Tuesday, November 10, 2009

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?'"

Obama's Fort Hood Memorial: No Mention of Terrorism or Jihad

I read the president's memorial speech earlier. The text is here. As always, the speech is both respectful and reserved, and I'm confident the president's talk will help many families with their grief and recovery. But frankly, there's little more than anodyne language here -- we have simply no repudiation of the Islamic extremism that drove Nidal Malik Hasan's attack. I know there's a way to denounce the fanaticism while reassuring moderate Muslims that our quarrel is not with them. But the president has no time for that. Whether it's his own Islamic background, his Marxist ideological upbringing (with its romance of tyranny and terror), or his fawning sensitivity to the Democratic terror-coddling base, Barack Obama is simply unsuited for the fight facing this country in radical Islam. I'll update with some of the partisan spin forthcoming tonight. In the meanwhile, Phyllis Chesler puts into words my own thinking as I read the speech earlier today. See, "Obama at Ft. Hood Memorial: No Mention of Terrorism or Jihad":

Radical jihadic Islamism/jihadic terrorism was given a free pass by the President of the United States at the Memorial Service for the thirteen soldiers and mental health professionals who were slaughtered at Ft. Hood.

See also, Victor Davis Hanson, "Sacrificing Americans," especially this:

Bottom line: The society at large, driven by the sermonizing of its elites, has come to an unstated conclusion that, unfortunately, a few Americans will have to be sacrificed from time to time, for the larger goal of establishing the fact that Americans in no way think Muslims are any more likely than any others to commit either random or premeditated terrorist violence. I think that is the initial lesson of Fort Hood.

Nidal Hasan's PowerPoint: 'Whoever Desires a Religion Other Than Islam ... Shall Be One of the Losers'

There's a lot in the news today. President Obama has now delivered his memorial eulogy for the troops at Fort Hood. The transcript is here. I'll comment in detail on the speech later. Here I want to share Nidal Malik Hasan's PowerPoint presentation from his talk to senior doctors and staff at the Walter Reed Army Medical in 2007. The pdf document is here: "The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." I've read the presentation from the Washington Post, "Hasan on Islam." Slides 46 and 47 caught my attention, although it's a striking lecture all around. It's hard to believe this event didn't set off more warning alarms. As one participant at the lecture noted at the time, "It was really strange .... The senior doctors looked really upset [at the end]."


See also, Dana Priest, "Fort Hood Suspect Warned of Threats Within the Ranks: Cited Stress Facing Muslims Hasan Spoke at Walter Reed in 2007."

More at
Memeorandum.

Obama's Fort Hood Visit: Comfort the Bereaved, Confront the Realities of Islamist Violence

From the Austin-American Statesman, "At Fort Hood, Preparations for a Presidential Visit: Focus Shifts to Counseling, Healing." Also, at the Dallas Morning News, "Obama's Fort Hood Visit Part of Presidential Tradition of Offering Comfort":

When Barack Obama stands today before the mourning children, spouses and comrades of those cut down last week at Fort Hood, he will confront one of the most delicate and painful duties a president undertakes.

Only a president can offer the condolences of a nation. In a moment of crisis and sorrow and anger, only a president can soothe raw emotions, allay fears, elevate a senseless act into a call to action, and offer the assurance that – as his aides put it Monday – no stone will be left unturned.

This is by far the biggest test of Obama's ability to fulfill the role of consoler in chief.

The Fort Hood massacre is the worst single tragedy on his watch. And – because the victims and the shooter were soldiers, and because the suspect is Muslim and Obama has put such a premium on repairing relations with the Muslim world – the expectations on him, as commander in chief, are especially high.
But see the New York Daily News, "Fanaticism Hits Home: Blame Islamic Extremism for the Carnage at Fort Hood":

It is increasingly apparent that the mass murder at Fort Hood by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is the latest in a line of attacks or attempted attacks by Americans radicalized by fanatical Muslim ideology.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, is not just a man troubled by the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, traumatized by veterans' wrenching stories and unhappy about being deployed to the war zone.

Although he may have been all those, Hasan is also a man who followed twisted religious beliefs into revolt against the nation of his birth.

That Hasan began his rampage, according to witnesses, by saying "Allahu Akbar," or "God Is Great," is relevant to his crime.

So is the fact that Hasan's classmates say he had expressed anti-American views, justified suicide bombings and contended that Islamic law trumped the Constitution.

So is the fact that Hasan reportedly appeared pleased by the shooting death of a recruiter in June and was heard saying, "Maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Times Square."

Hasan is the latest dot to connect in a picture of homegrown radicalization.
Check the examples at the editorial, and here's this from the conclusion:

There has been no rush to judgment about Hasan's demons. But it has become clearer that he was swept along by the perversion of Islam - repeat, perversion - that has justified violence.

America must wrestle with these realities, lest naivete leave us vulnerable to more of the same.

The president needs to address these realities, or else the visit will do nothing to prevent further attacks of the same kind.
God bless to all those who are grieving and recoving in this time of crisis and danger.

Carrie Prejean on Sex Tape Video: 'It Was Bad Judgment ... I Take Total Responsibility'

Carrie Prejean opened up to Sean Hannity about the sex tape scandal that led to the settlement of her Miss California-USA lawsuit. Andrew Malcolm has a report, "Carrie Prejean Confirms 'Sex Tape,' But..." Hannity said "We might as well go right to it":

The handsome host noted that the high-powered, celebrity website TMZ claimed to have a sex video of the beautiful Prejean that was so outrageously explicit it hasn't posted it yet. But people can feel free to keep clicking back there every few minutes to check. If they don't mind someday maybe seeing a naked female conservative.

Prejean replied -- insert teasing pause here -- yes, there was a tape she had done as a teenager. She made it for a distant boyfriend whom she loved at the time. She said TMZ can call it a "sex tape" if it wants. But she was alone on the video and no one else was in the room.

So everyone (except TMZ, Prejean's mother and the ex-boyfriend, who presumably provided the tape of his beloved) is left to imagine what is on what is no doubt the first such boudoir video ever made in history.

Prejean said it was the "biggest mistake" she'd ever made in her not-yet-lengthy life. She regretted it. She felt mortified talking about it, but it was her own fault. And that as a Christian she'd never claimed to be perfect.
Watch the entire video.

Ms. Prejean is embarrassed to discuss the video at the opening of the segment, but she comes clean. She said she was a teenager and thought her boyfriend was "the one" and wanted to please him: "It was the biggest mistake of my life."

We'll see how this plays out today across the netroots. Ms. Prejean warns that nothing is private. "People are still digging up things from my past."

Monday, November 9, 2009

Nidal Hasan's Al-Qaeda Connection Insignificant, FBI Claims

From the Washington Post, "Hasan E-Mails to Cleric Didn't Warrant Inquiry":

Maj. Nidal M. Hasan exchanged e-mails late last year and this year with a radical cleric in Yemen, but the contact did not lead to an investigation, federal law enforcement officials said Monday.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist suspected of killing 12 soldiers and a civilian here last week, will be tried in military court, the officials said.

U.S. intelligence agencies intercepted 10 to 20 e-mails from Hasan to Anwar al-Aulaqi, a U.S. citizen who once was a spiritual leader at the suburban Virginia mosque where Hasan had worshiped, said Rep. Peter Hoekstra (Mich.), the top Republican on the House intelligence committee.

Aulaqi responded to Hasan at least twice, Hoekstra said, but he described the responses as "innocent," and a terrorism expert cautioned that the exchanges may have been part of Hasan's academic research.

The FBI determined that the e-mails did not warrant an investigation, according to a law enforcement official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Read the whole thing.

At the article, everybody's saying how "innocent" these communications looked. But really, isn't this just more evidence of abject political correctness. Wouldn't want to inflame those jihaid bros hangin' down under the local minaret.

More at
Memeorandum.

President Obama Slurs Tea Party Patriots as 'Tea Baggers'

From "Obama Uses Crude Gay-Baiting Sexual Slur to Attack Tea Party Protesters":


Barack Hussein Obama II, used a crude gay-baiting sexual slur to denigrate Tea Party patriots in a talk with House Democrats yesterday on Capitol Hill, reported the New York Times:

According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”

The word 'teabag' is used to describe a sexual practice popular in the homosexual community. Earlier this year as the anti-big government protest movement exploded across the country, liberals in the media first started calling conservative and libertarian protesters organizing under the Tea Party banner, "teabaggers," in a juvenile effort to gay-bait the protesters. Democrats, including now the president of the United States, have also used the slur.

More at the link.

Image Credit: Voting Female Speaks, "
Senate Throws Obama's Baton in the Dumpster; Takes Fiscally Responsible Stance and Rejects Abject Obama Socialism."

Glenn Greenwald: Fort Hood Attack Not Really Terrorism, Or Else the U.S. Gov't is Terrorist, or Something...

Patterico's been going a few rounds with Glenn Greenwald, the hardline left's America-basher extraordinaire. At his post calling out Greenwald's recent attack on him and Allahpundit, Patterico notes, "Despite Greenwald’s history of dishonest sock-puppeting, there are times when I want to like him, because he sometimes shows an inclination to act on principle."

That concuding bit of decency toward Greenwald really struck me, considering how vile the dude is. Indeed, just take a look at Greenwald's post up this afternoon, "
Can Attacks on a Military Base Constitute 'Terrorism'?":
The incomparably pernicious Joe Lieberman said yesterday on Fox News that he intends to launch an investigation into "the motives of [Nidal] Hasan in carrying out this brutal mass murder, if a terrorist attack, the worst terrorist attack since 9/11." Hasan's attack was carried out on a military base, with his clear target being American soldiers, not civilians. No matter one's views on how unjustified and evil this attack was, can an attack on soldiers -- particularly ones in the process of deploying for a war -- fall within any legitimate definition of "terrorism," which generally refers to deliberate attacks on civilians?

The obvious problem with answering that question is that, as
even the U.S. State Department recognizes, "no one definition of terrorism has gained universal acceptance" -- despite the centrality of that term in our political discourse ....
More at the post, then this:
... a large part of our "war" strategy is to kill people we deem to be "terrorists" or "combatants" without regard to whether they're armed or engaged in hostilities at the moment we kill them. Isn't that exactly what we do when we use drone attacks in Pakistan? Indeed, we currently have a "hit list" of individuals we intend to murder in Afghanistan on sight based on our suspicion that they're involved in the drug trade and thus help fund the Taliban. During its war in Gaza, Israel targeted police stations and, with one strike, killed 40 police trainees while in a parade, and then justified that by claiming police recruits were legitimate targets -- even though they weren't engaged in hostilities at the time -- because of their nexus to Hamas (even though the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said the targeted recruits "were being trained in first aid, human rights and maintaining public order").

Is there any legitimate definition of "terrorism" that allows the Fort Hood attack to qualify but not those above-referenced attacks? The U.S., of course, maintains that it is incapable of engaging in "terrorism," by definition, because "terrorism" is something only "subnational groups or clandestine agent" can do, but leaving that absurdly self-serving and incoherent exclusion aside, how can the Fort Hood attacks targeted at soldiers be "terrorism" but not our own acts?
Hey, that's some pretty professionalized moral relativism?

The difference, as anyone knows -- most of all a constitutional lawyer like Greenwald -- is that the U.S. is a sovereign state-actor, possessing a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, recognized under international law; and its military campaigns are internationally-substantiated legal actions in response to acts of war against this country. (See, "
George W. Bush: Declaration of War on Terrorism.") Even Greenwald's own elaboration of the definition of terrorism infers the fundamental right of the U.S. to respond to attacks on its own terroritory and people.

So, what to do? Just denounce the United States as a terrorist itself. That'll do it. Raise a few rhetorical smokescreens and poof!, it's the American military that's the bad guy here, not a methodical fanatical Muslim who killed 13 Americans in cold blood.

You know, this morning
Verum Serum used very strong language to denounce Anwar al-Awlaki, who hailed Nadal Hasan's ramage as a heroic act ("anyone who has empathy on any level for the actions of Hasan, or the views expressed by Al-Awlaki, does not deserve to be an American as far as I’m concerned," etc.).

I feel the same way about
Greenwald, with all due respect for Patterico's generosity.

New York Times Retracts Headline Indicating 'Fort Hood Suspect Communicated With Radical Cleric...'

The orginal title still shows at Memeorandum's page, for the New York Time's, "Fort Hood Suspect Communicated With Radical Cleric, Authorities Say." But when you click through, you'll get, "U.S. Monitored Fort Hood Suspect Before Shooting." And look at the Google search too. A click through there leads us to the Times' own blog aggregator, Blogrunner, with the original headline still in view:

I guess the Times is not "jumping to conclusions" in its reporting, despite the fact that no one else online is worried about actually saying Hasan contacted an al Qaeda operative prior to mounting a terrorist attack.

Exit Question: Is the Times heading over into
fifth column territory?

America's Allies Ask 'Where's Obama?' Leader of Free World Snubs Berlin Wall Celebration

From the Christian Science Monitor, "At Berlin Wall Fall Celebration, Old Allies Ask Where is Obama?":

The celebrations of the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall started off well enough – former President George H.W. Bush, ex-Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, and former West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl gathered in front of nearly 2,000 dignitaries in Berlin last week to celebrate their role in bringing about the end of the Cold War.

It was a happy affair, with Mr. Bush and Mr. Gorbachev exchanging laughs and smiles as they recalled Nov. 9, 1989, a day that all agreed advanced world freedom and ended the looming threat of the cold war.

But in the week since, as leaders have gathered here to mark the Mauerfall anniversary, agreement has been tough to come by and fractures between allies have shown themselves in what has been billed as an event to celebrate unity. One of these signs was the absence of US President Barack Obama as other heads of state gathered underneath the Brandenburg Gate Monday night to make a symbolic journey from the old East Berlin to West Berlin. They group then toppled a wall of dominoes along the path of the Berlin Wall.

But President Obama sent Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is his place, infuriating many Germans, as the US president is beloved here. Some in Berlin asked if this snub indicated that the alliance between the US and Germans is strained.
Actually, Pamela Geller puts things in perspective, "Tear Down This Presidency!":

On the twentieth anniversary of one of freedom's monumental moments, one of America's finest moments, the fall of the Berlin Wall, Obama is MIA.

Huh?

Yes, the mirror man who has never met a camera or teleprompter he didn't fall head of heels in love with is NOT at the anniversary of the Fall of the Wall.

He sent a video. I kid you not.

He went to a meeting of the Organization of the Islamic Conference Alliance of Civilizations (instead of the graves of the glorious dead on the anniversary of Normandy), toured Turkey's mosques, bowed to the wahhabi Saudi king, coasted to Copenhagen to whore for his cronies in Chicago (Olympics) -- but he can't go to Germany for this stunning historical triumph of free men.

Sarkozy, Merkel, all the greats are in attendance.

He must have had a late basketball game with Reggie. All kidding aside, Obama could not stand the idea of the exaltation of Reagan. He is so small and so petty. He is the anti-Reagan.

Well, the good news is that 58 percent of Americans expect a Republican to be elected in 2012!

Next President Likely To Be Republican, Poll Finds

Something I've been arguing around here for some time now. From Rasmussen, "58% Say Next President Likely To Be Republican" (via Memeorandum):

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of likely voters say it is at least somewhat likely the next president of the United States will be a Republican, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

The number has been trending in this direction since Democrat Barack Obama took office in January and is up 14 points since then.

Thirty-one percent (31%) of voters see it as Very Likely that the next president will be a Republican.
And what explains this? Well, this administration's unprecedented culture of corruption, for one. But the larger explanation is the public's repudiation of the left's attempted socialist takeover under Barack Obama. See, Mark Steyn's seminal essay, "The Europeanizaion of America."

Also, previously, "
Socialism Schmocialism? Let's Get Real About Marxism in America." Plus, Gateway Pundit, "58% of Voters Believe Next President Will Be Republican."

Foot Hood Killings Expose Left's Unholy Alliance With Fanatical Islam

From David Horowitz, "Our Brain Dead Country":

The Ft. Hood killings are the chickens of the left coming home to roost. Already the chief political correspondent of The Nation has decried even mention of the fact that the jihadist killer Hasan is a Palestinian Muslim. According to The Nation this is “Islamophobia.” This fatuous attempt to protect America’s enemies carries on The Nation’s 60-year tradition as the leading fifth column collaborator with America’s enemies — defender of the Rosenbergs, defender of Hiss, defender of their boss Stalin, defender of Mao, defender of Castro and now defender of Islamic terrorists. But The Nation is only the tip of an iceberg. The fifth column formed out of the unholy alliance between radical Islam and the American left is now entrenched in the White House and throughout our government. And in matters like the Muslim jihadist Major Hasan our military is its captive.

The Fort Hood massacre is the first of the preventable atrocities we have been warning about
on our websites since 9/11 — the atrocities which are apparently necessary for Americans to wake up to the threat that confronts us. We have a vast internal threat in this country in the form of this unholy alliance between the anti-American Left and radical Islam – whose Muslim Brotherhood network extends through our universities, our government and our military. It is “politically incorrect” to recognize this fact. You can be barred — as I have been — from speaking at universities for even talking about it. The embargo of discussion of the Islamo-fascist threat puts every American (including the infidel collaborators) at risk. Hasan had semi-automatic weapons. But they weren’t nuclear. That possibility is just around the corner unless we undergo a sea change in our attitudes and marshal the intelligence and the courage to recognize the threat.
Added: Linked at Blazing Cat Fur, "The Left and Terror."

Nidal Hasan Sought Contact With al Qaeda: CIA Refuses Congressional Briefing; Anwar al Awlaki, Hasan Mentor, Praises 'Great Heroic Act'

From ABC News, "Officials: U.S. Aware of Hasan Efforts to Contact al Qaeda" (via Memeorandum):

U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

It is not known whether the intelligence agencies informed the Army that one of its officers was seeking to connect with suspected al Qaeda figures, the officials said.

One senior lawmaker said the CIA had, so far, refused to brief the intelligence committees on what, if any, knowledge they had about Hasan's efforts.

CIA director Leon Panetta and the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, have been asked by Congress "to preserve" all documents and intelligence files that relate to Hasan, according to the lawmaker.
The report indicates that Anwar al Awlaki, Nidal Malik Hasan's religious mentor at the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia, hailed the Fort Hood attack as an act of "great heroism." See "Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing":

Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people. This is a contradiction that many Muslims brush aside and just pretend that it doesn’t exist. Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges ....

May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act.
Verum Serum has more, "Radical 9/11 Cleric Linked to Fort Hood Shooter: Nidal Hasan is a Hero":

I have a hard time even imagining the level of depravity and moral bankruptcy necessary to view the cold-blooded massacre of unarmed men and women as an act of heroism. It’s an act of cowardice, and Al-Awlaki is a sick and evil man. He is an enemy of this country.

You know, I spent much of this weekend defending the rights of Muslim Americans against attacks by regular commenters on this blog – people that I normally agree with. And I still fervently believe that Muslim Americans who desire to live here in peace, respecting our laws and traditions, are entitled to the same Constitutional rights to religious freedom and personal liberty as any other citizen. And I also believe that the majority of Muslims living in the U.S. fall into this category.

But anyone who has empathy on any level for the actions of Hasan, or the views expressed by Al-Awlaki, does not deserve to be an American as far as I’m concerned.
See my earlier reports, "Nidal Malik Hasan, Fort Hood Shooter, Linked to September 11 Terrorists," and "Anwar al Awlaki, Fanatical Mentor to Nidal Malik Hasan, Calls for 'Allah's Victory' Over West."

Hat Tip:
AOSHQ.

The Left After the Berlin Wall - They're Back, Attacking Us From Within

Melanie Phillips illustrates once more why she's one of the most important journalists working anywhere in the world today. From her essay, "We Were Fools to Think the Fall of the Berlin Wall Had Killed Off the Far Left. They're Back - and Attacking Us From Within":

Twenty years ago today, supporters of freedom and human rights cheered and wept for joy as the Berlin Wall was torn down by jubilant young Germans.

To so many, that heady day seemed to herald the emergence of a better world. The spectre of communism had finally been laid to rest. Liberty had triumphed over tyranny.

The end of the Cold War even led some to proclaim that this was 'the end of history' - which was to say that liberal democracy was now the dominant and unchallengeable force in the world.

However, the 9/11 attacks on America tragically proved this to be absurdly over-optimistic. The eruption of radical Islamism revealed that, while the West may have been rid of one enemy in the Soviet Union, another deadly foe had risen to take its place. So much is, sadly, all too evident.

But what is perhaps less obvious is that communism did not just vanish in a puff of historical smoke. The Soviet Union was defeated and fell apart, for sure. But the communist ideology that fuelled it did not so much disintegrate as reconstitute itself into another, even more deadly form as the active enemy of western freedom.

Subversive

Soviet Communism was a belief system whose goal was to overturn the structures of society through the control of economic and political life. This mutated into a post-communist ideology of the Left, whose no-less ambitious aim was to overturn western society through a subversive transformation of its culture.

To grasp the extent to which this has in fact taken place, we have to go back in time to well before the moment the Berlin Wall fell. The collapse of communism was actually a slow-burning process. Its moral and political bankruptcy became obvious decades before that glorious Berlin day in November 1989.

For many communist fellow travellers, the scales fell from their eyes when the Hungarian uprising was crushed in 1956. Others, over the years, lost faith not just in communism but in its less radical sister, socialism, as their core tenet of 'equality' proved itself in a myriad different ways to be the enemy of freedom and justice, with market forces appearing to carry the torch of liberty instead.

But as communism slowly crumbled, those on the far-Left who remained hostile towards western civilisation found another way to realise their goal of bringing it down.

This was what might be called 'cultural Marxism'. It was based on the understanding that what holds a society together are the pillars of its culture: the structures and institutions of education, family, law, media and religion. Transform the principles that these embody and you can thus destroy the society they have shaped.

There's more at the link (via Memeorandum).

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Nidal Malik Hasan Gave Signals Before His Rampage

From the New York Times, "Fort Hood Gunman Gave Signals Before His Rampage":
It was still dark on Thursday when Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan left his aging apartment complex to attend 6 a.m. prayers at the brick mosque near Fort Hood. Afterward, he said goodbye to his friends there and asked forgiveness from one man for any past offenses.

“I’m going traveling,” he told a fellow worshiper, giving him a hug. “I won’t be here tomorrow.”

Six hours later, Major Hasan walked into a processing center at Fort Hood where soldiers get medical attention before being sent overseas. At first, he sat quietly at an empty table, said two congressmen briefed on the investigation.

Then, witnesses say, he bowed his head for several seconds, as if praying, stood up and drew a high-powered pistol. “Allahu akbar,” he said — “God is great.” And he opened fire. Within minutes he had killed 13 people.

But relatives and acquaintances say tensions that led to the rampage had been building for a long time. Investigators say Major Hasan bought the gun used in the massacre last summer, days after arriving at Fort Hood.

In recent years, he had grown more and more vocal about his opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and tortured over reconciling his military duties with his religion. He tried to get out of the Army, relatives said, and apparently believed it to be impossible, though experts say he was probably given inadequate advice.

At times, he complained, too, about harassment, once describing how someone had put a diaper in his car, saying, “That’s your headdress.” In another case cited by relatives, someone had drawn a camel on his car and written under it, “Camel jockey, get out!”

Major Hasan’s behavior in the months and weeks leading up to the shooting bespeaks a troubled man full of contradictions. He lived frugally in a run-down apartment, yet made a good salary and spent more than $1,100 on the pistol the authorities said he used in the shootings.

He was described as gentle and kindly by many neighbors, quick with a smile or a hello, yet he complained bitterly to people at his mosque about the oppression of Muslims in the Army. He had few friends, and even the men he interacted with at the mosque saw him as a strange figure whom they never fully accepted into their circle.

“He was obviously upset,” said Duane Reasoner Jr., an 18-year-old who attended the mosque and ate frequently with Major Hasan at the Golden Corral restaurant. “He didn’t want to go to Afghanistan.”
Read the whole thing.

This is one of those "analytical" pieces that attempts a master synthesis of the various facts and interpretations now available. And at every turn, the piece plays up Hasan's assimilationist, all-American bona fides, and downplays -- even denies, pleading that events are still under "investigation" -- the fanatical extremism that Hasan eagerly adopted as part of his strict interpretation of Islam.

As I reported just tonight, according to
London's Telegraph, Malik Hasan preached exterminationism of infidels even at professional events:

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the gunman who killed 13 at America's Fort Hood military base, once gave a lecture to other doctors in which he said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats.

He also told colleagues at America's top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The outburst came during an hour-long talk Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, gave on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, where he worked for six years before arriving at Fort Hood in July.
Malik Hasan may very well have been a fine and gentle man. But he was a ruthless killer who screamed "God is great" before riddling his targets with automatic fire. For the New York Times, there's an agenda -- an agenda of political correctness that bends over backwards not to alienate the Muslim community and the apologist for fanatical Islamism. Of course, if this had been an evangelical Christian opening fire at a conference of imams or murdering another abortion doctor, there'd be no talk of not "rushing to conclusions." Christians as a body would have been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion, found "consumed be hatred" and "intolerant of diversity." That's the double standard that not only demeans the goodness in the hearts of all Americans, but puts this country at an even greater risk of destruction.

RELATED: Robert Stacy McCain, "Paralysis by Analysis."

The Left and Terror: Unparalleled Cul-de-Sac of Death

From J.R. Dunn, at American Thinker, "The Left and Terror":

The Jihadis will return. We know this, in the same way that we know about death and taxes. Thanks in large part to the weakening of our defensive efforts under the new administration, there will be further attacks against this country's population, perhaps even worse than those of 9/11. (This week's attack by Nidal Malik Hasan serves to underline the threat.)

When this attack occurs, we will see an end to all the nonsense. Our present drift regarding terror policy is occurring only because Americans have been encouraged to put unpleasant realities at a distance, to live in a dream world where all the bad stuff happens to other people. 9/11 has ceased to signify. Terrorism has become a matter of bad manners. As my grandfather might have put it, this country is in for a rude awakening.

When it comes (and sad to say, it will need to be even worse than the Hassan attack) people will want answers and action. They will get both. Few things move faster than a frightened politician, particularly a politician frightened by his own constituents. Fearful pols will see to it that current efforts to undermine American security will come to an abrupt halt. The law enforcement paradigm will be overturned. The attempts to "Mirandize" Islamist terrorists -- to turn them into esoteric versions of American street criminals, protected by the same legal constraints -- will cease. Contingent efforts to criminalize American security officials doing their best to protect the country will be curtailed. All the deeply complex questions fabricated over the past few years will be abruptly simplified.

But there is one thing that will not be addressed: the role of the American left.

The American left is unparalleled at wriggling out of deadly cul-de-sacs of its own creation. Consider how many times since the Vietnam War this country's left has involved itself in activities that in saner epochs would have resulted in lengthy jail sentences. Support for the Sandinistas and the Salvadoran FMLN, the Nuclear Freeze movement (a KGB operation from start to finish), cooperation with Palestinian and related terrorist groups. In each case, the left continued its involvement until the bitter end; and in each case skipped off with no consequences. This offhand attitude toward sedition has its roots in the excesses of the witch-hunt era. The aura of martyrdom donned by the left since the early 50s has bought them a free pass for over half a century.

The myth concerning the left and the terror conflict asserts that American leftists pulled together with the rest of the country until such Republican Saurons as Cheney, Rove, Ashcroft, and their puppet W simply went too far: persecuting innocent citizens, impugning the Constitutional rights of the poor Jihadis, and shocking the world with their viciousness and brutality. As the sole exemplars of moral purity in the millennial world, the left had no choice but to begin "speaking truth to power" ....

There is only one way this will end: people are going to die. Americans will be killed in large numbers and under the most horrifying circumstances in attacks that could very likely have been prevented. And when this occurs -- as it must -- what will the left do? The same as they did after 9/11. Grab a kid-size American flag from somebody else's hand and stand waving it frantically until the moment of potential retribution is safely past.

Be sure to read the whole thing. (I mean it ... the best is at that link.)

RELATED: The Rhetorican, "The Security Bottom Line."

Lieberman Calls for Fort Hood Investigation: 'Nidal Malik Hasan an Islamist Extremist', 'Fort Hood an Act of Homegrown Terrorism'

Senator Joseph Lieberman's discussion today on Fox News Sunday was one of the most succinct, morally compelling commentaries on the Fort Hood massacre we've heard thus far. Certainly Lieberman's statements are the most forceful we've heard from any Democratic Party leader. See Chris Wallace, "Lieberman Calls for Fort Hood Investigation":

Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee Senator Joe Lieberman says he plans to begin a congressional investigation to determine whether the shooting of 13 people at Fort Hood was an act of home-grown terrorism.

Lieberman said there were "strong warning signs" that the alleged gunman, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, was an "Islamist extremist."

"If that is true, the murder of these 13 people was a terrorist act and, in fact, it was the most destructive terrorist act to be committed on American soil since 9/11," Lieberman told FOX News Sunday.

He said he also wants to find out whether the Army missed warning signs that Hasan was becoming extreme in his Islamist views.

According to bystanders at Fort Hood, Hasan shouted the words "Allah Akbar," Arabic for "God is great!" when he opened fire. Over the past few years, Hasan reportedly made a series of statements justifying suicide bombing and comparing it to the bravery of an American soldier who would throw himself on a grenade to protect his colleagues.

Lieberman said if Hasan was showing signs he had become an Islamist radical, the Army should have shown "zero tolerance" and discharged him immediately.
Referring to the very same broadcast, Raw Story suggests that the "New York Times reports, however, that investigators have tentatively concluded it was not part of a terrorist plot."

Of course, there's no necessary reason for Hasan to have acted as part of a formal jihadist cell in a planned terrorist operation. Perhaps a solitary Muslim extremist, the facts are clear enough for anyone to make a reasonable case that Nidal Hassan is responsible for the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11. We know now that Nidal Hassan:

* Attended the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia, where he worshipped with three of the 9/11 terrorsts; and where he trainded under Anwar al Awlaki, a radical Islamist cleric and fanatical al Qaeda booster.

* Posted anti-American hate-speech at online social-networking sites, and
hailed Islamist suicide attacks against American forces.

*
Criticized American foreign and military policies.

* Claimed a "Palestinian" heritage.

* Donned a traditional Muslim robe and distributed Holy Korans the morning of the rampage.

* Announced that
Muslims should "rise up" and attack Americans in retaliation for the war in Iraq.

*
Screamed "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire on the innocents.

And now, it turns out, according to London's Telegraph, "Fort Hood Gunman Had Told U.S. Military Colleagues That Infidels Should Have Their Throats Cut" (via Memeorandum):
Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the gunman who killed 13 at America's Fort Hood military base, once gave a lecture to other doctors in which he said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats.

He also told colleagues at America's top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The outburst came during an hour-long talk Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, gave on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, where he worked for six years before arriving at Fort Hood in July.

Colleagues had expected a discussion on a medical issue but were instead given an extremist interpretation of the Koran, which Hasan appeared to believe.

It was the latest in a series of "red flags" about his state of mind that have emerged since the massacre at Fort Hood, America's largest military installation, on Thursday.
No doubt the White House and its mainstream media apologists will continue to remind us not to jump to conclusions.

Thank God for
Joe Lieberman, in any case.

Fanatical U.S. Muslims Cheer Fort Hood Massacre

Via Fausta's Blog and CNN, U.S. Muslims cheering the bloody mayhem at Fort Hood:

See also, Mark Steyn, "MULTICULTURAL ILLUSIONS KILL - NO STRATEGY TO DEFEND AGAINST IDEOLOGY."

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano Apologizes, Reassures Arab Regimes for Fort Hood Massacre

From Fox News, "Napolitano Warns Against Anti-Muslim Backlash: Homeland Security Secretary Reassures Arab World That U.S. Authorities Were Taking Measures to Quell Anti-Islam Sentiments After Fort Hood Rampage":

"This was a terrible tragedy for all involved," Napolitano told reporters in the United Arab Emirates' capital Abu Dhabi. "Obviously, we object to -- and do not believe -- that anti-Muslim sentiment should emanate from this."

Napolitano said her agency is working with state and local groups to try to deflect any anti-Muslim anger after the Thursday attacks by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The shootings left 13 people dead and 29 wounded.
But see Bare Naked Islam, "After the MUSLIM SLAUGHTER of Americans at Ft. Hood, the Only Thing Homeland Security Chief, Janet Napolitano, is Worried About is Anti-Muslim Backlash?":
Oh Yeah? Well let’s really give her something to worry about. Pass these videos along to your friends, preferably WITH NO WARNINGS. Every American should be forced to watch these.
ACTUALLY, OUT OF RESPECT FOR MY REGULAR READERS, FULL CONTENT WARNING!!!!!

More at the link.