Sunday, November 8, 2009

If Only We Had A President

By now, we are all aware of the mass murder of unarmed soldiers by Muslim psychiatrist Major Malik Nadal Hasan at Ft. Hood, and we've all heard the speculation surrounding it. This article will only briefly address the attack itself. The main theme here is how the President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces addressed the matter. It was disgraceful.

First, for what we know about the attack. I will call it a terrorist attack no matter what the mainstream chooses to do. "Terrorist attack" does not require a vast conspiracy, or a sleeper cell coming awake, or a planned and organized assault acting on the orders of Al Qaeda. A Muslim who put Islam before country and who while in the military service actively opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and declared the right of Muslims in those countries to rise up and kill American troops opened fire in an assembly hall with two handguns. Multiple reports state that he shouted "Allahu akhbar" (God is great) before opening fire on the unarmed men and women in the hall. By the time the slaughter was over, thirteen people were dead and another thirty-eight wounded, some critically. And it was done by a man born a Palestinian Muslim who has been expressing anti-American views for at least a decade.

Despite early reports, the fanatic was not killed. As of this writing, he remains in critical but stable condition in a local hospital, in an induced coma to allow for the surgery to take effect. That is already far more mercy than he showed his victims. Reports detail how he calculatedly gave away his belongings, including his beloved Koran, before heading to his murder scene. Unlike many of us civilians, he was an army officer who knew full good and well that even on an army base, except for the military police and security staff, nobody in that room would be armed. And it was unlikely that either the MPs or security would be present that morning.

Multiple excuses for his behavior were being touted early by the politically-correct press and television commentators. He had post traumatic stress disorder (in fact, he has never been in a situation where PTSD would result, and his job as a psychiatrist was to help those who had truly suffered the horrors of war). He had made so many inflammatory pro-Muslim comments at his earlier posting at a military hospital, that they wanted him out of there. He was transferred to Ft. Hood, and continued to get poor reviews from his superior officers. Allegedly, there were anti-Muslim comments made to him by his fellow soldiers, so that may have triggered the attack. Or maybe it was that despite his multiple pleas to the contrary, he had been notified that he was going to be deployed to a war zone where he would be watching his fellow Muslims die. All are great justifications for mass murder, don't you think?

We will be getting the details of both the attack and the murderer's background for weeks and months to come. But one thing remains true. Make no mistake. This was a terrorist attack, carried out by a Muslim adherent of jihad. The Committee on Arab-American Relations (CAIR) rushed to denounce the attack for the sole purpose of trying to convince the world that the murderer's radical Islamic views had nothing to do with it. Horse manure.

Now comes the President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces to address the attack. He had been attending some useless conference about some new socialist program when he was informed of the attack. After being told, he dithered around for a few minutes while deciding how to react to the attack before going live on television to address the American people. There were already no doubts about the nature and the extent of the attack, unlike those immediately following September 11, 2001. So naturally, the president would make a bold and forthright statement condemning both the attack and terrorism, right? Here's how he began his statement (you didn't see this on most TV reports or read it in many later written reports or the reader boards at the bottom of the cable news reports):

"Let me first of all just thank Ken and the entire Department of the Interior Staff for organizing just an extraordinary conference. Uh, I want to thank my cabinet members and senior administration officials who participated today. Uh, I hear that Dr. Joe 'Medicine' Crow was around. So I want to give a shout out. My understanding is, is that you uh had an extremely productive conference."

Drink that in. The president has been told that a massacre has just taken place on an American army base, on American soil, by a Muslim fanatic, and all this scummy Chicago politician can think to do first is spend two to three minutes of his national airtime to thank and commend his political hacks and sycophants at a political conference. Ladies and gentlemen, this man is in charge of the troops who are there to keep us safe from Muslim fanatics.

Not a word about the Ft. Hood mass murders until he made sure he had properly thanked his disciples for their wonderful conference. But surely now he will make a bold statement, comforting the victims, their families and the American people, followed by a warning to all those who would choose to believe that America is an easy target. Nope. While he was finally addressing the attack, every cable feed was running scrolling details of the attack below the shots of his fake grim face. Everybody in America who was watching the events unfold knew what had happened.

So here's what the nuanced leader of the American armed forces had to say: "We don't yet know all the details at this moment. We will share them as we get them. We will make sure we get answers to every single question about this horrible incident. I hope all of you recognize the scope of this tragedy." Since apparently everybody in America already knew the scope of the "tragedy," he must have been referring to his cowardly, namby-pamby words. This is of course consistent with liberal thinking about jihadist attacks such as 9-11. They are "tragedies that happen" rather than murderous undeclared war on America.

And then, unbelievably, this cheap politician closed his remarks by making closing comments repeating his feelings about the now totally irrelevant conference he has just attended. It was undoubtedly the most reprehensible speech any president has ever made about an attack on America in all of American history.

And how does the mainstream report it? "Mr. Obama made an immediate and bold statement about the Ft. Hood tragedy." There's that "tragedy" again. I can only wonder what our brave soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan must be thinking now about their fate which is in the hands of this president who can't even recognize a terrorist attack on American soil, and call it by its proper name--Jihad.

Immediately after the 9-11 attacks, there was mass confusion about what had happened, unlike the event at Ft. Hood. President Bush recognized that scaring the children at the school where he was appearing would do no good while he waited for confirmation of the facts in New York, the Pentagon and Pennsylvania. He finished up what he was doing, left the school, and waited for definitive reports to reach him so that he could address the nation at the earliest possible time.

Once the president had the basic facts, he immediately went on television and made the following statement: "Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward, and freedom will be defended." He neglected to first thank the entire faculty and staff of the school for a wonderful conference, or to pay homage to his political operatives. He just laid it out. "We were attacked, and this will not stand."

Bush was soon thereafter portrayed by the mainstream media as a moron for continuing with the discussion of the children's book "My Pet Goat," and as endangering America by not moving fast enough to deal with the crisis. 9-11 Truthers even go so far as to say that he delayed making a statement as long as possible because he knew of the attack in advance and was waiting to see if it had been successful. There is no limit to the depths to which the mainstream will sink in its ongoing attack on America and everything she has stood for.

But when a president has 99% of the facts within minutes, and chooses to make a political speech before addressing what he called a tragedy, the mainstream media reports it as a bold and decisive move on the part of their messiah. "Disgust" is the only non-obscenity I can use to describe Obama's cowardly speech and the mainstream media's coverage of it.

29 comments:

AndrewPrice said...

I mentioned this in the open thread, but it bears repeating here.

This morning, Janet Napolitano said that she's working to prevent any sort of anti-muslim backlash from the Fort Hood shooting. Why the heck is she concerned about the American people, who have done nothing wrong and have never shown any incliniation to do anything wrong?

Why isn't she more concerned with stopping the muslims who keep doing things like this? There have been literally hundreds of attacks and foiled plots by muslims since 9/11. . . why isn't that important to her?

Jocelyn said...

It's so disgusting to have a President as we currently do. His speeches all show that he is still campaigning when he should be much more effective. This event is much more than a "tragedy". It was horrific.

Tennessee Jed said...

During Vietnam, many g.i.'s engaged in a practice known as "fragging," e.g. tossing framentation grenades into the tent of their commanders. I just wonder if there has ever been a less popular C.I.C. This guys takes the term "watch your back" to a whole new level.

StanH said...

You guys all know me, and my silly little 57th state comments I like to hit trolls with. It’s a double entendre, that some pick up, some don’t. Was it a Freudian slip or was he referring to the 57 Muslim states? …or did he think that he had been to 57 states of America? I think it’s both, he hates the USA, and we know this from his minister of twenty years, eh…hmmm… Reverend Wright, …yak! His father was a Muslim, and I hate to sound paranoid, …oh well right …but I believe he is as Muslim, as he is Christian, and since Muslims hate America this is where his sympathies lie. He really didn’t see anything wrong with what that Muslim goon did, and probably using his, “everything is relative,” horse squeeze leaped to the classic moral equivalence argument and will somehow justify in his pea brain, the murder, and wounding of those remarkable American soldiers as justified. We all know invariably it will be Bush’s fault.

PS: George and Laura Bush made a secret visit to the wounded of the terrorist attack at Ft. Hood, classy!

Tam said...

It is shameful, embarrassing, and terrifying to have a terrorist sympathizer put the rights and feelings of perpetrators of murderous attacks ahead of the citizens of our country and our brave armed forces who protect us. Nobody will be able to convince me this was not an imflitration of our military by a terrorist, whether acting alone or at the command of others. Sickening. Mostly sickening that the C in C wants us to hush.

patti said...

i have vomited things i have liked more than barry. and like you, that's about the nicest thing i can say at this moment.

did you see lieberman this morning? he came v-e-r-y close to calling it a terrorist act. i could sense the dems sharpening their knives for him as they listened. i wanted to high-five him, but of course he held back and that made me want to vomit. again.

patti said...

oh, and the terrorist who did this is currently in san antonio at a military hospital (BAMC...pronounced bam-cee) under military guard. was flown in the day of the attack by private airlift. makes you feel useful, spending your tax dollars to make sure this scum gets all the best, right?

Suzie1 said...

I am interested to see how BO will honor the heroes of this tragedy - that brought this animal down. Will he? Can he, without worrying about what the MSM/muslims will say about it? After all, they almost killed a poor misunderstood man who should be pitied.

They deserve a medal of honor.

LawHawkSF said...

Andrew: The folly of it simply stuns me. We saw a similar reaction after 9-11, and though unlike the Obama administration, the Bush administration didn't actually participate, they still cautioned Americans not to draw any quick conclusions. Political correctness and multiculturalism have become deeply ingrained in a major portion of the American people, like a spreading cancer.

LawHawkSF said...

Jocelyn: That is truer than most people realize. Obama simply can't stop running for the office he's already won, and doesn't have time to do the job he's being paid for.

LawHawkSF said...

Tennessee: I guess that practice has been around for many years. I remember my uncle telling me about similar incidents during WWII. The motivation behind the fragging is nearly as important as the intentional killings themselves. I think Vietnam may have been the first time fragging had ideological rather than personal motives.

LawHawkSF said...

StanH: Although I think Obama has a far more sympathetic eye for the Islamic world than any major politician before him, still he is just the strongest representative of "pretend there's no enemy, and maybe they'll go away." That naive take on the world is suicidal.

LawHawkSF said...

Tam: I agree. The same people who quickly denounced Timothy McVeigh as a Christian terrorist (when he wasn't even a Christian in any recognizable way) quickly jump to the defense of an avowed, aggressive, known Muslim radical. They can't make the clear connection between Hasan's written and stated views of the right of Muslims to kill indidels and this massacre, but they can jump all over imagined Christian conspiracies that simply don't exist. Whether this was the single act of a sleeper, or an organized effort is only tangentially important. What is manifest is that this was a clear, genuine and obvious result of radical Islamic jihadist theology. The theology is not a rare "cult," it is mainstream Muslim thinking. Some are indifferent to it, but it doesn't take many who actively espouse it to bring on this kind of mass murder.

LawHawkSF said...

Patti: The only reason I support the extraordinary efforts being used to keep this vermin alive is that I was in college a the time of the John Kennedy assassination. The death of Lee Harvey Oswald left a door open for wild speculation that will never be satisfied. But I was also in L.A. when another Muslim Israel-hater assassinated Bobby Kennedy. In that case, we got the answers. I repeat the mantra of that time: "No more Lee Harvey Oswalds." They went to great lengths to make sure Sirhan Sirhan lived to go to trial.

LawHawkSF said...

Suzie1: Considering the lack of government enthusiasm for a genuine memorial to the thousands murdered on 9-11, I expect to see an Obama "can't we all just get along?" piece of theater of the absurd.

Suzie1 said...

"Political correctness and multiculturalism have become deeply ingrained in a major portion of the American people, like a spreading cancer."

LH, I think this could go so deep as to affect our human ability to make decisions and judgements based on instinct. This, to me, has terrible long-term consequences.

LawHawkSF said...

Suzie: I think you are absolutely correct. It started with moral relativism, and has just gotten worse. This is nothing short of moral blindness.

BevfromNYC said...

Suzie: It is very important that all of our medical resources be utilized to make sure Hasan lives. I have no problem with whatever tax dollars it takes. We want answers from him. Otherwise it will just be swept aside by DHS and Obama as another crazy soldier with PTSD.

I hope that the families of the soldiers and civilians killed will insist on no cameras at the memorial. I don't want to see Obama make a mockery of it. Robert Gibbs assured reporters on Friday that Obama would attend, but Obama would work around whatever the families wanted, but it still wouldn't interfere with his trip to China next week. How convenient that the memorial is set Tuesday.

And finally, just to be ornery, I want to start my own conspiracy. Maybe this is the reason that Obama didn't want to go to Germany. He knew there was going to be an attack on Ft. Hood!

LawHawkSF said...

Bev: I like it. The conspiracy group could be called "The Ft. Hood Troofers." We could start it with "President Obama went right on with his political speech while waiting to see how successful the mission in Texas was."

BevfromNYC said...

Thanks LawHawk. Hey, I'm from Dallas we know how to fashion a good conspiracy theory! ;-)

Suzie1 said...

Bev, I hope Hasan is kept in military hands. Lord knows what the admin. will push for to sweep this under the rug. Im no lawyer, but I want him Court-martialed and tried for treasonous acts.

LawHawkSF said...

Suzie1: Pray that we can keep this in the military courts under UCMJ jurisdiction. Treason is one of those slippery charges that has ceased to have any real meaning in civilian courts. And the main charge will be thirteen counts of premeditated murder. The military courts do not allow "my mommy didn't love me" as a valid defense.

Writer X said...

The MSM did not skewer Obama for his outright insensitivity like they did Bush following 911 but it doesn't matter. Most people with half a brain know what insincerity and callousness looks like and it was on full display in President Obama as he was delivering his "shout-out." All of the subsequent speeches he's given since then (flying the flags at half-mast, etc.) have been a waste of time. The damage is done and with every clueless blunder Obama reveals just what an empty suit he really is.

LawHawkSF said...

WriterX: Even the flags at half-staff gesture is meaningless. It is used for the natural deaths of heads of state and important American personages. It says nothing about how the president feels about the underlying reason for the lowering of the flags.

Writer X said...

Excellent point, LawHawk. Clearly it was fed into his teleprompter so he promptly spit it out.

LawHawkSF said...

WirterX: I'm pretty sure you're right about the teleprompter. This man has zero concept of proper protocol, and even though it's a phony in his unpatriotic mind, he probably would have forgotten about lowering the flags.

HamiltonsGhost said...

Lawhawk--Every time I think the next cynical political ploy Obama pulls will be the last one, he comes up with another. I can see his smarmy grin, sitting in the White House right now, gloating over how he put another one over on the American people. He'd prefer to have the American flag at no-staff.

LawHawkSF said...

HamiltonsGhost: I'm sure you're right. The appropriate thing would have been to make a full presidential announcement about the flags. But that would have required him to give the specific reason he was doing it, and he risked the people seeing that phony look of concern he puts on--increasingly poorly. But it looks like he's setting up his photo op for the memorial service. Let's face it. It's a little hard for military families to ask the alleged commander-in-chief to stay away from a memorial service for fallen soldiers, even when they know he's more concerned about the feelings of put-upon Muslims than about the dead soldiers.

patti said...

holy smokes, i was thinking the same thing about barry ordering the lowering of the flags. in my mind i could see him thinking "halfway there"....

Post a Comment