Confronting the Spin on the Fort Hood Massacre

SEARCH FSM

Search Must Reads

National Debt Clock

A million seconds pass in 12 days.
A billion seconds pass in 31 years.
A trillion seconds pass in 31,688 years!

View results

November 13, 2009

Frank Salvato

Print This E-mail This

ShareThis

Comments (27)

It is sad and disturbing commentary on the state of American culture when the facts surrounding an event, such as the slaughter that took place at Fort Hood, can not only be manipulated to facilitate a political ideology but blatantly ignored in the pursuit of a political agenda. In the face of the most potent enemy the United States and the free world has ever know – aggressive and violent radical Islam – our leaders and members of the mainstream media are doing just that; manipulating the truth to facilitate an agenda, and we are all in danger because of it.

By now, everyone in the world knows the details surrounding the massacre at Fort Hood, Texas. US Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, in committing not only an act of terrorism but an act of treason, perpetrated the most deadly terrorist act on American soil since the attacks of September 11, 2001. Actions and statements made by Hasan prior to his murderous spree indicate beyond doubt that he was not only opposed to US military action in the Iraqi and Afghan theaters and that he felt it was appropriate for Muslims in those countries to kill US and NATO soldiers in response to “the infidel occupiers,” but that he made a purposeful and premeditated choice to execute his jihad. Yet, President Obama, his spokespeople and members of the mainstream media are hyping the “backlash against Muslims” sentiment while completely ignoring – and in some cases arguing against – the mountain of evidence that points to the fact that Hasan was a radical Islamist and a jihadist.

Four Qualifications for Terrorism

Alan Colmes erroneously cited a definition for the word “terrorism” as used by Webster's Dictionary during a recent stint on The O'Reilly Factor. While Webster's is a wonderful resource for everyday use in divining the meaning of words, where terrorism is concerned it falls short.

Terrorism is, effectively, a classification of a type of violent act. The National Counterterrorism Center uses the definition provided in Title 22 US Code § 2656f (d) (2):

“...the term ‘terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;...”

The NCTC specifically states in its 2008 Report of Terrorism that this definition includes:

“...military personnel and assets outside war zones and war-like settings.”

In addition, and from a clinical perspective, terrorism is distinguished from other acts of violence, and from war, by always having these four characteristics:

Terrorists violate the rules of modern warfare, as established in the Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions; they can also be “sub-state groups” who can't declare war legitimately.

The goal of those who employ terrorism is almost always, without exception, to achieve political change.

The targets of those who employ terrorism are symbolic of the political issue in question.

That acts of terror are designed specifically to be sensational, to get attention from the public and especially the media

When examining the actions taken by Hasan, both on the day of the shootings and before, each of the criteria in the officially recognized definition for terrorism has been satisfied:

· It was premeditated: Hasan acquired non-government issued firearms to use for the attack and he began, days earlier, to give away all of his personal belongings.

It was politically motivated: Hasan was acting in defense of his political beliefs – as well as his religious beliefs – where Muslims and Muslim nations were concerned as is evidenced in many of his statements provided in a medical lecture at Walter Reed Hospital.

It was an act of violence against non-combatants: While the location of the attack was indeed a military base the victims were unarmed and Hasan knew they would be.

It violated the Geneva and Hague Conventions: Hasan fired on unarmed people and non-military personnel.

His targets were symbolic: Hasan targeted US military personnel at a military base that is one of the primary embarkation points for troop deployment, thus the symbolism of an attack against US military might and ability.

His attacks were sensational.

With all of these facts – all obvious and overt – presented to the American people, law enforcement, our elected officials and the mainstream media, it is an act of dishonesty to pretend that the actions taken by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan on November 5, 2009, were anything but an act of terrorism.

Hasan Is Obviously ‘Pro-Choice'

The argument over whether Hasan's mental state played a significant part in his terrorist act against his colleagues and fellow soldiers has been championed by the mainstream media and some in the Obama Administration. Some are advancing the laughable theory that Hasan was suffering from “Post Traumatic Stress Disorder,” even though Hasan had never been deployed to any active theater. Further, Hasan was schooled as a psychiatrist who specialized in treating soldiers with serious personal injuries and PTSD.

It is more likely and, in fact, probable, in light of Hasan's own words, that he made a purposeful choice to follow his Islamic faith in that way of a fundamentalist. His statement that he is “a Muslim before I am an American,” lends credence to this notion, as do several of his other statements:

“It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims...”

“If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc...” [sic]

“Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the Islam...”

“Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly...”

And one slide in his visual presentation to colleagues at Walter Reed Hospital presented:

"We love death more then [sic] you love life!"

Disturbingly, and unreported in the mainstream media, Osama bin Laden is quoted as having said:

“We love death. The US loves life. That is the big difference between us."

The chances of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan not being of sound mind during the events of November 5, 2009, are distantly remote given the statements he made over the years. The shootings at Fort Hood weren't a case of PTSD or a person who “just snapped,” they weren't even the actions of a coward who was refusing to go to war. They were the actions of someone who made a clear and decided choice to champion his religion – fundamentally – over his nationality. Hasan chose to be a Jihadist and to kill US military personnel in the name of Islam; in the name of Allah; ergo, his use of “Allahu Akbar,” the takbir.

Texas Counts the ‘Fetus'

Another of the fallacies being foisted on the American people is that Hasan's shooting victims number thirteen (13).

One of Hasan's victims, Francheska Velez, 21, who had just returned for her overseas deployment, was six months pregnant at the time of her murder. This is significant for more than the obvious reason.

In the State of Texas, if a pregnant woman is murdered and her child dies as well, the assailant is charged with both the murder of the Mother and the murder of the child. In 2007, a Texas state appeals court upheld a state law that protects pregnant mothers and their unborn children from acts of violence. It is because of this law that Hasan should be charged with fourteen (14) counts of premeditated murder, not thirteen (13).

So, why won't the mainstream media and the Obama Administration use the correct number – fourteen (14) – when referring to the victims of this massacre? Because they would then have to admit that an unborn baby, pursuant to Texas law, is a human being worthy of the right to life as established “unalienable” by our US Constitution. Should either the mainstream media or the Obama Administration establish the precedent – nationally, due to the fact that this happened on federal land in the form of a US military base – that the unborn have a right to life, constitutionally, and the entire pro-choice movement is set back to zero.

By the authority of Texas law, the accurate number of murders that took place at the hand of Maj. Nidal Malik Hassan is fourteen (14). It is cowardly and pathetically ideological for the mainstream media, the President and his administration to ignore this truth, this fact, and this moral accuracy.

Political Correctness Kills

So, why did this all have to happen? Why could all of the “red flags” exist without any definitive action having been taken by the FBI or the US Army? The truth of the matter is that none of this had to happen. Fourteen (14) people would still be alive today if it wasn't for the ideological cancer that is political correctness.

Because of political correctness, federal authorities failed to categorize Hasan as a potential threat to national security. Further, in another stunning bit of denial, the wheel chalks weren't even under the tires of the government plane that brought FBI investigators to Fort Hood before they issued a statement saying “terrorism was not involved in this shooting.” The obvious question begging to be asked is this: Based on what? Before the FBI had even gathered the first shred of evidence it discounted terrorism. Why, because classifying a violent act perpetrated by a fundamentalist Muslim as “terrorism” isn't politically correct.

And because of political correctness, the US Army refused to act on the concerns of several of Hasan's colleagues that brought to light his penchant for radical Islam. Several of Hasan's colleagues stated that he was vehement in his defense of Islam to the point of taking the side of Jihadists engaged in combat against American soldiers. This information was provided to superior officers but because Islam has been erroneously declared the “religion of peace” it isn't politically correct to accuse a fundamentalist Muslim of committing a terrorist act when he shoots people as he screams “Allahu Akbar.”

Islam is the only religion existing today with religious tenets that validate killing to advance the religion. All one has to do is to take the time to read the Quran and Hadith to understand that Islam is a religion of conquest that condones violence in its version of proselytization. In using violence – and sometimes deadly violence – against non-believers or “sinners” within the religion (which can range from a woman talking to an unrelated man to drawing a picture of Muhammad), how can anyone justify calling Islam the religion of peace? The only justification comes by way political correctness.

Political correctness has kept the federal government, law enforcement and the mainstream media from being honest about several terrorist plots against military installations right here in the United States.

Jihadists targeted Fort Dix.

A jihadist shot a military recruiter in Arkansas.

Two jihadists targeted a US Navy base which docks nuclear submarines in South Carolina.

And now Fort Hood.

In light of the Fort Hood massacre we can now say with absolute certainty that because of political correctness, fourteen (14) people are dead. Political correctness kills.

And In the End...

Perhaps we are naïve. Maybe the falsely elevated self-esteem fostered in a generation of me-first, gimme-mine, golly-I'm-great, narcissistic ideologues has left us unable to recognize true evil when it stares us in the eye; has left us unable to recognize an enemy attack – or a number of enemy attacks (whether plotted, attempted or completed) – even as it occurs. In light of the denial of the facts by our mainstream media, law enforcement and federal leadership the argument for naiveté can be successfully advanced.

Or maybe we have foolishly allowed disingenuous and dangerous people to establish a shadow set of cultural norms – antithetical to constitutionally legislated public law – in political correctness. And perhaps these people don't really have the best interests of the country at heart. Maybe, just as Nidal Malik Hasan put his religion above his country, the politically correct have put their ideology above their country, above national security and above you and me.

No matter how you assemble the pieces, our nation has suffered the first terrorist attack since September 11, 2001, in the massacre at Fort Hood. It was perpetrated by a radical Islamist executing Jihad and it happened on President Obama's watch. Fourteen (14) people are dead and no amount of politically correct spin can bring them back.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Frank Salvato is the managing editor for The New Media Journal. He serves at the Executive Director of the Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan, 501(C)(3) research and education initiative.

Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (27) | Sign Up for FSM Updates!

Print This E-mail This

ShareThis

Comments (27)

My position may even go further........I think every Muslim in the world is my enemy simply because their position is "if I don't do it their way, won't accept their religion, won't honor the Koran, won't blow myself up", their objective is to kill me. Every Muslim has Americans or "infidels" as they call us, in their killing crosshairs.

And even more......since it's clear the Koran demands Muslims to capture the world, killing anyone that stands in their way, then every Muslim in the United States Armed Forces is a threat to not only military members, but a threat to American national security. Therefore every Muslim in the military services should be discharged immediately...it is unconceivable to allow the enemy inside our umbrella of protection........the United States Military.

posted by: Harry Riley
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 08:51 AM

DUH - Being politically correct is just stupid!

posted by: Bud
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 09:15 AM

I think Mr. Salvato has hit the tack on the cranium.
I also believe the truly insane have been given control of America. Dems and Reps alike need to be rebuilt from the top down. And a 3rd party is a good idea for us, too.

posted by: Glenda Rosenberg
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 09:26 AM

I don't agree that every Muslim in the world is an enemy. There are Muslims and ex-Muslims who are attempting to bring Islamic teachings into the 21st century; Mustafa Akyol, Irshad Manji, and Abdul Hadi Palazzi are only three who are working hard to accomplish this. Islam is over 1400 years old, so these people and many more will not have an easy time of it. We should encourage and support them. Islam, after all, is not going to go away. In terms of what America and the military can and should do- educate our children about the true history of America, her greatness and exceptionalism; the meaning and responsibilities of freedom. Our military should investigate thouroughly any Muslim who wants to sign up, have them undergo extensive psychological tests, etc. Actually, they should do this with anyone who wants to sign up. I just read that our war colleges do not even teach the history of war anymore, primarily due to budget cuts. So we must increase funding for our military. All that said, I agree that we have raised a selfish, nihilistic bunch of spoiled brats.

posted by: MaryAnn
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 09:48 AM

Political Correctnes is a cancer in our society which is and will continue to destroy our country.

posted by: Bob Pruitt
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 09:55 AM

The appeasement of muslims (yes, ALL of them) is just plain nuts. Show me one "good" muslim organization who has marched against their jihadi bros, reported the tithe to their mosque as going to terrorist groups. I have been sickened by our government's appeasement strategy (remember that CAIR were the "good muslims" until just recently?) Their religion states that the world MUST be muslim, all who aren't are infidels. These people are swine. Apologies to all the PC folk out there but MUSLIMS declared war on us in 1979 (1968 if you count RFK's assassination by Sirhan Sirhan). They are THE ENEMY!

posted by: Jeff McDonald
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 10:58 AM

There may be moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam.

posted by: Trisha
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 11:25 AM

I don't belive there are any moderate Muslims. These people only have one thing in mind. The complete overthrow buy any means of any country that will not yeild to them. I think every American should arm themself and return the violance to them in the form of lead...

posted by: Herb Baxter
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 11:49 AM

The tell all is that post 911,and after Fort Hood, and all other Islamic attacks few, if any, Islamic organizations voiced disapproval. We need to be vigilant. Those that forget or do not know history will suffer again.. I submit that these signs of terrorism are no different then the early days of Naizism. We need to heed the warnings. God Bless America.

posted by: neil 5hands
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 12:35 AM

I really hate to say this and I know this sounds extreme. Many in the media, claim that we are fighting aginst Muslim extremists. I believe that this is not the case at all. It is the Musim religion that is the problem. There is no problem with any other religion in the world except Mulsims. Everywhere the Muslims touch another non-Muslim population, there is bloodshed.
To survive, the rest of the world will have to take the action to either push back, outlaw, or to completely destroy this so-called religion. I don't see another alternative: Most freedom loving people do not want to be subjected by Muslims, and Muslims, as dictated by their Koran have declared death to us apostates. I wish this was not so.

posted by: Jeff Spencer
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 01:23 PM

With disgust I watch the "we-feel-your-terrorist pain" anti-American appeasement coalition and its fanatic orthadoxy of political correctness transform America into an emotional halfway house and a nation of eunuches.

We now have an entire self-loathing treasonous mindset population whose concern for the civil liberties of jihadi terrorist will lead America to compassionate annihilation.

Forgiving is God's job, there is nothing more contemptable than forgiving the unforgivable.

posted by: Lightning Jack
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 01:24 PM

It is time to push back on "political correctness" and start telling the truth even when it is offensive. The truth is offensive to some people. When Muslims commit a terrorist act, lets just say it!
Even the FBI admits, 10% of the Mulsims in the United States are terrorist. Wake up America!

posted by: Larry
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 01:37 PM

Being spoiled is not the driver, the driver is political correctness which has construed caution as prejudice. Simply put while not all muslims may be radicals the simple execution of treating a group with an extra degree of caution is treated as "prejudice". The fear of bigotry has gotten to the point that it is overruling caution. Are we justified in being cautious, I would say yes. Just as staying out of dangerous neighborhoods is considered wise not bigoted. Why in the name of political correctness do we need to expose ourselves to such dangers?

While Major Hassan, may not necessarily have been a part of a Muslim conspiracy, his background and the inherent conflicts between his background and his duties appear to have been his critical decision point and he came down on the side of "jihad". This appears to give sufficient reason to treat suspect individuals with caution.

posted by: WildeBeast
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 02:26 PM

Exactly correct. The 1960s Dr. Spockian non-disciplinary upbringing has brought us a generation of deadbeats with an entitlement mentailty that creates a need for big government, with the socialist demogoguery that always follows. Men are now either feminist clones or still little boys, incapable of handling their own lives without Nanny government at their side. It is the fall of the great Republic of America that had brought us the wealth and freedoms we currently have. Very sad.

posted by: reeves
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 02:30 PM

I never havebeen and wil never be politicaly correct. This problem has led to the overall weakening of our country and must stop if we wish to remain the worlds primary power.

posted by: bob arrix
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 02:30 PM

How about we pull all of troops out of the midle east and then we drop a couple of really big A-Bombs on this scum. That should take care of the problem once and for all.

posted by: Herb
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 03:07 PM

Serious issues demand serious thought - please start checking out streetrebuttal.com - today's question is "what lessons have we learned from the Fort Hood massacre?"

posted by: Joroma
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 03:33 PM

Lets go back to the 'old style' of warfare, wipe out your enemy at the source, continue with "cleaning house". Lock the Borders.

We need a Gov't with cajones to protect us.
Not a bunch of game players with our lives. Power seekers with their eye on the ultimate, a major position in the New World Organization.

Watch the Copenhagen Meeting in December. Google "Lord Monkton" in Utube.com and be aware of what is about to happen to our country via Obama.

This 'Poser' Administration will/has already started to wipe out our monetary system, health care system, capitalism and enslave every person in this country.

God Bless America,

posted by: Cab
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 05:37 PM

I think we need to really consider the fact that a generation of Americans have been raised that simply do not value Life itself. They forget about 3,000 dead Americans on 9/11 like it was a new flick from Tarantino. They take the morning after pill like it's a Rolaids. They are so insensitized to crime, violence and murder in our society that they literally don't give a rat's behind.

If the brutal slaughter of 13 unarmed soldiers at Fort Hood doesn't turn your knees to jelly and your heart to lead with grief, what hope ...really is there for you?

posted by: Holger Awakens
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 05:52 PM

Salvato's piece is awesome, rivaled only by Lawrence Auster's "The Massacre" at

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/014684.html

and David Kupelian's "What's Behind America's Politically Correct "love" Of Islam?" at

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115542

posted by: levotb
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 05:52 PM

i recognize evil when i see it.

posted by: alan
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 07:05 PM

I was of that totally anti-Muslim mindset, too (show me a so-called "moderate" Muslim!), until I heard an absolutely riveting interview on the Laura Ingraham Show this week with a Muslim (Syrian-American) doctor in Phoenix. Actually, his parents came from Syria; but, as he emphasized strongly, the moment they arr'd in America, they became totally American in every sense but actual citizenship until that day, too, arrived. He pointed out that every time he hears of another Radical Muslim outrage, he is chagrined, angered and frustrated - and, in fact, has begun - with like-minded Muslims - a very pro-American organzation to try to counter the growing tide of Anti-Islamic anger and feelings. He is very Conservative, is NOT impressed by or supportive of the current Administration, and correctly analyzed the terrorist psychiatrist as a terrorist sicko - wrapped up in 7th-Century Islam, etc. - whereas members of his organization only practice the peaceful tenets of Islam and reject all the violence - both historical (much as the stories in the Old Testament are very violent) and societal (Shar'ia law - which, of course, he totally rejects as anti-American and anti-individualistic freedom, etc.). He recognizes that he has - as do his fellow peaceful, pro-American Muslims - an uphill battle, but they're not shrinking from the challenge. Oh yes, he also served as an officer in the US Military, supports 100 percent our mission in Iraq and Afghan, and never experienced any anti-Muslim backlash while in the military. In fact, he is very PRO-military. Wish I recalled his name and the name of his organization, but I was driving in the car & couldn't write anything down - rats!!

posted by: Joy
Saturday, November 14, 2009 at 00:13 AM

The worst terroist attack on America since 911. The current cronies in power are incompetent, ignorant and what worse arrogant. This is a disaster for AMERICA.

posted by: Jane L Wegener
Saturday, November 14, 2009 at 07:51 AM

TPTB ar determined to use everything they can to overthrow America as establlished by the Founding Fathers. This PC and acceptance of these atrocities by the current administration in Washington is but another step in their scheme to control the world with one government, one religion, one political belief, etc. We're on the slippery slope to h---.

posted by: Lee M
Saturday, November 14, 2009 at 07:54 PM

Joy,

Your example of a possible exception to the rule doesn't negate the rule. But no matter what this particular Muslim said/says, there's no possible way for you or I or any other non-Muslim American to know whether he is sincere or genuine because of the principle of Taqiyya.

posted by: Terry Morris
Sunday, November 15, 2009 at 00:22 AM

I agree with Harry Riley's comment (posted Nov 13) to quote:
"Therefore every Muslim in the military services should be discharged immediately...it is unconceivable to allow the enemy inside our umbrella of protection........the United States Military."

posted by: Dan Goodman
Sunday, November 15, 2009 at 04:08 AM

If it's inconceivable to allow the enemy inside our umbrella of protection (which I most certainly agree with), then it goes way, way beyond simply dismissing Muslims from the American military.

posted by: Terry Morris
Sunday, November 15, 2009 at 02:41 PM

Eurabia Watch

Confronting the Spin on the Fort Hood Massacre