Quotes

"I was bold in the Pursuit of Knowledge, never fearing to follow Truth and Reason to whatever results they led and bearding every authority which stood in their way" ~ Thomas Jefferson
Showing posts with label Major Hasan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Major Hasan. Show all posts

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Obama: AWOL at Arlington on Memorial Day

by Clio

For the first time since 1992, the American president is delegating the wreath-laying service at Arlington Cemetery on Memorial Day; Mr. Obama is jetting to Chicago aboard Air Force One to enjoy the three-day weekend with his family, leaving the honor of placing a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier to Vice President Joe Biden.

In 2002, President George W. Bush attended a solemn ceremony at the Normandy American Cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer; 9387 American soldiers are buried in this cemetery near Sainte-Mere-Eglise, the first town in France to be liberated by American troops during the World War II D-Day Invasion, June 6, 1944. Many remember watching the televised ceremonies and President Bush's moving tribute these fallen heroes.

Fortunately, the men and women who serve in uniform can take comfort knowing that the current president’s priorities are in order: he will return to the White House on June 2nd, just in time to present Sir Paul McCartney with the Gershwin Prize, a lifetime achievement award for contributions to pop music.

This marks the first time since 1992 that a U.S. President has delegated honoring those who died in service to our nation. During his 1992 presidential campaign, former President George H.W. Bush, a decorated military war hero, observed the holiday in Maine while his vice president, Dan Quayle (who served in the Illinois National Guard), attended to the ceremony in his stead.

The mainstream media remains Mr. Obama’s friend and marketing division by defending his decision to skip the wreath-laying on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier next Monday:

“So what the hell do these conservatives want out of Obama? And does it matter if Obama throws some leaves on a tomb?” David Corn, www.politicsdaily.com

Let’s take a moment to assess Mr. Obama and his relationship with the military and his concern for the security of our country:

Mr. Obama has not served in the military.

Mr. Obama finds the phrase “war on terror” distasteful, preferring “overseas contingency operation.” Terrorism is now “man-caused disasters.”

Mr. Obama doesn’t condone using terms like “radical Islam,” nor does he approve of the term “enemy combatant.” The Obama administration prefers: "individuals who provide substantial support to al-Qaida forces in other parts of the world may properly be deemed part of al-Qaida itself ...”

Mr. Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, wants to give “individuals who provide substantial support to al-Qaida …” civilian trials in New York City (the scene of the most heinous attack on American soil, September 11, 2001) instead of military tribunals despite strong objections from the American people, including many of the families of the September 11th terrorist attacks.

Recently, three Navy Seals were charged with abusing Ahmed Hashim Abed who claimed that Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe punched him in the stomach. Also charged, Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe with dereliction of duty based on allegations that they failed to safeguard the prisoner.

According to USNavySeals.com, an unofficial blog; “In addition to being accused of masterminding the killing of four Blackwater contractors and dragging their charred bodies in the streets before hanging them [from] a bridge over the Euphrates, [Abed] is also said to have committed a series of killings – beheadings included – as an Al Qaeda operative in western Anbar province. He is also said to be responsible for recruitment, weapons trafficking, ambushes and attacks using improvised explosive devices…”

Three American heroes were arrested, charged and tried because a terrorist claimed that one punched him in the stomach; all three Navy Seals were found not guilty.

On November 5, 2009, another “man-caused disaster” occurred at Fort Hood; Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan murdered 13 people and wounded 29 others in the first act of terrorism on American soil since September 11, 2001.

Mr. Obama was slow to issue a statement regarding the attack, eventually noting the attack during a brief press conference before moving on to promote his health care agenda.

Mr. Obama called the attack a “tragedy,” not terrorism.

The administration and military failed to note or act on information about Major Hasan, a Muslim born in Virginia to Jordanian immigrants.

Since the attack on Ft. Hood, we’ve learned the FBI and Major Hasan’s superiors were aware of Major Hasan’s extremist views at least six months prior to the attack. Major Hasan was monitored by intelligence services because he exchanged e-mails, asking for guidance regarding violence, with radical Imam Anwar al-Awlaki.

U.S. Major Hasan’s business cards identified him as a “Soldier of Islam.”

Hasan was “on the radar” of his associates, superiors and officials, yet they failed to act due to concerns about “…hearings and potential legal conflict.” Fox News

When one takes all of the above into consideration, it is obvious that the current administration is reluctant to identify radical Islamic terrorists and their hostile agenda for America, yet comfortable showing a lack of respect and support for those who serve in uniform.

After a year and a half of apologizing to the world for his perceptions of America’s transgressions and bowing to foreign kings, Mr. Obama continues to show his true colors … and they are not Red, White and Blue.



This Memorial Day, The Bold Pursuit honors the men and women who serve in uniform and pays tribute to those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country, our freedom and democracy. Below is The Sentinels Creed of the Tomb Guards at Arlington National Cemetery:

The Sentinels Creed

My dedication to this sacred duty
is total and whole-hearted.
In the responsibility bestowed on me
never will I falter.
And with dignity and perseverance
my standard will remain perfection.
Through the years of diligence and praise
and the discomfort of the elements,
I will walk my tour in humble reverence
to the best of my ability.
It is he who commands the respect I protect,
his bravery that made us so proud.
Surrounded by well meaning crowds by day,
alone in the thoughtful peace of night,
this soldier will in honored glory rest
under my eternal vigilance.

After reading The Sentinels Creed, it’s easy to understand why so many Americans are displeased with Mr. Obama’s decision to take a personal vacation instead of paying tribute to those who served our nation.

TombGuard.Org:
“The Sentinel's Creed are the 99 words we live by. The words bring vast emotions to the surface when spoken by a Sentinel. We tend to stand a little taller, back a little straighter and our head just a little higher. These words capture the true meaning of why we are Tomb Guards. When ever a Tomb Guard salutes a commissioned officer, they always say in a loud voice:

"Line Six, Sir!"



© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Saturday, May 8, 2010

America’s Finest ... On the Defensive

Special to The Bold Pursuit … Robert Arvay, former military, shares his unique perspective on the attempted courts-martial of three Navy Seals.


During my twenty years of military service to the United States, I was privileged to see some of the very finest Americans on a daily basis. From the lowest private to the highest general, and in all branches of the service, I witnessed constant dedication and devotion to our highest ideals.

I am now in my twentieth year of post-military retirement, and I have never had anything disparaging to say about our Armed Forces. But the recent courts-martial of three heroic Navy Seals compels me to speak my mind.

Every house has its soiled laundry, and as a general rule, we are all better off not mentioning it. The bad apples in the military are few and far between, but sometimes, they have a negative influence all out of proportion to their small numbers. And I warrant that the vast majority of military veterans know exactly whereof I speak.

So it is that I call for an investigation of exactly how it was, that three American heroes were not only falsely accused of a crime they did not commit, but actually brought to trial on the basis of a prosecution case that could not survive two hours of jury review before the just verdict of acquittal on all charges.

This was never a case about a crime. It was never a case about serving justice. From the very earliest stages of this case, superior officers had the discretion and the duty to exonerate these men on the basis of the flimsiness of the prosecution evidence, if evidence it was.

Let us consider the very worst case scenario possible, that the three men had presumably been guilty as charged. Guilty of what? Of punching a terrorist who had murdered Americans? Which they did not, but let us presume guilt. How serious was this charge? Serious enough to warrant a court-martial?

Remember, these men had risked their lives to capture the terrorist. They had risked death to take him alive. During the capture operation, they had every opportunity to punch, kick, stab, shoot and even bomb the terrorist, to insult, hurt, wound or kill him. They did not do that. But according to the prosecution, the Navy Seals chose to bloody the terrorist in front of a witness whom they did not know well enough to trust with a secret. Preposterous!

So why did the commanders, after seeing the Navy Seals refuse the dishonor of nonjudicial punishment, then proceed with a full blown court-martial? Why did they choose to believe the discredited witness, who admitted dereliction of duty?

To answer that, we have to understand that there are two kinds of people in the military. First are the warriors, those willing to risk their lives in the performance of dangerous, often thankless duties. Second, there are a small number of the politically correct.

And if you think that is of little consequence, you are tragically mistaken.

To prove that, ask yourself which of these two kinds of people supervised Major Nidal Malik Hasan. Warriors or bureaucrats? Hasan is the man who murdered 13 Americans in the Fort Hood massacre. There was strong reason for Hasan’s superiors to report him for terrorist sympathies, long before he actually murdered his victims. He had a long history leading up to the murders. But you see, Hasan is a Muslim. You might not know that. The press either did not report his religion at all, or downplayed it. Because you see, it is politically incorrect to associate terrorism with Islam. The politically correct do not wish to offend Muslims.

This is the kind of thinking that led to the courts-martial of the Navy Seals, but not even nonjudicial punishment against Major Hasan prior to his act of terrorism. The thinking is that we must not offend the terrorists who are killing us. We must instead punish those who defend us.

This is the kind of thinking that requires American warriors in Afghanistan to warn the enemy of our impending attacks, and to read them their (nonexistent) Miranda rights on the battlefield.

This is the kind of thinking that gets us killed. And it is well past time that Americans put a stop to this insanity.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Fort Hood: Terrorism or just a tragedy? Propaganda, Part I

by Clio

In my earlier blogs (“Man-Caused Disasters” and “Grab Your Merriam-Websters…”), I expressed disdain for the Obama administration’s terminology tinkering. “Man-Caused Disasters” focused on taking out terrorism and replacing it with an easier to digest “man-caused disaster.” “Grab Your Merriam-Websters…” examined the new policy of wiping out “war on terror,” giving preference to “global overseas contingency operations.”

When those exchanges were announced earlier this year, I felt so strongly about the White House’s word wrangling that I grabbed my laptop and pounded out a couple of blogs to express my disapproval. I had a feeling that these subtle substitutions marked the beginning of a campaign to change our opinions about the new government’s domestic and foreign policies.

It seems that Mr. Obama believes that if he expunges a certain word, such as “terrorism,” and replaces it with a less offensive term like “man-caused disaster,” the result will negate or change reality.

Reality arrived home last week in the form of an Army major at Fort Hood, Texas. Major Nidal Hasan murdered 13 people and wounded 29 others in first act of terrorism on American soil since September 11, 2001. News reports are surfacing regarding Major Hasan’s ties to radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki and Hasan’s attempts to contact members of Al Qaeda. In fact, there is enough information regarding Major Hasan, his activities and statements to launch a Senate inquiry into the shootings; other agencies will follow suit with their own investigations.

How did Mr. Obama respond to last week’s terrorist attack? During a brief press conference in the White House Rose Garden, Mr. Obama spent two minutes acknowledging a member of the audience and touting his health care package before he mentioned the Fort Hood attack: “… some of you might have heard there has been a tragic shooting at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas,” he told the assembled guests and cautioned “not to jump to conclusions” about the event.

Mr. Obama used poor judgment in failing to mention the attack on Fort Hood before giving “shout outs” and promoting ObamaCare, but I concur with his prudent advice about jumping to conclusions. Meanwhile, the facts are beginning to emerge and the evidence collected thus far suggests that a thorough examination of Major Hasan and his deadly acts is warranted.

On Tuesday, November 10th, the Commander-in-Chief spoke at a memorial service in honor of the fallen soldiers at Fort Hood Army Base. Again, Mr. Obama refused to use the term terrorism or even his own spin, “man-caused disasters.”

“This is a time of war. And yet these Americans did not die on a foreign field of battle. They were killed here, on American soil, in the heart of this great American community. It is this fact that makes the tragedy even more painful and even more incomprehensible.

It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know – no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor. And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice – in this world, and the next.

We are a nation of laws whose commitment to justice is so enduring that we would treat a gunman and give him due process, just as surely as we will see that he pays for his crimes.”
Barack Hussein Obama, Fort Hood Memorial Service, November 10, 2009

The attack was a “tragedy,” not terrorism, according to Obama, and Major Hasan is a “gunman” and a “killer,” but not a terrorist. The exclusion of the expunged terms is pertinent because there is significant evidence, not far-fetched right-wing conclusions, that Major Hasan is a terrorist and his words and deeds provide substance to the charge. Mr. Obama may not want to acknowledge that, after eight years without a terrorist attack on America, one just occurred during his first year in office.

“It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion” – Joseph Goebbels

Author’s note: after posting this blog around 4am, I turned on the television. Commentators on FoxNews were discussing Major Hasan’s legal defense and his attorney’s intent to use a mental illness defense for his client. I’m quite certain that Major Hasan suffers from some mental malady (the diagnosis was psychopath, according to the commentators), but that begs the question: are all terrorists suffering from mental illness?

Surely, strapping explosives to one’s chest and walking into a building filled with innocent adults and children qualifies under that presumption. Piloting airplanes filled with highly explosive jet fuel and frightened passengers into skyscrapers and government offices – those 19 terrorists on September 11, 2001 were clearly mentally disturbed, as well as terrorist militants who engage in variety of murderous activities.

It all makes perfect sense to me; anyone who shouts “death to America” or carries signs that read “America is the Great Satan” is obviously a few nails short of a dirty bomb.

Will psychological illness become the new defense for terrorism? If so, what will that mean for those who were detained at Guantanamo Bay or tried, convicted and jailed for their attacks on America, its people and military? Should we release all of them for humanitarian reasons or ship them to a mental hospital to be tended by trained psychiatric staff?

If Major Hasan’s legal defense is successful, this could open a Pandora’s box in the prosecution of terrorism.

Psychopath or terrorist? Oh, here we go again… Shall we just trash our dictionaries and let liberals tell us what words mean and what we should or should not believe? It’s PROPAGANDA, my friends, an insidious ploy to stage manage our perception of the world and its dangers.



© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED