Upset about the public execution of Hasan? Why?

Wrong.                                                                                                                                        

For far too long, accountability on those rare occasions it has been applied, has lacked the impact of a video game reset.

There is no question of this traitor's guilt. He murdered 13 of us and wounded 33 others.

In one brief moment, he destroyed or permanently impacted 44 lives.

THAT is "sick and unacceptable."

Your response is similar to that of your typical leftists who want to confiscate our guns... because they declare WEAPONS are "sick and unacceptable."

The punishment for murder lacks the impact of reality. Non-televised executions have all reality of a video game war scene to the participants.

ALL executions should be televised. ALL of those convicted of Murder 1 should be executed.

There's nothing "sick" or "unacceptable" about it.

That reality hit home in Singapore, where the law is that if you use a firearm in the commission of ANY crime, whether you shoot it or not?

You're executed.

If you even CARRY a firearm during the commission of a crime? Without even showing it? You get a life sentence.

As a result, gun crime is essentially unheard of.

Why? Consequences.

No one will force anyone to watch this. I will be watching... I would volunteer to take him out myself. And I will be thinking about the lives this scumbag so admired by the left destroyed or permanently altered.

And there's nothing "sick" or "unacceptable" about it.

The message is clear: You don't want to pay for what you've done?

Then don't do it.

Killed and wounded at Ft. Hood should get the Purple Heart.

.
I must admit that I hadn't thought about it. But in a combat situation, when one of us is wounded, particularly with some seriousness (again, letting out John Kerry, since there is no award for self-inflicted wounds) one is awarded the Purple Heart.

I believe that the second Major Hasan made the decision to kill American soldiers he qualified as an "enemy of the United States."

That, to me, means that anyone killed or wounded by any terrorist attack, including 9/11, while serving in the Armed Forces of the United States deserves the award and all that goes with it... and that includes the troops at Ft. Hood as well as the Little Rock Recruiting Station and the other fragging attack by an American Muslim, Sgt Hasan Akbar, that typically goes unmentioned.

a. The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of an Armed Force or any civilian national of the United States who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed, or who has died or may hereafter die after being wounded

(1) In any action against an enemy of the United States.

Although wearing the uniform of my Army, is their any doubt this scumbag became an enemy of the United States the INSTANT he made the decision to kill us?

We can come up with a dozen reasons NOT to award this medal.

But we can also come up with a dozen reasons TO award this medal.

And under the circumstances, when it comes to those who’ve shed their blood for this country at the hands of an enemy… ANY enemy… acknowledging that fact with this medal is the least we can do.

More on the "political correctness run amok in the US Military" issue.

.
I remember reading a Life Magazine article back in the 70's, I believe, where they interviewed Army Lt. General(temporary) Andrew Goodpaster, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, while he was serving as the Superintendent of West Point.

The Army had just changed some of it's physical requirements at the Point to the current type of PT test: push ups, sit ups and a two mile run. He was, as I recall, asked what brought the change on, and he responded with an observation that burned itself into the front of my brain when he said:

"When the Russians are attacking your position, it doesn't matter how many chin ups your Platoon Leader can do."

Fast forward to today.

This little tidbit jumps up and bites me:

Michelle Malkin

Diversity engineers at the NavalAcademy
By Michelle Malkin • November
11, 2009 06:44 PM

Well, this puts a perfect exclamation point on my diversity column today: Look at the p.c. pretzel that the Naval Academy twisted itself into in order to try and engineer picture-perfect diversity among its color guard:

Leaders of the U.S. Naval Academy tinkered with the composition of the color guard that appeared at a World Series game last month so the group would not be exclusively white and male.

Accounts differ as to who was added to or removed from the Oct. 29 color guard. But the net result was that one of the six who marched on Yankee Stadium’s field, Midshipman 2nd Class Hannah Allaire, was selected because her presence would make the service academy look more diverse before a national audience.

The incident has captured the attention of the Annapolis campus and stirred up the broader community of alumni and military observers, who see it as part of a campaign to bring more racial and sexual diversity to the academy. Diversity is a sensitive point at the Naval Academy, an institution that has been accused by some faculty members and alumni of forsaking fairness in its quest to build a brigade that mirrors the nation as a whole.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, elevated diversity to a “strategic imperative” during his tenure as chief of naval operations. Academy leaders, on their official Web site, call diversity “our highest personnel priority.”

That thinking reflects “a sea change, in that this initiative was generated from within the military, rather than imposed from without by civilian overseers,” said retired Marine Maj. Gen. Thomas Wilkerson, an academy alumnus and chief executive of the U.S. Naval Institute, an independent think tank. Some alumni, he said, “have voiced concerns that it will happen at the expense of quality and combat readiness.”

Ding, ding, ding!

La Shawn Barber at ACRI has more on the efforts to cover the whole p.c. kerfuffle up:

I’m sure you’ve heard about colleges removing white faces from brochures and catalogs and photoshopping in blacks or women for “diversity.” Comical.

It seems the Naval Academy performed some real-life photoshopping. Academy leaders removed two white men from the color guard line-up for a performance at the recent World Series and replaced them with a “non-white” man and a white woman for purposes of diversity. (Source)

But here’s the twist: the “non-white” man forgot part of his uniform and had to be replaced. The line-up was all-white, anyway, and the Naval Academy ended up with bad PR.

Other midshipmen and alumni complained about the apparent diversity shuffle. After the requisite he said/he said exchanges, where an academy spokesman denied that the school pulled the men because they were white, despite a press release apparently contradicting him, brigade commanders issued a gag order forbidding midshipmen to talk about the controversy to outsiders.

Diana West connects the dots between the Naval Academy photo flap and Fort Hood: The same cult of diversity is at work. This is how it metastasizes.

I repeat: P.C.-paralyzed America, heal thyself.

Is it any wonder that this kind of PC crap resulted in the deaths of 14 at Fort Hood?

This has to stop.

While LTG Goodpaster nailed it on the matter of chin ups, the battlefield is no place for affirmative action (Of course, there is NO acceptable place for affirmative action, battlefield or no) and yet, we have to constantly be on guard against offending someone or hurting someone's feelings.

Well, MAJ Nidal Hasan is the result.

Everyone involved in the fiasco not a Midshipman should be kicked out of the Academy, if not the Navy.

On one hand, we're told to be a color-blind and gender-blind military. On the other, those in charge engage in rampant PCdom and reverse discrimination as a matter of policy.

Ladies and gentleman, a bullet don't care.

We must stop the mindset that says this kind of crap is "OK." That has GOT to go.

Before it's too late.

.

ABC News: So, Hasan wasn't terrorism? Odd, isn't it, that he had at least attempted contact with al Qaeda... And we KNEW it.

.
Now if FOX NEWS reported this, the fringe left nutters would reject it out of hand.

That a member of the lamestream media is reporting it?

Not so much.

So, Mr. President, before I offer up my son, the Marine wannabe, on the alter of your empty suited stupidity, will SOMEBODY explain why this guy was allowed to continue to wear the uniform of a major in MY Army?

Will SOMEONE explain why MY ARMY KNEW AND DID NOTHING?

I served many, many years. I'm familiar with the concept of things "falling through the cracks" but I'm also familiar with the corporate attitude infesting the Army.

We are, no longer, an Army of soldiers. We are, instead, an Army of political correctness, a horrifically expensive Army where each combat soldier requires his own platoon of logistics and administration.... an Army where you can smoke like a train but God help you if you're one pound over weight... an Army where we have a corporate culture instead of a military culture.

Say the wrong thing.... do the wrong thing.... THINK the wrong thing.... and you're done. And you wind up with an attitude of fear... an attitude not unlike the one adopted by those living next to concentration camps... or hearing nothing... seeing.... nothing and saying... nothing.

Not because they've been explicitly TOLD to remain silent. But because, in all the years I served, I NEVER saw anyone who tried to deal with these issues from a position of authority, as opposed to dealing with it from a position of victimhood, live to tell the tale.

The omnipresent attitude of the military was, and apparently still is, that you do not need a complete commitment to your job, your Army, your country.

Even yesterday, the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Casey, sniveled about his concern over a "backlash" against Muslim troops. Well, General, what *I* need to know is where was your goddamned concern for your troops before this scumbag took them down? Not even the blood of American men and women spilled on YOUR watch on one of YOUR posts has dented the attitude that allowed this to happen.

General, you should resign. The attitudes inculcated in the Army that fostered Hasan's terrorist attack Are YOUR responsibility. Your failure to act pre-emptively is YOUR responsibility. While YOU did not pull the trigger, the blood on the grounds of Ft. Hood is at least partially your fault, and your misguided concern over Muslim troops instead of your focus on addressing the culture that resulted in this attack is YOUR responsibility.

And you blew it, General.

Turn in your shit. You're done.

The rank and file of the United States Army look to YOU, General. They look to YOU for guidance and leadership... and to protect them when they're home.

Oh, you may not leave, General. But you ARE done... because even the newest E-1 knows you've blown it and you are blowing it because your concern isn't for the Army; instead, it's for those who MIGHT suffer some discomfort because a terrorist wearing an officer's uniform slaughtered innocent people.

General, pull your head out of your ass. The military requires a fundamental attitudinal shift, back to the days of an Army of Warriors... not the soap opera bullshit you run.

You ought to resign. And if you don't, that empty suited moron running the show ought to fire your clueless corporate ass.





Monday, November 09, 2009 The Blotter from Brian Ross

Officials: U.S. Aware of Hasan Efforts to Contact al Qaeda
By RICHARD ESPOSITO, MATTHEW COLE and BRIAN ROSS
Today, 7:53 AM EST

Army Major in Fort Hood killing used 'electronic means' to connect w/ terrorists

U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

It is not known whether the intelligence agencies informed the Army that one of its officers was seeking to connect with suspected al Qaeda figures, the officials said.

One senior lawmaker said the CIA had, so far, refused to brief the intelligence committees on what, if any, knowledge they had about Hasan's efforts.

CIA director Leon Panetta and the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, have been asked by Congress "to preserve" all documents and intelligence files that relate to Hasan, according to the lawmaker.

On Sunday, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) called for an investigation into whether the Army missed signs as to whether Hasan was an Islamic extremist.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have a zero tolerance," Lieberman told Fox News Sunday.

Investigators want to know if Hasan maintained contact with a radical mosque leader from Virginia, Anwar al Awlaki, who now lives in Yemen and runs a web site that promotes jihad around the world against the U.S.

In a blog posting early Monday titled "Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing," Awlaki calls Hassan a "hero" and a "man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people."

According to his site, Awlaki served as an imam in Denver, San Diego and Falls Church, Virginia.
The Associated Press reported Sunday that Major Hasan attended the Falls Church mosque when Awlaki was there.

The Telegraph of London reported that Awlaki had made contact with two of the 9/11 hijackers when he was in San Diego.

He denied any knowledge of the hijacking plot and was never charged with any crime. After an intensive investigation by the FBI, Awlaki moved to Yemen.

People who knew or worked with Hasan say he seemed to have gradually become more radical in his disapproval of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Army Chief of Staff

A fellow Army doctor who studied with Hasan, Val Finell, told ABC News, "We would frequently say he was a Muslim first and an American second. And that came out in just about everything he did at the University.

Finell said he and other Army doctors complained to superiors about Hasan's statements.

"And we questioned how somebody could take an oath of office…be an officer in the military and swear allegiance to the constitution and to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic and have that type of conflict," Finell told ABC News.

The Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, raised concerns over the weekend that innocent Muslim soldiers could suffer as a result of the shooting at Fort Hood.

"I think the speculation (on Hasan's Islamic roots) could potentially heighten backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers," he said on ABC's "This Week."

Click Here for the Blotter Homepage.
.

When your home town, leg-humping NBC affiliate says that Obama was an idiot about Ft. Hood...

.

When an NBC affiliate like the one in his own base of operations (Chicago) calls him a clueless idiot, then chances are, he's a clueless idiot.

We are unfortunately lead by a man dangerously out of touch with the country he leads. I am becoming increasingly frightened as to what other clues this moron is missing.

news politics
Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting
A bad week for Democrats compounded by an awful moment for Barack Obama.
By ROBERT A. GEORGE
Updated 2:56 PM CST, Fri, Nov 6, 2009

President Obama didn't wait long after Tuesday's devastating elections to give critics another reason to question his leadership, but this time the subject matter was more grim than a pair of governorships.

After news broke out of the shooting at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas, the nation watched in horror as the toll of dead and injured climbed. The White House was notified immediately and by late afternoon, word went out that the president would speak about the incident prior to a previously scheduled appearance. At about 5 p.m., cable stations went to the president. The situation called for not only his trademark eloquence, but also grace and perspective.

President Obama took way to long to get serious while speaking after the shootings at Army post at Fort Hood, Texas.

Source: Getty Images

But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?

Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That's the least that should occur.

LOOK

Dramatic Photos: Fort Hood Shooting
LOOK
2009 in Memoriam

Indeed, an argument could be made that Obama should have canceled the Indian event, out of respect for people having been murdered at an Army post a few hours before. That would have prevented any sort of jarring emotional switch at the event.

Did the president's team not realize what sort of image they were presenting to the country at this moment? The disconnect between what Americans at home knew had been going on -- and the initial words coming out of their president's mouth was jolting, if not disturbing.

It must have been disappointing for many politically aware Democrats, still reeling from the election two days before. The New Jersey gubernatorial vote had already demonstrated that the president and his political team couldn't produce a winning outcome in a state very friendly to Democrats (and where the president won by 15 points one year ago). And now this? Congressional Democrats must wonder if a White House that has burdened them with a too-heavy policy agenda over the last year has a strong enough political operation to help push that agenda through.

If the president's communications apparatus can't inform -- and protect -- their boss during tense moments when the country needs to see a focused commander-in-chief and a compassionate head of state, it has disastrous consequences for that president's party and supporters.

All the president's men (and women) fell down on the job Thursday. And Democrats across the country have real reason to panic.

New York writer Robert A. George blogs at Ragged Thots. Follow him on Twitter.

Copyright NBC Local Media

First Published: Nov 6, 2009 5:16 AM CST

.

To our friends, family and our brothers and sisters at Fort Hood:

.

.

Major Hasan: All they've got is whining about a non-existent "harassment."

.
So, we have a United States Army field-grade officer on orders for Iraq or AStan. He decides he doesn't want to go because Muslims must "stand up to oppression."

Well, this scumbag low-life not only violated his oath as an Army officer, but he certainly violated the Hippocratic Oath of a physician.

He can't claim, as much as the fringer's initially charged, that it was the stress of all his deployments; this particular scumbag was never deployed. That only leaves one "out," already mentioned by a cousin: harassment due to his race.

Claims of harassment

Hasan, who dealt with troops returning from combat and faced his own imminent deployment, had been harassed by his military colleagues because of his "Middle Eastern ethnicity," said his cousin Nader Hasan.

"I don't think he's ever been disenchanted with the military," Nader Hasan told Fox News.

"It was the harassment.

"He hired a military attorney to try to have the issue resolved, pay back the government, to get out of the military. He was at the end of trying everything."

Nader Hasan says his cousin did not want to be deployed to Iraq.

"He is a good American and we are shocked," he said.

And to that I call bullshit.

"Good" Americans of any stripe do not slaughter unarmed innocents.

"Harassment," while not impossible in the Army, is extremely unlikely in this era of political correctness with it's emphasis on Race Relations and Equal Opportunity.

But "harassment" is all this scumbag has. He's not about to claim it was a result of his increasingly militant feelings against his own country.

The questions I have include these: the Army's chain of command has been aware of the scumbag's anti-American positions for months, both uttered and written. Yet, instead of kicking his dumb ass out and forcing him to repay the hundreds of thousands of dollars we, as grateful taxpayers, paid to make this clown into a doctor.... they PROMOTE him?

Multiple asses need to fry on this.

I really don't give a rat's hindquarter if his "harassment" was so bad it made his hair fall out.

It provides no cover, no justification, no mitigation.

This traitor to his country should, in the American tradition, be given a fair court martial. And if he did it, they should execute him immediately... or as immediately as you CAN execute someone.

Harassment.

I got your harassment hanging.
.