To have others investigating not firmly under the thumb of the Executive branch might muss things up. And the President is now an experienced foot dragger, so why not push this out until there's some other event to distract attention? Why bother committing all the resources of the government to investigating the first jihadist attack on America since 9/11? After all, the FBI said this was not being looked at as terrorism, right after the attack. The attacker opens fire screaming the jihadist war cry "Allahu Akbar!" and it's not Islamic terrorism? Please ignore that man screaming "God is Great" unless he blows your head off. Then we're off to mourning mode replete with more odes to political correctness like our "our diversity is our strength." In this instance, our "strength" was a police officer pumping multiple rounds into a still-firing fanatic. Sanctimonious homilies are a tissue thin shield against terrorists.
The enemies of America are not stupid. There are very capable of learning lessons and applying them. The attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 failed, but the lessons of that failure paved the way to the horrendous massacre that was 9/11. They are watching and learning. Whether planned directly by Al Qaeda or not, this Ft. Hood slaughter enabled by a PC blind spot will be understood and filed away. Perhaps, it will give action to another plot immediately. Maybe it will give rise to another long term plot just as deadly as 9/11. Either way, a new weakness has been shown. They know it now, but the question is: do we know it? Will we ever know it?
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dan(Miller)
Doc Ellis,
I agree with you on the PC problem. Now that it appears very unfortunately to have affected at least the higher echelons of the military, there is a big problem.
As to giving the Major Hasan situation a lot of public and congressional scrutiny at this point, I think it would be best to allow his court martial to go forward, without excessive recriminations in congressional hearings. I don't think the PC virus is likely to affect the lieutenant colonels and colonels who will compose the court martial, and I would be very disappointed were a conviction to be overturned due to command influence from above, or press accounts alleged to have affected the fairness of the court.
You may be interested in this article explaining my expectations for the court martial.
Dan(Miller)
2 - Cindy
Didn't finish reading this article. It's standard bullshit bigoted racist white-man-speak written by someone who doesn't know dick about affirmative action. The author is a typical round peg spit out of the American round peg machine. A tribute to zombie robot non-thinking all across the good ol' boys USA.
3 - Dave Nalle
Do I hear the sound of a mind slamming shut?
Dave
4 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
Speaking of minds slammed shut, check out Dock's last article...and the last comment to his article. I think Cindy's quite justified, thank you very much.
5 - Ruvy
It's standard bullshit bigoted racist white-man-speak written by someone who doesn't know dick about affirmative action...
Dock Ellis' article is, as is often the case, right on the money - in almost every particular.
I do know dick about affirmative action. I've seen this poisonous shit at work in the Federal government, with my own wife targeted by some mean mouthed black worker who accused her of racism. Why? Because she had taken a stamp that was her responsibility to take care of back to her own desk! This same worker accused the whole office of racism in one variety or another - and the only thing that came out of the administrative hearings was her own racism and hatred, and her own attitude that "whitey owed her".
The black plaintiff lost the administrative hearing - and she suffered a heart attack shortly afterward. You draw your own conclusions. Mine is that she didn't get what she felt that "whitey owed her" and it was just too much for her.
In this instance, there was more at stake than a stamp in a drawer. Fourteen people lost their lives, and the murder was preventable with all the bullshit that the Feds do to "watch" the members of the military. But being a Wahhabi fanatic murdering off soldiers and civilians was okay. And it still is. General Casey said so. Let's smell the horse-shit again, straight from the horse's ass. "This terrible event would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty." To sacrifice "diversity", and all the multi-culti bullshit that goes along with it, is more of a crime than murdering off soldiers and civilians at a military base. Boy, have the mighty fallen! If I were stupid enough to have remained in the States with my family, the ONE thing I would have forbidden my boys from doing would have been signing up for your military. And General Casey explained why.
There is a reason you Americans deserve the snickers, contempt and humiliation the world is dishing out to you, and your government's behavior in this case is a perfect illustration.
6 - Dave Nalle
Glenn, I read the comment you pointed me to. So? Do the sins of one administration excuse the sins of another? Do two wrongs make a right? How is his criticism of Obama invalidated by your criticism of Bush? Perhaps you should consider that the knife cuts both ways.
Dave
7 - Glenn Contrarian
Boy oh boy, Ruvy, you've had a long morning!
"All men are created equal"
"Separation of church and state"
"Give me your tired, your poor, your wretched refuse"
"The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"
So since ONE Muslim decides to murder fourteen of his fellow American soldiers, we need to get rid of all of them? Y'know, It wasn't so long ago that Blacks weren't allowed to serve in combat roles. Come to think of it, the Mormons didn't allow Blacks to be ministers until the late 70's...which meant they were an officially racist organization.
But I'm getting off track here.
Tell you what, Ruvy - Google the "Go For Broke" Regiment, the "Fighting 442nd" of WWII, the most-decorated regiment of the Army. They were all ethnic Japanese...with all the traditions that entails, despite the fact that the nation held their entire race in suspicion and their families were in internment camps.
What we did to the issei was certainly a crime...but we can at least learn from our mistakes. We cannot let the actions of one American soldier who happened to be Muslim be attributed to all American soldiers who happen to be Muslim.
Diversity IS a tradition of our nation - and if we let the actions of one or several take away that tradition, then the idea, the dream that is America, that Land of Opportunity where ANYONE can be WHATEVER they want to be...is lost to the dustbin of history.
Besides, Ruvy - if we allow officially-sanctioned discrimination again, sooner or later they'll go after other ethnic groups, too.
8 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
Glenn, I read the comment you pointed me to. So? Do the sins of one administration excuse the sins of another? Do two wrongs make a right? How is his criticism of Obama invalidated by your criticism of Bush? Perhaps you should consider that the knife cuts both ways.
Perhaps you should consider whether criticism of EITHER administration is warranted at all in that particular case. Why? Did either the Bush or the Obama administrations in any way require or even gently encourage those children to sing? No. The ones who did get those children to sing had nothing to do with either administration.
What I did, Dave, was point out yet another instance of a conservative searching for SOMEthing, ANYthing to criticize Obama about. Cases in point - the birthers; "We're glad Obama failed to bring the Olympics to Chicago!"; "He bowed before the Japanese emperor!"; "He's not wearing a flag pin on his lapel!"; "He disrespected the national anthem!"; "He pals around with terrorists!"...
...need I go on?
Frankly, Dave, the attitude I see most conservatives having towards President Obama aren't really much different than that of wrestlers towards their 'enemies' on WWE. Even the tone isn't much different.
9 - Baronius
Cindy, that's hilarious. Rather than dispute the article, you tell us to stop reading it. Anti-PC people would tell you that an article is nonsense, but PC people will order you to stop reading it.
It also illustrates that a rebel objects to power when it's exercised by others.
10 - doug m
Baron, what your comments illustrate is that you're an anti-comprehension person. Cindy didn't anyone to stop reading it. She said she didn't finish it.
11 - Baronius
Fair enough, Doug.
12 - Mark
Diversity is. PC should no longer mean politically correct -- that impotent power play. We are better described as a post consensus society. Get used to it.
Or move to Israel.
13 - roger nowosielski
"Post consensus" society - an apt term.
14 - Jordan Richardson
More of the same nonsense: arrogant, ignorant people refusing to change or understand other cultures can only bear a grudge towards the myth of "political correctness" while thinking that the sky is falling and that their rights are vanishing because others finally get to share in the pie.
Sad, really.
15 - Cindy
Baronius,
Cindy, that's hilarious. Rather than dispute the article, you tell us to stop reading it.
I said I stopped reading it. That is quite a different thing than suggesting anyone else should do likewise.
I don't have to read every army recruitment flyer to see if maybe one says something different than all the others. The author begins on page one with standard biased presumptions. I have made arguments against such at least a half dozen times. If folks like Dave or you have not already read them I doubt taking the trouble now will help.
Anti-PC people would tell you that an article is nonsense, but PC people will order you to stop reading it.
I have written in opposition to PC. Guess you don't know more about me than my age (which I also wrote about, btw).
It also illustrates that a rebel objects to power when it's exercised by others.
??? What does that mean?
16 - Cindy
Oh # 10. Thank you doug.
17 - Cindy
Hiya Roger!~~~~
Yay! You are back! ~~~~~~~~~
:-) (-: !!!!!!!!!!!
18 - roger nowosielski
So far so good. I'll post later on the Foucault thread so we might continue.
19 - Cindy
Glenn,
I read your last post as you suggested Dave do. All I can say is, this is for you.
20 - Dave Nalle
Perhaps you should consider whether criticism of EITHER administration is warranted at all in that particular case. Why? Did either the Bush or the Obama administrations in any way require or even gently encourage those children to sing? No. The ones who did get those children to sing had nothing to do with either administration.
I'd dispute that. The teachers who encouraged this behavior are part of a culture which conditions children to revere leaders reflexively and this kind of display is disturbing no matter who it is directed towards. It's not a healthy way to behave towards an elected leader.
...need I go on?
They're mostly valid criticisms, they're just trivial ones. It's hardly illegitimate to bring them up.
Dave
21 - zingzing
dave: "The teachers who encouraged this behavior are part of a culture which conditions children to revere leaders reflexively..."
they're north korean?
22 - Ruvy
Glenn,
Don't lecture me with your American civics bullshit. I didn't love it and I left. To me all that crap is meaningless. This has meaning.
Your government was tracking this SOB and monitoring his e-mails. They knew what direction he was moving in. They knew because they were reading over his shoulder. This man Hasan should have been pulled from the base and given some kind of position where he could not harm anybody.
A Muslim who subscribes to the Wahhabi crappology is a threat to you and every other non-Muslim he comes in contact with. And he should not be allowed to bear arms - particularly where he can endanger others. Wahhabis are supposed to kill non-believers; that is their creed.
Nota bene, Glenn, I did not say Muslims - I specified Wahhabi. If eight years after seeing 3,000 Americans (or more) murdered off by Wahhabi terrorists, you still cannot distinguish between Wahhabi, Sunni, Shi'a and Sufi, you are fools, the lot of you.
The Wahhabi are your enemies and if you do not kill them, they will kill you. The Shi'a are being worked up into being your enemies, but if the radical haters in their leadership are killed, they will change course. The Sunni are not yet your enemies, but your ignorance and unwillingness to learn about Islam will make them your enemies. The Sufi are still up in the air. Again, your ignorance of Islam will make them your enemies.
23 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
It's not a healthy way to behave towards an elected leader.
I heartily agree! But that is NO reason to castigate that particular elected leader when that leader had NOTHING to do with making those children do such a thing!
24 - Glenn Contrarian
And for Dave and OA -
I think Cindy's link is meant for all of us, and not just me.
(Thanks, Cindy - I needed a smile)
25 - Glenn Contrarian
Ruvy -
Why didn't the FBI do anything about Hasan when they knew he was communicating with a Wahhabi cleric? Because they saw no reason to do so:
"But the federal authorities dropped an inquiry into the matter after deciding that the messages from the psychiatrist, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, did not suggest any threat of violence and concluding that no further action was warranted.
“At this point, there is no information to indicate Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had any co-conspirators or was part of a broader terrorist plot.” The statement concluded that “because the content of the communications was explainable by his research and nothing else was found,” investigators decided “that Major Hasan was not involved in terrorist activities or terrorist planning.”
Counterterrorism and military officials said Monday night that the communications, first intercepted last December as part of an unrelated investigation, were consistent with a research project the psychiatrist was then conducting at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington on post-traumatic stress disorder."
Okay, Ruvy? I understand that you hate civics lessons, but in America you can't take action against someone if they happen to talk to someone evil. After all, have you yourself ever had a discussion with someone you knew supported someone else who was up to no good?
For the past ten months I've had to deal with a my Foster child's dad whom we all strongly suspect of child abuse and carnal knowledge. I strongly suspect it, and so does my wife and family, and so do the nurses and the caregivers, and so does the state. But we can't DO anything because we don't have PROOF.
So since I've had to be repeatedly nice to this guy because it helped my Foster child to calm down and behave, does that make me evil? Of course not.
So please, Ruvy - calm down and relax. You'll live longer and happier if you do.