Thursday, November 05, 2009

Another Home-Grown Muslim Terrorist Attack On Our Own Soldiers

The U.S. Army recently sent a Muslim (not a convert as earlier reported) from Walter Reed Hospital in D.C. by the name Malik Nadal Hasan to perform work as a psychiatrist at Texas' Fort Hood. Today, Major Hasan shot and killed 12 soldiers preparing to ship off to Iraq and wounded another 30 supposedly because he got a bad evaluation and didn't want to fight in Iraq, or so says his cousin, Nadir Hassan, who also assures us he is not a violent person. Nadir confirms his family's Middle Eastern Arab origins. News media coverage has carefully avoided saying the words, "Muslim terrorist," but let's call it for what it is. According to Major General Robert Scales, this was not a random act by a nutjob. "A deliberate act of execution," he said. Hasan shot his victims at close range. According to a former colleague, retired Col. Terry Lee, Hasan wanted our troops pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan and made his views well known. Lee said he had been known to make statements like "The Muslims have a right to stand up against the aggressors" and "maybe we should have more people strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square." Muslim terrorist organizations like al Qaeda have urged followers in the past to infiltrate the U.S. military and carry out terrorist acts within it. President Barack Hussein Obama will assure us it's just a random act of violence. Yeah, right. It's not real comforting knowing that our U.S. military would give someone like this responsibility for providing mental health counseling to our soldiers.

UPDATE: Add another to the death count. There are now 13 dead soldiers as a result of this senseless act of terrorism. And while he was gunning down our brave soldiers, he yelled, "Allahu Akbar." Yeah, big surprise.

UPDATE: Now we learn this terrorist played an advisory role on homeland security matters for Barack Hussein Obama's transition team. Very comforting.


Anonymous said...

As with any thoroughly insane act of mass murder, my thoughts turn to Islamicists.

Chris Worden said...

The military has never been skilled at recognizing terrorists. Remember Timothy McVeigh? He was U.S. Army.

Anonymous said...


I generally like what you write and that you put thought into it. But some of the cheap shots are beneath you. "Barack Hussein Obama"...

Look, a terrible thing happened. But short of repeating the internment camps of WWII, I don't know how you could insure that this couldn't have happened. Except for 9/11, we've had more deaths on US soil from home grown wingnuts and angry high-school kids than Hasan and friends.

We need to do a better job of screening, but blaming this on the current President is crap.

Gary R. Welsh said...

Greg, It's his name. He used it when he was sworn in as President. Don't pull your PC crap on us and claim we can't state his middle name without being called religious bigots. It's this PC shit that has us unable to distinguish who the enemy is even within our own military.

Unknown said...

I think the media isn't calling him a terrorist because the FBI specifically said it was not a terrorist attack. Honestly, whenever you write about anything involving a Muslim, you start to sound like Glenn Beck. There is no evidence of the motive you suggest; simply being a Muslim doesn't cut it.

Luvbeers said...

The US military are terrorists. Why would anyone be surprised when one of their own act like it???

You muppets need to pull Uncle Sam's fist from your asses and recognize some propaganda. It seems likely something like this would happen on the eve of the pentagon requesting more funding.

Chris Worden said...

And please don't patronize us by acting like you're saying Barack Hussein Obama like you're saying Franklin Delano Roosevelt because you're not. You are trying to create a psychic link between our President and an Iraqi dictator, and you do this to insinuate that our President is a closet Muslim intent on destroying us from within. Your rhetoric suggests this repeatedly, and the side effect is that some American Muslims who have never had anything to do with violence will be victims themselves because you try to make everyone think every Muslim belongs to a monolithic cabal taking orders from Islamabad.

Chris Worden said...

I forgot to add, I heard the same argument about not letting ''p.c. crap'' keep us from knowing the real enemy before -- on rightwing religious websites talking about how homosexuals are secret killers right after Jeffrey Dahmer.

I guess you really ARE a Republican because,while you are fond of saying you are for individual rights, you will use an individual heinous act to besmirch an entire group, as long as you're not one of its members.

artfuggins said...

I think to use this unwarranted tradegy as a platform to condemn Muslims is totally wrong. Why don't you look at the horrible acts committed by Christians and condemn those. Oklahoma City was a tradegy committed by a Christian but you have never stated that all Christians are bad........the murders of some doctors in this country were the work of some Christian groups. The last murderer even has Christian groups raising money for his defense.

Vox Populi said...

There have been more attacks on soldiers by fellow soldiers than I can count in the past decade, and this is the first time I recall any of them being Muslim.

What would you think if the media started using their political party affiliation to describe them? "Home-Grown Republican Terrorist Attack On Our Own Soldiers" sounds pretty nice, right?

Diana Vice said...

Amen to your last comment, Gary!

Gary R. Welsh said...

Fact. Obama was born and raised as a Muslim. Hence, the Muslim name. Get over it, Chris and Vox. We went through an entire campaign last year where anyone who attempted to shed light on Obama's background was castigated as a religious and racial bigot. We could only know the story that terrorist Bill Ayres made up in that book of lies he wrote for Obama that was passed off as truth. Also, anyone who is a student of history understands what the Muslim religion is all about. Don't try to pass of this moderate BS to me and don't try to blame the OK City bombing on Christians. McVeigh was trained by our own military. He was not driven by any extremist Christian ideology. Funny how Obama's election was suppose to usher in a new era when Muslims would suddenly stop hating us and trying to blow us up. I guess things haven't worked as planned, have they?

dcrutch said...

We're back on "profiling". Is it demeaning to believe some students would be better off in vo-tech or a two-year college than a four-year university? If the guy at the front door taking out my daughter won't look me in the eye, is dressed poorly, and is driving something that barely got into the driveway- am I to be a judicious parent? If we roll a policeman out on a possible break-in based on a citizen's phone call and it turns out to be a black professor, or screen more Middle Eastern looking guys in line at the airport than grandmothers- this is racist, or sterotyping, or xenophobia?

I think we're to try to give everybody a fair shake in life. It's not always easy. It's not that there aren't non-Islamic terrorists or pale-skinned burglars, but we sometimes only have enough resouces, information, or time to "play the odds", go on statistics, some would argue- use "common sense".

Common sense tells me if you have soldiers that stridently, repeatedly make it clear that they have a problem placing their country's mission ahead of their religion, these guys are probably a risk to their fellow soldiers. Based on the collective modern bombings in New York, Spain, London, etc., I think it makes more common sense to screen Middle Eastern looking guys at the airport than play the odds that a grandmother wants to be the next Timothy McVeigh. I think we're stuck with the same statistical common sense in crime.

If I don't like the reputation a demographic has that I fit within, what should I do? I could move to Guam. However, I suggest if I don't like the reputation of greed some white, middle-class people are acquiring, then I better make darn sure I'm paying my taxes, volunteering time and money to my community, being a participatory citizen by voting, and speak-up on injustice- including by persons who are white & middle-class. Otherwise, try to do what's right and accept life's not always fair. There's a bus out there with my name on it and it could hit me tomorrow.

Granted, the whole story behind Fort Hood may not yet be known. I still think pursuit of "profiling" is societally necessary, particularly in protecting those serving our country, even if we can't always agree on it's practice.

Gary R. Welsh said...

I love it when liberals in this country are the first to rush to the defense of Muslims and preaching tolerance. My view is that tolerance is a two-way street. When Muslims stop treating women as second class citizens, allowing their men to marry as many wives as they want, forcing young 10-year-old girls to marry 70-year-old men, defending honor killings, calling for the execution of all apostates and infidels and demanding that Sharia law prevail over our own democratic laws, then I will agree with my liberal friends.

Marv said...

Forget the fact that he was a Moslem.

1) Suicides are rapidly increasing in the military as a result of soldiers being sent off to fight unwinnable wars we never should have gotten in from the beginning. This suicidal soldier just took others along with him.

2) This Major has apparently been having problems and has been a problem for a long time, yet the Army continued to promote him and allow him to treat soldiers. It reminds me of this section of Arlo Guthrie's "Alice's Restaurant":

“They got a building down New York City, it's called Whitehall Street,
where you walk in, you get injected, inspected, detected, infected,
neglected and selected. I went down to get my physical examination one
day, and I walked in, I sat down, got good and drunk the night before, so
I looked and felt my best when I went in that morning. `Cause I wanted to
look like the all-American kid from New York City, man I wanted, I wanted
to feel like the all-, I wanted to be the all American kid from New York,
and I walked in, sat down, I was hung down, brung down, hung up, and all
kinds o' mean nasty ugly things. And I waked in and sat down and they gave
me a piece of paper, said, ‘Kid, see the phsychiatrist, room 604.’

And I went up there, I said, ‘Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I
wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and
guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill,
KILL, KILL.’; And I started jumpin up and down yelling, ‘KILL, KILL,’; and
he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down
yelling, ‘KILL, KILL.’; And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me,
sent me down the hall, said, ‘You're our boy.’”

indyernie said...

Gary isn't the only news outlet calling this guy a terrorist. The main stream media is reporting that the shooter made the anti American statements... more than once.
Why is it that some in America want to bury their heads in the sand until its too late? Obama is proud of his Muslin heritage; Gary might be on to something here.
Who says that the only weapons are guns and bombs? A pen can have the same effect, death. If Obama’s health care bill passes thousands might perish. Why?... because of Obama's persistence.
Gary tell these politically correct pinheads to kiss your American ass. "The pen is mightier than the sword" insert the word gun or bomb for sword and this statement still rings true. Do you believe that this is only taught in America? Obama can do more destruction in America just by signing his name than a thousand terrorists can do with weapons.vitypent

Unknown said...

We also never, in the history of our country, had our president BOW before a king.

Unknown said...

This POS can't even bother to talk about the tragedy at Ft. Hood until he gets his brownie points thanking his friends and staff for a conference, etc.

Hoosier in the Heartland said...

Gary: you said, "Fact. Obama was born and raised as a Muslim. Hence, the Muslim name."

Nope. Not fact. Neither "Barack" nor "Hussein" is a Muslim name. They're both names in the Arabic language (like "Gary" is a name in the English language, meaning "spear carrier" in the original Old English).

"Barack"(بارك) means "he who is blessed" or "blessed". "Hussein" (حسین), an extremely common name, means "good" or "handsome" or "beautiful".

And, as you well know, Iraq's Saddam Hussein was a secular, not a Muslim, ruler.

swan said...

It also amazes me that the U.S. military would assign Dr. Hason to be a psychiatrist for our troops, knowing how absolutely outraged he was about being ordered to deploy to Iraq, to the point that reportedly he was ready to hire a lawyer to fight this. He had already been given a dissatisfactory job rating while serving as a psychiatrist at Walter Reed Hospital, from which he had just been transferred. What mental help for the troops was he capable of giving?

As far as 9/11, like most Americans I want a new investigation, and do not trust the findings of the FEMA commission. We are being led into a great depression, and I so agree with the Honorable Ron Paul, that all our troops should be brought home. Thank you!

M Theory said...

The General in charge said the shooting was not an act of terrorism?

If that's not terrorism, then what is?

YET...I don't understand how folks with Ron Paul, U.S. Constitution, Liberty focused bumper stickers and Mr. and Mrs. Folks who go to Tea Parties are painted broadly as potential terrorists.

It's like the whole world is turned upside down.

Gary R. Welsh said...

Melyssa, The Obama administration had ordered the word "terrorist" struck from the vocabulary of our government. The use of the word is too offensive to some people.

dcrutch said...

Thanks for the reminder and recalibration. We were committing "terrorism" when we marched by local channels 8, 6, 13, and to the Star offices. We were constituting a "danger" to the public with signs protesting excessive government spending, biased media, and takeover of health care by government. The single channel 8 photographer with a camera that appeared was actually a very brave soul, to venture out amongst all those potentially violent radicals in disguise as largely gray-haired working people, who scrawled their own signs, drove their own cars and brought their own kids.

I didn't appreciate the magnitude of fear we brought to our local media. This explains perfectly why they didn't appear. It's not for any lack in pursuit of journalism, it's for the bone-chilling appearance of a lady in a coat waving cardboard, or the spine-tingling fear induced by a 55 year-old guy shaking his fist at a televsion station, or the jaw-dropping panic that can be induced by watching a 98-pound woman stamping her feet to the cadence of cheers through a bullhorn.

It's not that our local media WON'T cover events that truly concern readers, viewers, and listeners- they just get a little frightened by the "terrorism" of it sometime. I'm sure they'll regain their courage and start covering both sides of important issues any day now.


Anonymous said...

Good Lord, here come the wingnuts.


No PC Crap here. And from what you have posted, it's clear you are a religious bigot.

From the reports today it appears that it wasn't terrorism or based on his religion. And, for what it's worth, the President didn't say that it was random. In fact he said that "we will get answers to every single question" and that he has the FBI and Homeland Security working on it.

Greg, I will say it again, you are a thoughtful person. But using this act to further what is clearly religious bigotry is beneath you. It cheapens the good work that you do.

I don't agree with his personal attacks, but iPOPA got it right in his comments.

The faux news clip features a Third hand report that the guy was saying this and that. It doesn't meet any basic test other than rumor.

People justify acts of cruelty with their religion after the fact quite often. Was the motivation that he didn't want to be shipped off or was it really an act of religious terrorism?

Gary R. Welsh said...

Greg, I don't know what news reports you've been reading, but everything points to an angry Muslim man who planned and carried out a bloody terrorist attack on our soldiers because he didn't want them fighting a Muslim enemy in Afghanistan and Iraq. I stand by what I wrote. Every news media report I've seen totally confirms what I wrote. If you want to pretend otherwise, then fine. Why is it religious bigotry to point out truths about this religion, but it's just fine for the liberals to trash Christians and their religion and just be exercising their free speech rights? I'm sick and tired of these double standards. I don't subscribe to Islam because I've studied it and understand what harm it has brought to this world. It is an extremly dangerous and violent ideology. Read your history, Greg, for God's sake.

IndyPaul said...

Gary, you don't explain your recurring reference to 'history' - you apparently cite to it to justify your derisive use of President Obama's middle name, continued inaccurate portrayal of his upbringing, or inference that "every Muslim belongs to a monolithic cabal taking orders from Islamabad" as IOPA aptly states.

I guess it depends upon what history you refer to. Islam was born into a culture of religious violence, mainly perpetrated by Christians upon those of other faiths. Early radical Islamic violence was mainly perpetrated upon other Muslims perceived as heretical, while Jews and Christians living amongst them were left alone. The Caliph and later the Ottoman Empire allowed Jews and Christians in their territories to continue to worship their faiths, while Muslims in Christian countries such as Spain were forced to convert or leave, and if converts were believed to be insufficiently Christian they were burned alive. History shows that humans in general can be very violent, especially when they have religious motive. All of which returns us to the question posed by many here - why condemn Islam as a religion based upon this man's crime, when countless similar crimes have been perpetrated by Christians?? If you want to cite to history, you need to at least give some idea of what history you cite to.

Gary R. Welsh said...

Okay, Paul, then why are you still a Catholic? Silliness begets silliness.

Gary R. Welsh said...

Actually, Paul, this comment on Catholic Exchange about the 2012 movie says a lot about tolerated religious dialogue today:

Catholic League president Bill Donohue speaks to the way Catholics and Muslims are treated in the upcoming film, “2012”:

When we got word recently that the movie “2012” depicts the Vatican being blown up, along with the famous statue from Rio, Christ the Redeemer, we were unmoved. Why? Because this occurs during the end of the world in a massive destruction. This kind of sensationalism, we reasoned, is standard fare for director Roland Emmerich: he is the guru of the “blow ‘em up” genre of movies. But now we’ve learned that while Catholics get theirs, Muslims are spared. Out of fear, of course.

Emmerich is more than a coward—he is a liar who has it out for Catholics. Last year, he was quoted saying, “I would like to erase all nations and religions.” Not true. He is quite content to live with Islam, even though he readily admits it is a religion of terror. When asked why he did not show the destruction of Kaaba, the religious structure in the Grand Mosque in Mecca, he said, “I wanted to do that, I have to admit. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have…a fatwa.”

So why was the Sistine Chapel designated for destruction? “We have to show how this gets destroyed….I am against organized religion.” Emmerich lies again. He is not against Islam.

Anonymous said...


What happened was a terrible thing. Our military should be more vigilant about people who aren't wrapped too tight.

That said, it's a tough call to know when someone is using their religion to justify their underlying attitudes and behavior. There are lots of examples where people who are basically self absorbed bad people who do just that. Most of us are mature enough to know when an individual or even a group is twisting religion and know not to condemn an entire religion.

Right now you remind me of the book Dr. Suess Goes To War - He railed against some of the dominant thinking at the time... and was an advocate for Blacks and Jews - not a particularly popular stance at the time. But he had a real blind spot for the Japanese Americans who he always shown as sneaky dirty Japs.

Gary R. Welsh said...

Hotair offers a little different narrative than what some in the mainstream media are feeding us on Hasan:

Well … yes, that’s true, if you think anything short of Hasan sitting up in his hospital bed and declaring “why, indeed, religion was a factor at Fort Hood” amounts to irresponsible speculation. But here’s what we’ve got so far, according to eyewitnesses, colleagues, and friends. He considered the war on terror a “war on Islam” and himself a Muslim first and an American second; he thought Muslims had the right to stand up to the “aggressor” in the Middle East and is suspected of posting things online about the selfless heroism of jihadist suicide bombers; he was placed on probation for proselytizing about Islam to patients and colleagues and was sufficiently devout that he refused to have his picture taken with women; he once used a lecture at a medical conference as an opportunity to discuss how the Koran orders decapitation for infidels; and, oh yes, he yelled “Allahu Akbar” before opening fire.

dcrutch said...

While recognizing the degeneration of debate from the "wing nut(s)":

"...political terrorist..."- Rep. Baron Hill- D- IN- Aug 12

"...political terrorist..."- Steven Pearlstein, 2008 Pulitizer Prize winner- Washington Post- Aug 7

"...racist..."- Geraldo Rivera- Aug 5

"...racist..."- Amos Brown- Oct 29

Good luck herding those cats.


ARTFUGGINS - you need to be very careful making bold statements that are fallacies.
You wrote "Oklahoma City was a tradegy committed by a Christian" yet you can not accurately state McVeigh was a devout, practicing Christian.
You took others for task for identifying a problem with Muslims. You may not know this but it appears Hasan attended THE VERY SAME MOSQUE IN GREAT FALLS, VIRGINIA IN 2001 AS NAWAF AL-HAZMI AND HANI HANJOUR. You may not remember these two as part of the team that flew flight 77 into the Pentagon but I will never forget them as I was in the Pentagon on 9/11.
If you can't see the obvious problem with a fundamentalist strain of Islam then that's fine - continue in your blissful ignorance but stop making comments that are illogical. You write about "horrible acts committed by Christians" yet I challenge you to name 2 acts committed by a known radical form of Christianity that even come close to the level of the terrorist acts caused by Muslims who follow Wahhabism or Salafism (as it is otherwise known).