A question not being asked anywhere else besides for on this website, an unasked question that demands an answer from the U.S. Army, is why they did not discharge such a security risk known for his "outlandish" views? Col. Terry Lee who knew and worked with Hassan says he was known for his "outlandish" views and that he had said that Muslims should "stand up" to the American "aggressor." In fact, the AP reports that federal "law enforcement officials say the suspected Fort Hood, Texas, shooter had come to their attention at least six months ago because of Internet postings that discussed suicide bombings and other threats, including posts that equated suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on a grenade to save the lives of their comrades." Are U.S. soldiers dead because political correctness forbade law enforcement from doing what was necessary and discharging this soldier? It seems like there is evidence to indicate that this is the case. The American people should loudly be demanding the answers to these important questions. Tweet
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)
absolutely - you have a commander in chief that is cozy with the muslim nations, leaders and speaks their lingo. Hence those who are in charge of security concerns are now hesitant to address anyone as a muslim sympathizer for fear of being labeled as intolerant or a hate monger. The responsibility here lies squarely on the shoulders of Hassan's commander and S-2. Neither of which took appropriate action even in the light of their impending deployment. Both apparently put their concerns for their careers over their concerns for their men. What else would be their reasoning for lack of action?
ReplyDeleteThanks for the insights.
ReplyDeleteIf federal law enforcement knows about vile internet posts about suicide bombings but decides not to pursue and investigate the matter, then there is a problem. Because if they had looked into it rather than apparently ignored it for six months, they could have found that Malik Hassan was a Major in the U.S. Army. They could have informed the U.S. Army and he should have then at the very least been discharged. Why did they not pursue these internet posts, why did they not do this? Could it be political correctness? Furthermore, given Col. Lee's interview above and the apparent widespread knowledge of Hassan's "outlandish" views, including that the Muslims should "stand up" to the American "aggressor," do you think Hassan's views always remained a complete secret from any military superior? Because if they did not , it means there was a probably an act of willful blindness. And what would motivate that other than a form of political correctness?
ReplyDeleteIn this context, political correctness really means fear of facing accusations and actual consequences for being politically incorrect. Assuming federal law enforcement had reason to believe or investigate the matter, or military superiors did know about his views, then perhaps treating Hassan as a security risk never happened because of fear of the reprecussions of doing so. Fear of charges of Islamophobia, fear of responses from organizations like CAIR, fear of being accused of racism, fear of being told they were discriminating against religion, or fear of lawsuits. Fear of the attack from those who are the standard bearers of the politically correct in our society.