Category Archives: Fort Hood Massacre

On Anniversary of Fort Hood, Barack Skips Another Chance to Heal America

But the representatives of the more than 120 Fort Hood terror attack victims and family did not. The following statement by attorneys Neal M. Sher and Reed D. Rubinstein on the 5 year anniversary of the 2nd worst (I think) terror attack on American soil comes from Hannity.com via Cardigan at iOTWr. It is reproduced in entirety below:
fort_hood_0_1411999332
“Five years ago today, the terrorist Nidal Hasan yelled “Allah akbar” and, wearing the uniform of an U.S. Army major, began slaughtering Americans. Fourteen innocent people lost their lives and over fifty were injured. For five years, Hasan has bragged of committing this atrocity in the name of Islam to protect the Taliban.

Hasan’s victims saw their lives forever changed that terrible day. But the real tragedy of Fort Hood was that our government could have easily prevented their suffering. The U.S. Army and FBI had long known that Hasan was a jihadist with al-Qaeda connections and, simply by following their own standard policies and procedures, easily could have stopped him before anyone was hurt. Instead, because of what the Senate Homeland Committee’s investigation called “political correctness,” the government willfully averted its eyes to Hasan’s jihadism. Hasan should have been arrested. Instead, he was promoted and given other special privileges.

Incredibly, the government’s policies of political correctness and special privileges for Hasan continued even after his killing spree.

The day after the carnage, on November 6, 2009, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said that U.S. authorities “were taking measures to quell anti-Islam sentiments” in the U.S. and that Hasan “does not, obviously, represent the Muslim faith.” On November 8, 2009, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said on the Sunday talk shows that the “real tragedy” of Fort Hood would be damage to “diversity” policies and publicly warned against “guessing at Hasan’s motive,” though the government knew of Hasan’s jihadist motive from the start.

The special privileges for Hasan also continued. Pfc. Bradley Manning, who gave Wikileaks documents, was kept naked in an isolation cell and charged with aiding the enemy. But Hasan, who killed for the Taliban, was not similarly charged or confined. Instead, he was given uniquely comfortable accommodations and special food; permitted to wear a beard, a privilege denied loyal American soldiers; and allowed to give Al-Jazeera an interview praising anti-American “mujahadeen.”

Though the government went out of its way to coddle Hasan, it had no kindness for his victims. First, they were used as props in staged “mourning” ceremonies to benefit political leaders, then they were personally promised assistance by President Obama and top generals, and finally they were shoved down a memory hole. Hasan’s terrorism became “workplace violence,” meaning that those who survived the charnel house were denied support, benefits and mental health treatment. In some cases, soldiers were physically and mentally abused for requesting treatment of Fort Hood-related injuries.

Five years on, the government has done nothing to help the victims of Fort Hood. Congress recently passed bills to force the Department of Defense to at least consider awarding the Fort Hood soldiers the Purple Hearts that they deserve. But these bills, even if they become law, do nothing to make good the President’s promises to family members that “the government will make you whole.”

Now, from our new Congress, we call and hope for action. First, we ask for equity. Congress should provide similar benefits to the Fort Hood victims as it provided to the 9/11 Pentagon victims. The government should not be allowed to dodge its culpability.

Second, we ask Congress hold oversight hearings to investigate and hold accountable the Department of Defense and the White House for their post-attack policies, conduct and abuse.

Political correctness caused multiple deaths at Fort Hood and mass child abuse in Rotherham, England. Yet the fundamental evil of political correctness, beyond even the body count, is the damage done to the public’s faith in our leaders. The officials who call Fort Hood “workplace violence” also say that “ISIS is not Islamic.” Who can, or should, believe them?

The victims of Fort Hood have heard many expressions of sympathy and promises of help from the President, the Chief of Staff and powerful Senators. But there has been no aid and no action. The time for answers, for action and for justice has long passed.

2 Comments

Filed under Al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Fort Hood Massacre, Islam, Janet Napolitano, Nidal Hassan, Terrorism

Words matter

Liberalism 101 Terrorism vs Workplace Violence

This blog is worth reading.

EXCERPT: The tongue is the tail of the heart. The heart is known by how the tongue wags. … Remember what G.K. Chesterton said? That bigotry is “an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition.”

http://www.aholyexperience.com/2013/12/dear-kids-never-forget-the-power-of-words-what-you-need-to-know-about-duck-dynasty-justine-sacco-and-christmas-2/

2 Comments

Filed under Fort Hood Massacre, Nidal Hassan, Obamacare, Ted Cruz, Terrorism

The Ten PM Phone Call

There is good reason to believe that Barack Obama himself is responsible for the “Blame The Video” Benghazi cover-up.

(There is a 6 hour time difference between Benghazi, Libya and Washington, D.C. Times given are Washington time.)

2012_09 11 The Ten PM Phone Call

Between mid-day of Friday, September 14 through mid-day of Saturday, September 15, Obama’s people and Clinton’s people shot emails back and forth, working out just how to remove all mention of Islamic terrorism from the CIA’s talking points.

On Sunday morning, September 16, 2012, Obama’s U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on all the major television stations swearing it was all about the YouTube video.

September 16, 2012: Susan Rice on ABC [1:52]

Why would Clinton and Obama collaborate in an absurd and elaborate lie?

Obama was running for reelection and election day was 56 days after the Benghazi attack … plenty of time for a scandal to develop enough to sink his chances, not enough time for said scandal to fade or be overshadowed by other hot topics.

Clinton was positioning herself for the 2016 presidential campaign and needed Obama to win so she would not be running against an incumbent Republican.

Together, Obama and Clinton had been the architects of the American foreign policy of empowering Muslims because they only don’t like us because Bush was such a bad guy. See, if we would be EXTRA NICE to them, they would obviously return the favor and be EXTRA NICE to us.

Thus, when Nidal Hassan shouted, “Allahu Akbar” before opening fire on his co-workers at Fort Hood, the Obama narrative demanded it be classified as nothing more than “workplace violence.”

That Obama Narrative was that Hassan was just really upset about all the sad stories his PTSD patients told him about all the sucky things that happened to them while fighting Bush’s Stupid War. Hassan had never seen combat, but you know … he was just THAT compassionate. And it totally follows that, being a real sensitive guy and loving his military patients so deeply, he would totally deal with his angst by murdering fellow military personnel. Right?

So when more than 100 guys known to be affiliated with al-Qaeda attacked America (a U.S. consulate is U.S. soil) wearing the Afghan-style tunics favored by Islamic militants and armed with hand grenades, assault rifles, mortars, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), heavy machine guns and artillery mounted on gun trucks, it HAD to be blamed on Racist Right-Wing Intolerant Bush Style Islamophobia.

It was even more important, so close to the 2012 election, that the Obama-Clinton “We’re Not Big Meanies Like Bush” foreign policy be perceived as having succeeded. Whoever among them located that pathetic YouTube video deserved a raise. From what I heard, it had been viewed all of 300 times before it got blamed for having set off an international incident.

———————-

Sources:

The 10 P.M. Phone Call By Andrew C. McCarthy – May 18, 2013

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/348677

Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims By Stephen F. Hayes – May 16, 2013

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/newly-released-benghazi-emails-directly-contradict-white-house-claims_724603.html

Gunman shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’ before opening fire – November 6, 2009

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/did-nidal-malik-hasan-shout-allah-akbar-before-opening-fire-at-fort-hood.html

2012 Benghazi Attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack

3 Comments

Filed under Al Qaeda, Armed Forces, Barack Obama, Benghazi, Fort Hood Massacre, George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, Iraq, Islam, Nidal Hassan, Susan Rice, Terrorism, Videos

A few thoughts on Gun Control

Tweeted @ @marklevinshow:

Chicago has the toughest gun laws in Country. This year 446 school age children have been shot and 62 killed in Chicago!

Special kind of stupid

Tweeted @WilliamTeach:

Weird how Dems weren’t calling for gun control when Islamist went on a rampage at Ft. Hood

Liberal Second Amendment

The following is excerpted from http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/335987/gun-owners-segregationists-and-jim-sleeper-charles-c-w-cooke by Charles C.W. Cooke:

Anybody who bothers to look up 1857′s Dred Scott v. Sandford decision will notice right away the court’s awful observation that if slaves were permitted to enjoy full citizenship rights, then they would — shock horror! — enjoy the right

“to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”

This, the court thought, would be disastrous.

Gun control is racist

The fear of blacks with guns is not, of course, new. The very first gun-control measures in American history were designed to keep arms out of the hands of blacks and Indians:

The Massachusetts and Plymouth colonies both prohibited the sale of guns to Indians in the early seventeenth century, and the “Black Codes” of the mid-eighteenth century required French colonists in Louisiana to disarm and beat “any black carrying any potential weapon.”

Many pre-Civil War state constitutions went further, reserving the right to bear arms … to “freemen,” which, naturally, meant whites. After their damnable cause was lost, the KKK picked up and ran with disarmament as a way of keeping blacks down.

As Adam Winkler has observed, “gun control” was “at the very top of its agenda.” The Democratic party’s “Black Codes,” which barred former slaves from owning guns in the (segregated) post-bellum South, were passed for the same purpose.

It is no accident that the first draft of the 1871 Anti-Klan Act contained a provision that made it a federal crime to

“deprive any citizen of the United States of any arms or weapons he may have in his house or possession for the defense of his person, family, or property,”

for that was exactly what segregationists set out to do.

Robert Franklin Williams’s classic work, Negroes with Guns, tells a tale of the KKK’s systematic attempt to disarm black Americans — and of the National Rifle Association’s work in forming a counter-group called the “Black Armed Guard” — as late as the as the 1950s.

As Williams points out, it was guns in the hands of his family that saved their lives and allowed them — literally — to fight the KKK and their allies.

15 Comments

Filed under Constitution, Crime, Fort Hood Massacre, Government Tyranny, Gun Control, KKK, Law, Liberty, Race Relations, Second Amendment, Supreme Court