August Anwar excitedly blogged about a battle in Marib between Yemeni forces and al Qaeda.)

--------

Al-Awlaki was arrested in 2006 with a group of five Yemenis accused of kidnapping a Shiite teenager for ransom...The group also plotted to kidnap the U.S. military attache in Yemen and rented a villa near the attache's house using a fake ID, the officials said. There was no immediate confirmation of the plot from American officials.

But investigators could not find any evidence for al-Qaida ties. Tribal leaders - who hold enormous influence in Yemen, where the central government is weak -intervened and pushed for the group's release, the Interior Ministry official said. The group was freed in December 2007 after they signed documents promising to remain in Yemen and to avoid any contacts with militants.

But authorities' suspicions over al-Awlaki were raised again several months after his release because he stopped checking in regularly with security officials as required under his release agreement, the officials said. Also, months later, another member of the group arrested with al-Awlaki left Yemen and was arrested in Syria on terrorism charges.

Ralph Peters on Obama's Fort Hood Memorial: 'Not One Mention of Terrorism'

Via Pat Dollard, "Ralph Peters Pissed at Obama's Ft. Hood Speech":

Note that Peters predicted as much in his essay today, "Deadly Denial: Fudging the Facts on Fort Hood":

As President Obama belatedly appears at Fort Hood today, will he dare to speak the word "terror?"

He won't use the word "Islamist." If he mentions Islam at all, it'll be to sing its praises yet again.

We've already learned that Islamist terrorist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan attended the Northern Virginia mosque of Imam Anwar al-Aulaqi, a fiery al Qaeda supporter who later fled the United States. We know that Hasan's peers, subordinates and patients repeatedly raised red flags that his superiors suppressed. We know he was a player on Islamist-extremist Web sites. The FBI's uncovering one extremist link after another.

But to call this an act of terrorism, the White House would need an autographed photo of Osama bin Laden helping Hasan buy weapons in downtown Killeen, Texas. Even that might not suffice.

Islamist terrorists don't all have al Qaeda union cards in their wallets. Terrorism's increasingly the domain of entrepreneurs and independent contractors. Under Muslim jurisprudence, jihad's an individual responsibility. Hasan was a self-appointed jihadi.

Yet we're told he was just having a bad day.

More at the link.

Media Reporting and the Fort Hood Massacre

There's a fundamental incongruity -- if not traitorous dishonesty -- to media reporting on the Nidal Hasan Fort Hood massacre. CBS is reporting, "Officials: Fort Hood Shooter Acted Alone." But hey, why the rush to judgment, as everyone on the left has been saying regarding the question of terrorism? Sure, while so far there's no evidence that Hasan had outside direction or help, the investigation's still young -- and considering how much revelatory information has come out since last Thursday, we may indeed learn of a dramatically more complicated, and connected, terrorist plot.

Contrast the CBS report to ABC's, "Senior Official: More Hasan Ties to People Under Investigation by FBI: Alleged Shooter Had "Unexplained Connections" to Others Besides Jihadist Cleric Awlaki" (via Memeorandum):

A senior government official tells ABC News that investigators have found that alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan had "more unexplained connections to people being tracked by the FBI" than just radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. The official declined to name the individuals but Congressional sources said their names and countries of origin were likely to emerge soon.

Questions already surround Major Hasan's contact with Awlaki, a radical cleric based in Yemen whom authorities consider a recruiter for al Qaeda. U.S. officials now confirm Hasan sent as many as 20 e-mails to Awlaki. Authorities intercepted the e-mails but later deemed them innocent or protected by the first amendment ....

In Texas, an hour before a memorial service for the Fort Hood victims, four FBI agents showed up at the Killeen mosque where Hasan prayed and searched a trash bin outside. The mosque president was clearly upset when he had to return from traveling to the service to sign a document handed to him by agents, apparently authorizing the search.

The FBI would not comment on what the agents were looking for at the mosque a full five days after the shooting, but motivation remains the focus.

"Obviously, the key is did he act alone," former senior FBI official Brad Garrett told ABC News. "And secondarily is, what evidence might potentially be in the dumpsters or at the mosque."

Plus, this short Fox video above, "Sympathetic Media," is a classic. Note how it begins with Chris Matthews' now immortal comment, "'That's not a crime to call up al Qaeda, is it?'"