We now learn that Nidal Hasan, the man who instigated a massacre at Ft. Hood, was continually moved upward in rank despite the concerns of his superiors. They knew he had strident pro-Islam views that conflicted with his service in the U.S. Army, yet they kept raising his rank.
While he was getting his medical education in the DC area, he gave a class presentation once that included the following:
- An argument that the War on Terror was actually a war on Islam
- A suggestion that Islamic Shariah law trumped the Constitution
- An attempt to justify suicide bombings
Does this sound like Army officer material to you?
I question whether we’re really taking this War on Terror seriously. President Obama says we are, but his flat tone and sympathies with the Islamic world don’t provide much assurance.
And what about the decision to close Gitmo and give known terrorists trials in American civilian courts with all the privileges of American citizens? Obama operates on the assumption that Gitmo inspires more terrorism. I operate on the assumption that no matter what we do, we will continue to be attacked because the radicals’ ideology demands it. Those are two different worldviews.
And when a man tries to blow up an airplane with a bomb in his underwear, what is our response?
Well, not yet. But it seems we’re far more likely to do something inane like that than consider the alternative: take the offensive against radical Islam and profile the most likely people to be carrying bombs. Do we really need to do full-body scans on grandmothers? Why not, instead, learn from the Israelis, who don’t have these problems on their planes? I know. That would offend the Muslim world. So? Which is more important: making sure Muslims aren’t offended or truly protecting the innocent?
Let’s get serious.