From the professional America-haters at Code Pink:

Under the Hood Cafe & Outreach Center – Soft Opening

February 7, 2009
CODEPINK Austin
Austin, TX

On February 7, 2009, Under The Hood Café & Outreach Center officially opened its doors to the public for the first time. Under the Hood, located in Killeen, Texas, home of the largest military base in the U.S., is a venue designed to promote the free uncensored exchange of ideas and information among active duty and reserve military, and civilians. Iraq Veterans Against the War, CODEPINK, and numerous other peace groups in Central Texas have helped to make Under the Hood a reality.

CODEPINK’s own Cindy Thomas is the manager for Under the Hood. For more information about Under the Hood Cafe and Outreach Center, visit the website at www.underthehoodcafe.org.

And from the Kileen Daily Herald:

New café a refuge for dissent

By Rebecca LaFlure

Friday, Feb. 6 2009

As an Army wife of 17 years, Cindy Thomas struggled through her husband’s three deployments to Iraq. The second tour of duty left him close to death with a brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, collapsed lungs and multiple fractures in his spine and pelvis.

But it was not until her stepson, then 19 years old, called to say he was joining the Marines in 2007 that she felt compelled to vehemently protest the ongoing wars in the Middle East and work to improve the lives of soldiers and their families…

Since April 2008, Thomas has devoted her time, thoughts and passion to opening Under the Hood Café, a local outreach center for active duty military personnel, veterans, family members and friends to support and console each other about their daily struggles…

Thomas said the refuge, scheduled to open Saturday, will be a "free speaking zone" to discuss difficult issues such as the death of a friend or family member overseas, spouses and children coping with the absence of their loved ones during multiple deployments or perhaps a guilty conscience for fighting in a war that increasingly more soldiers no longer believe in…

"We have counseling services on post obviously, but when you’re sitting around and hanging out, it’s more relaxing and natural, and you feel more comfortable asking for help," Thomas said. "The concept of it is having that place they can come and not only support each other and help each other out, but maybe even advocate for each other."

Thomas said the house will have a kitchen with coffee and snacks, a break room, a pool table, a big-screen television, a jukebox and multiple couches and tables, all funded by donations.

Though a peace activist herself, Thomas stressed the café is open to people of all ideologies.

Thomas said she is prepared for some public backlash, but her goal is to provide an inclusive environment for military community members to share their stories.

"They might not like what some of us or some of the soldiers have to say because everybody’s experience is different. If you experienced … reconstruction and helping the community, then great, that’s absolutely great. But not every soldier did," she said. "There are others with difficult stories, and the difficult choices they had to make. They have a right to be heard. If you want to support them, hear them. Just let them have their voice."

For more information on Under the Hood Café or to read about the history of the Oleo Strut from someone who was there, go to www.underthehoodcafe.org.

And from the professional America-haters known as the Iraq Veterans Against the War:

Joint Statement from Under the Hood Café and the Fort Hood Chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War

by Victor Agosto | Fri, 11/06/2009

Joint Statement from Under the Hood Café and the Fort Hood Chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War

Our community is distraught by the tragic shooting at Fort Hood yesterday. We extend our condolences to the families and friends of the victims.

As upset as we are about this incident, this shooting does not come as a shock. Eight years of senseless wars have taken a huge toll on our troops and their families. It’s time to admit that the wars in southwest Asia are in no one’s best interests. Bring the troops home now!

The Army has also repeatedly demonstrated that it is more interested in making soldiers “deployable” than it is in helping them fully recover from PTSD and other mental health issues. This often leaves soldiers with few options other than to self-medicate with drugs and alcohol. The Army routinely deploys soldiers who are clearly suicidal and homicidal. Yesterday was a gruesome reminder of the possible violent consequences of this policy. We hope the Army now takes its duty to take care of soldiers more seriously.

We demand transparency from the Army and other federal agencies involved with this investigation.

Under the Hood Café provides military service members support with referrals to legal, financial, and medical services. It is a space for troops to freely express their views on the wars and the military. It also offers GI rights counseling. Iraq Veterans Against the War calls for the immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces in Iraq, reparations for the human and structural damages Iraq has suffered, and full benefits for returning military.

Under the Hood Café
Iraq Veterans Against the War – Fort Hood Chapter

And more crocodile tears from Code Pink:

Stress, Emotional Trauma and Anxiety for Military Servicemen and Servicewomen

November 6, 2009 (Los Angeles, CA) — “We express deep grief for the families of those who died yesterday and for the wounded who still struggle,” said Jodie Evans, co-founder of CODEPINK, “and also for the families and soldiers who are still in harm’s way in Iraq and Afghanistan.”  Wednesday’s shootings by an active-duty serviceman at Fort Hood killed 13 and wounded 30 people.

Retired U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright is a 29-year veteran and former U.S. diplomat. “What happened at Fort Hood is probably a result of the accumulated stress of working with thousands of soldiers who have returned from war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan as shattered humans who have participated in or exposed to the horrific carnage of war,“ said Wright.” "I am very concerned about the stress from deployments and for those who care for those who have deployed.” Wright resigned in 2003 from the Bush administration and the U.S. diplomatic corps over opposition to the war in Iraq.

10 Fort Hood soldiers have reportedly commit suicide in 2009. Fran Hanlon is board member of the Fort Hood Support Network, a non-profit organization that operates Under the Hood Café in Killeen. Under the Hood is an outreach center for active duty military personnel, veterans, family members, and friends, to support and console each other about daily struggles. Today, there is plenty of grief to go around.

“We hear from soldiers with PTSD who are not properly diagnosed and treated,” said Hanlon.  She continued, “President Obama was quoted as saying ‘We will make sure that we get answers to every single question about this horrible incident.’  The questions many here in Texas would ask are when will this nightmare end? And how will we properly care for the ‘walking wounded’ we have created?”

Why do we our enemies to operate so openly?

Why do we support them with our tax dollars?

Both Code Pink and the Iraq Veterans Against the War are tax exempt 501c3 ‘charities.’

Normally we try to ignore the rabid imbecility of the America-haters at the Daily Kos.

But this is just too rich:

Possible answer for the Ft. Hood Trajedy.

We especially like answer number three:

“He was trying to save these troops from the horrors of war that he heard about from returning troops”

By KILLING them!

From Iran’s Press TV:

Iran charges 3 US hikers with espionage

Mon, 09 Nov 2009

The Iranian Judiciary says the three young Americans arrested in late July while hiking near the country’s border with Iraq have been charged with espionage.

Shane Michael Bauer, Joshua Felix Fattal, and Sarah Emily Shourd were arrested in the western Iranian district of Marivan, at Malakh-Khur border point on July 31.

The three were traveling on Syrian and Iraqi visas and according to Iranian officials, crossed the border illegally.

Meanwhile the families of the detainees maintain that they accidentally crossed the border into Iran while hiking in a scenic area of northern Iraq.

Tehran Prosecutor-General Abbas Jafari-Dolatabadi said the three entered the country to carry out acts of espionage.

"They are charged with espionage. Investigations into the case of the three are underway," IRNA quoted Jafari-Dolatabadi as saying.

He went on to add that the final decision about the detained US citizens would soon be announced.

What a shock, huh?

This is just one more benefit from our new, friendlier relationship with the Islamic Republic Of Iran.

From a mind reading Associated Press:

DC area relives terror as sniper’s execution nears

By DAVID DISHNEAU (AP)

WHEATON, Md. — Serial sniper John Allen Muhammad’s upcoming execution has residents in the Washington area reliving the fear they felt during his three-week killing spree seven years ago.

Muhammad is set for lethal injection Tuesday in Virginia for shooting a man at a gas station. It was one of 10 deaths in and around the nation’s capital blamed on Muhammad and teenager Lee Boyd Malvo.

The attacks began with five shootings in about 12 hours. The random targets had people all over the region changing their habits to avoid becoming the next victim.

Experts say it’s not unusual for people to feel fearful all over again seven years later. Going through trauma like that alongside their neighbors can intensify the effects.

Isn’t it amazing the lack of coverage Mr. Muhammad’s well deserved execution is getting – even from the left?

Especially, given that this was worst terrorist attack on US soil until Mr. Hasan’s recent jihad.

But even with this natural tie-in, there has been very little coverage of Mr. Muhammad’s send-off, or any remembrances of his killing spree. Which is odd, given how much our watchdog media normally enjoy covering mass murderers.

And yet somehow talking about Muslim mass murderers always seems to be anathema to our watchdog media.

Note how even this article concentrates on the fears Mr. Muhammad’s execution is supposedly dredging up. Whereas we suspect most people would be relieved and gladdened at the news.

Once again we get the same old song from the erstwhile news magazine, Time:

Why the Wall Came Down

By Romesh Ratnesar

Monday, Nov. 09, 2009

The fall of the Berlin wall caught the world by surprise. For months, East Germany’s beleaguered communist rulers had tried in vain to silence a growing opposition movement and stem the tide of people pouring out of the country. On the night of Nov. 9, 1989, an East German official held a press conference to announce new government travel policies but inadvertently announced that crossings to the West would be opened "without delay." Within hours, thousands of East Berliners began lining up at checkpoints near the Wall. At first the border guards tried to check passports, but they quickly realized it was futile. The masses surged through. Many of them ran. Crowds of West Berliners waited on the other side, hugging strangers and popping champagne. The scenes were stunning. By the fall of 1989 cracks in the communist bloc had started to emerge. But few people imagined the Berlin Wall would disappear anytime soon.

Ronald Reagan did. "I didn’t know when it would come, but I have to tell you, I’m an eternal optimist," the former President said in an interview with ABC’s Sam Donaldson that night. "I believed in all my heart it was in the future." Two years earlier, Reagan had addressed a crowd of some 20,000 near Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate and challenged Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Wall…

And yet 20 years later, Reagan’s role in bringing about the fall of the Berlin Wall and the peaceful end of the Cold War remains exaggerated, manipulated and misunderstood. To many of his conservative admirers, the challenge to Gorbachev in Berlin epitomized the toughness that made Reagan great: by refusing to compromise his core principles, he defeated communism and won the Cold War. But the truth is that Reagan was more adaptable, politically shrewd and open to compromise than either his champions or his critics prefer to admit. He may have called the Soviet Union an "evil empire," but he was not above negotiating with it. While others saw the enmity between the superpowers as immutable, he insisted that change was possible. And though today he is revered by foreign policy hawks, Reagan’s greatest successes were achieved not through the use of force but by persuasion, dialogue and diplomacy.

Reagan loathed the Berlin Wall. "It’s a wall that never should have been built," he often said…

But despite his abhorrence for the Wall and the totalitarian system it symbolized, Reagan was even more mindful of the consequences of military confrontation with the Soviets. "A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought," he said in 1983. During the early years of his presidency, Reagan privately sought to open dialogue with the leaders of the U.S.S.R. but made no headway. With Gorbachev’s arrival in 1985, Reagan found a partner who could help in his quest to end the arms race–and ultimately abolish nuclear weapons…

By the time Reagan went to Berlin in 1987, he and Gorbachev had developed enough trust to gamble on change. In the weeks leading up to the speech, several Administration officials lobbied to have the "tear down this Wall" line removed, arguing that it was unrealistic, unpresidential and potentially embarrassing to Gorbachev. But Reagan and his speechwriters insisted on keeping it in. To the President, the line was an invitation as much as a challenge: calling on Gorbachev to tear down the Wall might actually inspire him to do it. "If he took down the Wall," Reagan told an aide after returning from Berlin, "he’d win the Nobel Prize."

Reagan was right. (In 1990, Gorbachev not only won the Nobel but was named TIME’s Man of the Decade.) Neither Gorbachev nor Reagan was directly responsible for the fall of the Wall; rather, it collapsed from its own weight. But Reagan’s speech presciently identified Berlin as the proving ground of Gorbachev’s intentions to open up the communist bloc. If Gorbachev truly sought peace and liberalization, Reagan said in Berlin, then he should let the Wall come down. In the end, Gorbachev did, and the rest of the Iron Curtain followed. Allowing democracy to spread through Eastern Europe in 1989 was Gorbachev’s greatest accomplishment; in this drama, Reagan was the supporting actor. Nevertheless, as Sean Wilentz, a liberal historian, wrote in 2008, Reagan’s "success in helping to finally end the Cold War is one of the greatest achievements by any President of the United States–and arguably the greatest single achievement since 1945."

What lessons can the current President learn from that achievement? Even if Barack Obama tries to make peace with the mullahs of Iran or with insurgents in Afghanistan, as Reagan did with the U.S.S.R., there’s no guarantee he’ll succeed. The threats facing America cannot be willed away. Defusing them will ultimately require the mix of firm resolve and patient diplomacy practiced by successful American statesmen throughout the Cold War. Reagan’s gift was his ability to speak candidly about the realities of the age while still presenting, and working toward, an optimistic vision of the future. He sensed when the right risk might be rewarded. Obama’s challenge now is to do the same.

We realize it is largely a waste of time to mock Time magazine, since few people read it any more.

But this article is all too typical of the revisionism that we get from our media masters 24 hours a day – and especially on historic anniversaries.

Who are we supposed to believe? Time magazine or our lying memories? (The author, Mr. Ratnesar was 14 years old when the Berlin Wall came down.)

The "risk" that President Reagan took was to revitalize America’s military strength, put money into the Strategic Defense Initiative, install missiles in Europe and to confront an ‘evil empire’ an ‘evil empire.’

If he was trying to “make peace” it was a peace through strength.

This article turns Mr. Reagan’s actions completely upside down.

Of course the writer has to do so because he wants Obama to do the precise opposite of what Reagan actually did.

He wants to encourage Mr. Obama to surrender our country’s interests in Afghanistan and Iran – and everywhere else in the world, for that matter.

As if Mr. Obama needs any encouragement.

An editorial from the man who ended the Cold War and brought the millennium, via the UK’s Times:

Tear down this wall! And save the planet

There are urgent parallels between the fall of Communism and the fight to stop climate change

Mikhail Gorbachev

November 9, 2009

The German people, and the whole world alongside them, are today celebrating a landmark date in history: the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Not many events can claim their place in the collective memory as a watershed that divides two distinct periods. The dismantling of the Berlin Wall — that stark, concrete symbol of a world divided into hostile camps — is such an event. It brought incredible hope and opportunity to people everywhere, and provided the 1980s with a truly jubilant finale. That is something to think about as this decade draws to a close, and the chance for humanity to take another momentous leap forward appears to be slipping away.

The road to the end of the Cold War was certainly not easy, or universally welcomed at the time, but it is for just this reason that its lessons remain relevant. In the 1980s the world was at an historic crossroad. The arms race had created an explosive situation. Nuclear deterrents could have failed at any moment. We were heading for disaster, spending billions on an arms race, rather than investing in creativity and people.

Today another planetary threat has emerged. The climate crisis is the new wall that divides us from our future, and today’s leaders are vastly underestimating the urgency, and potentially catastrophic scale, of the emergency.

People used to joke that we will struggle for peace until there is nothing left on the planet; the threat of climate change makes this prophecy more literal than ever. Comparisons with the period immediately before the Berlin Wall came down are striking.

Like 20 years ago, we face a threat to global security and our very future existence that no one nation can deal with alone. And, again, it is the people who are calling for change. Just as the German people declared their will for unity, world citizens are today demanding that action is taken to tackle climate change and redress the deep injustices that surround it. Twenty years ago key world leaders demonstrated resolve, faced up to opposition and immense pressure, and the Wall came down. It remains to be seen whether today’s leaders will do the same.

Addressing climate change demands a paradigm shift on a scale akin to that required to end the Cold War. But we need a “circuit-breaker” to escape from the business-as-usual that currently dominates the political agenda. It was the transformation brought about by perestroika and glasnost that provided the quantum leap for freedom for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and opened the way for the democratic revolution that saved history. Climate change is complex and closely entwined with a host of other challenges, but a similar breakthrough in our values and priorities is needed.

There is not just one wall to topple, but many. There is the wall between those states which are already industrialised, and those developing countries which do not want to be held back. There is the wall between those who cause climate change, and those who suffer the consequences. There is the wall between those who heed the scientific evidence, and those who pander to vested interests. And there is the wall between the citizens who are changing their own behaviour and want strong global action, and the leaders who are so far letting them down.

In 1989, incredible changes that were deemed impossible just a few years earlier were implemented. But this was no accident. The changes resonated the hopes of the time and leaders responded. We brought down the wall in the belief that future generations would be able to solve challenges together. Today, looking at the cavernous gulf between rich and poor, the irresponsibility that caused the global financial crisis, and the weak and divided responses to climate change, I feel bitter. The opportunity to build a safer, fairer and more united world has been largely squandered.

To echo the demand made of me by my late friend and sparring partner President Reagan: Mr Obama, Mr Hu, Mr Singh, Mr Brown and, back in Berlin, Ms Merkel and her European counterparts: “Tear down this wall!”

For this is Your Wall, your defining moment. You cannot dodge the call of history. I appeal to heads of state and government to personally come to the climate change conference in Copenhagen this December and dismantle the wall. The people of the world expect you to deliver; do not fail them.

Mikhail Gorbachev, former President of the Soviet Union, was awarded the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize for his role in the peaceful conclusion of the Cold War. He is the Founding President of Green Cross International and is heading an international Climate Change Task Force

Apparently, even the devil can quote Reagan.

Even a devil who did everything in his power to try to save Communism, the Soviet Union and its slave empire.

Indeed, the Berlin Wall came down and the Cold War ended (if it did) despite Mr. Gorbachev’s best efforts.

So who better to preach to us about this new form of Communism and tyranny? After all, green is the new red.

Like 20 years ago, we face a threat to global security and our very future existence that no one nation can deal with alone. And, again, it is the people who are calling for change. Just as the German people declared their will for unity, world citizens are today demanding that action is taken to tackle climate change and redress the deep injustices that surround it.

What a stain-faced lie.

There is no groundswell around the world for this nonsense. Though, of course, there are some groups who hope to benefit from the redistribution of wealth that will redress these imagined “deep injustices.”

Speaking of which, you can bet your bottom kopek that Mr. Gorbachev, like Mr. Gore, has an ulterior financial motive behind his sudden interest in the environment.

Indeed, the last we heard from him the New York Times was bemoaning how he had sold out and was doing Pizza Hut commercials for the almighty dollar. (He needed the money for his ‘foundation.’)

Going ‘green’ is a much more respectable racket.

And much more profitable, too.

From Wikipedia:

Green Cross International

Green Cross International is an environmental organization founded by former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1993, building upon the work started by the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Green Cross International’s mission is "to help ensure a just, sustainable and secure future for all by fostering a value shift and cultivating a new sense of global interdependence and shared responsibility in humanity’s relationship with nature." …

Green Cross International works in the following areas:

1. Prevention and resolution of conflicts arising from environmental degradation;
2. Provision of assistance to people affected by the environmental consequences of wars and conflicts;
3. Promotion of legal, ethical and behavioral norms that ensure basic changes in the values, actions and attitudes of government, the private sector and civil society, necessary to build a sustainable global community.

Promoting values and behaviour changes

GCI also seeks to attain a value and behaviour shift through initiatives such as the Earth Charter, the Earth Dialogues and the Environmental Education and Awareness Programme. The idea is to sensitise people, especially the young, with a positive awareness of and responsibility towards these common threats to humanity posed by poverty, insecurity and environmental destruction.

Ka-ching!

By the way, lest we forget, Mr. Gorbachev was such ‘a man of peace’ – he tried to assassinate Pope John-Paul II for meddling with his Soviet Empire.

From Fox News:

Alleged Fort Hood Shooter Frequented Local Strip Club

Sunday , November 08, 2009
By Jana Winter

Killeen, Texas — The Army psychiatrist authorities say killed 13 people and wounded 29 others at the Fort Hood Army Base Thursday was a recent and frequent customer at a local strip club, employees of the club told FoxNews.com exclusively.

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan came into the Starz strip club not far from the base at least three times in the past month, the club’s general manager, Matthew Jones, told FoxNews.com…

"The last time he was here, I remember checking his military ID at the door, and he paid his $15 cover and stayed for six or seven hours," Jones, 37, said…

Starz is a strip club located just down the road from the main gate entrance to the Fort Hood Base. It does not serve alcohol, but customers bring their own beer and liquor and buy ice buckets and mixers at the club…

Jennifer Jenner, who works at Starz using the stage name Paige, said Hasan bought a lap dance from her two nights in a row. She said he paid $50 for a dance lasting three songs in one of the club’s private rooms on Oct. 29 and Oct. 30.

"I remembered his face because it was the first lap dance I [gave] to a customer while working here," she said. "When I saw his face [Friday] on TV, I jumped out of bed, I knew it was him."

Jenner, 31, said Hasan was dressed casually both nights he came to the club – in jeans and a T-shirt the first night and then wearing a baseball cap the next. She recalled that he arrived at about 6:30 p.m. and stayed until 2 a.m. She said he brought in a six pack of light beer, took only a few sips from one can and gave the rest to the strippers.

"He preferred the blondes," said Jenner, whose hair was dyed blond at the time. "He said he was a medic and that he was being deployed soon, but mostly he wanted to ask us questions." …

"I just can’t believe that he’s the one who killed all those people. You know, he tipped every girl as she came off the stage after her dance. He was a really good tipper."

What a pious Muslim.

And yet another similarity Mr. Hasan shares with some of the 9/11 hijackers.

From the blog of Anwar al Awlaki, who was the ‘Imam’ in the Falls Church, Virginia mosque attended by Mr. Hasan and several of the 9/11 hijackers:

Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing

November 9, 2009 – الاثنين 22 ذو القعدة 1430 by Anwar alAwlaki

Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is 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. This is a contradiction that many Muslims brush aside and just pretend that it doesn’t exist. Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.

Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.

The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.

The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.

Allah(swt) says: Give tidings to the hypocrites that there is for them a painful punishment – Those who take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do they seek with them honor [through power]? But indeed, honor belongs to Allah entirely. (al-Nisa 136-137)

The inconsistency of being a Muslim today and living in America and the West in general reveals the wisdom behind the opinions that call for migration from the West. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold on to Islam in an environment that is becoming more hostile towards Muslims.

May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act.

Ameen

Mr. Awlaki now lives in Yemen. So it’s good to see he nevertheless keeps apprised of the doings of his flock.

Imagine the satisfaction Mr. Hasan will have when he reads this.

From the UK’s Telegraph:

Fort Hood gunman had told US military colleagues that infidels should have their throats cut

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the gunman who killed 13 at America’s Fort Hood military base, once gave a lecture to other doctors in which he said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats.

By Nick Allen in Fort Hood
8 Nov 2009

He also told colleagues at America’s top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The outburst came during an hour-long talk Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, gave on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, where he worked for six years before arriving at Fort Hood in July.

Colleagues had expected a discussion on a medical issue but were instead given an extremist interpretation of the Koran, which Hasan appeared to believe.

It was the latest in a series of "red flags" about his state of mind that have emerged since the massacre at Fort Hood, America’s largest military installation, on Thursday…

Fellow doctors have recounted how they were repeatedly harangued by Hasan about religion and that he openly claimed to be a "Muslim first and American second."

One Army doctor who knew him said a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim soldier had stopped fellow officers from filing formal complaints…

One of Hasan’s neighbours described how on the day of the massacre, about 9am, he gave her a Koran and told her: "I’m going to do good work for God" before leaving for the base…

More information that the British Telegraph seems to be able to unearth, while none of our stateside media watchdogs seem to be interested.

It was the latest in a series of "red flags" about his state of mind that have emerged since the massacre at Fort Hood, America’s largest military installation, on Thursday.

Mr. Hasan seems to have had more red flags than a May Day parade.

As the article notes, political correctness and the fear of lawsuits overcame common sense.

What a triumph for CAIR and the ACLU.

From the one time news magazine, Time:

Hasan’s Therapy: Could "Secondary Trauma" Have Driven Him to Shooting?

By Tim Mcgirk Sun Nov 8

As an army psychiatrist treating soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, Major Nidal Malik Hasan had a front row seat on the brutal toll of war. It is too early to know exactly what may have triggered his murderous shooting rampage Thursday at Fort Hood – Hasan is accused of killing 12 people and wounding 32 others before he was wounded by a police officer – but it is not uncommon for therapists treating soldiers with Post Trumatic [sic] Stress Disorder (P.T.S.D.) to be swept up in a patient’s displays of war-related paranoia, helplessness and fury.

In medical parlance it is known as "secondary trauma", and it can afflict the families of soldiers suffering from P.T.S.D. along with the health workers who are trying to cure them. Dr. Antonette Zeiss, Deputy Chief of Mental Health Services for Veteran Affairs, while not wishing to talk about the specific case of the Fort Hood slayings, explained to TIME that: "Anyone who works with P.T.S.D. clients and hears their stories will be profoundly affected."

It’s entirely possible that other factors may have acted as a trigger for Hasan’s alleged killing spree. The army major was a devout Muslim who reportedly had been harassed because of his religion and had developed strong objections to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But he was also due to be shipped out to Afghanistan, drawing him closer to the terrible scenes described in detail by his patients. At army hospitals dealing with P.T.S.D. patients, the staff is required to periodically fill out a ‘resiliency’ questionnaire that is supposed to gauge how well they are coping with the burden of their patients’ emotional and psychological demands. "It takes its toll on people," says one officer at a Colorado military hospital. "You cannot be un-affected by the terrible things these soldiers have undergone."

Most army psychiatrists now have a full caseload of men and women returning from combat zones with P.T.S.D.. A survey by the Rand Corp. last April revealed that one in five service men and women are coming back with post-traumatic stress and mental depression….

As part of their therapy, PTSD sufferers are typically asked to dredge up their worst wartime memories. Hearing these nightmarish experiences can stir up powerful reactions in even the most seasoned therapists…

And for even the most hardened army psychiatrist, that would be a grueling assignment. Fort Hood has the highest suicide rate of any army base in the country, largely because so many service men and women stationed there have undergone severe trauma while deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. At Fort Hood, in other words, there was no shortage of horrific tales that could have set loose the demons in Hasan’s mind.

Tim McGirk, the same Time reporter who gave us — that is to say, made up — Haditha jumps on the “Contact PTSD” bandwagon.

In fact, his article almost amounts to plagiarism of the New York Times article we posted earlier. But this is what passes for ‘journalism’ in the age of Obama.

[I]t is not uncommon for therapists treating soldiers with Post Trumatic Stress Disorder (P.T.S.D.) to be swept up in a patient’s displays of war-related paranoia, helplessness and fury.

In fact, it’s so common that we have never heard of another case of a psychiatrist claiming infidels should be beheaded and shouting ‘Allahu Akbar!’ as he gunned down innocent people. Have we?

Of course Time magazine will never burden its benighted readers with these mundane details about Mr. Hasan’s actions. Though they will admit there might be "other factors" (as well):

It’s entirely possible that other factors may have acted as a trigger for Hasan’s alleged killing spree. The army major was a devout Muslim who reportedly had been harassed because of his religion and had developed strong objections to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Which is to say, if this defense doesn’t work we can always fall back on the claim that Mr. Hasan was a victim.

At Fort Hood, in other words, there was no shortage of horrific tales that could have set loose the demons in Hasan’s mind.

It sounds to us like Mr. McGirk might be guilty of a ‘hate crime.’ For isn’t he suggesting that Mr. Hasan’s pious jihad was demonic? Isn’t that mocking Islam as a religion?

Meanwhile, in the journalistic practices of the day the biggest terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11 will never be described as such.

No, we can’t have it be that.

It must be explained away as something, anything else.

(Thanks to Clarice for the heads up.)

From the always understanding New York Times:

A news photographer records footage of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s apartment door in Killeen, Texas.

Painful Stories Take a Toll on Military Therapists

By BENEDICT CAREY, DAMIEN CAVE and LIZETTE ALVAREZ

November 8, 2009

Many of the patients who fill the day are bereft, angry, broken. Their experiences are gruesome, their distress lasting and the process of recovery exhausting. The repeated stories of battle and loss can leave the most professional therapist numb or angry.

And hanging over it all, for psychiatrists and psychologists in today’s military, is the prospect of their own deployment — of working under fire in Iraq or Afghanistan, where the Pentagon has assigned more therapists to combat units than in previous wars.

That was the world that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, inhabited until Thursday, when he was accused of one of the worst mass shootings ever on a military base in the United States, an attack that killed 13 and left dozens wounded. Five of the dead were fellow therapists, the Army said.

Major Hasan’s motives are still being investigated. But those who work day in and day out treating the psychological wounds of the country’s warriors say Thursday’s rampage has put a spotlight on the strains of their profession and of the patients they treat.

Major Hasan was one of a thin line of military therapists trying to hold off a rising tide of need. So far this year, 117 soldiers on active duty were reported to have committed suicide. The Army has only 408 psychiatrists — military, civilian and contractors — serving about 553,000 active-duty troops around the world…

Many military professionals, meanwhile, describe crushing schedules with 10 or more patients a day, most struggling with devastating trauma or mutilated bodies that are the product of war and the highly advanced care that kept them alive.

Some of those hired to heal others end up needing help themselves. Some go home at night too depressed to talk to their children…

Whatever the facts in Major Hasan’s case, some therapists who work with the military agree that the tragedy is likely to have a “lasting impact on how we look at mental health providers,” said Dr. Martin Paulus, a psychiatrist at the University of California, San Diego, and the Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System.

The Army has added to their ranks in recent years, as the number of soldiers with the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder has climbed to 34,000. But the shooting has raised a pressing question: Who counsels the counselors? Dr. Moore and other therapists who have worked in the military or for Veterans Affairs said that mental health evaluations of therapists themselves were virtually nonexistent.

“I have worked with the Army, the Navy, the V.A., and I’m not aware of any formal, systematic process to evaluate professionals,” said Dr. Andy Morgan, a psychiatrist at the National Center for P.T.S.D…

In studies of therapists working to soothe mental distress in victims of violence, whether criminal, sexual or combat-related, researchers have documented what is called secondary trauma: contact distress, of a kind. In one 2004 study of social workers on cases stemming from the Sept. 11 attacks, researchers found that the more deeply therapists were involved with victims, the more likely they were to experience such trauma. The same associations have been found in doctors working with survivors in war zones.

Dr. Hasan was reportedly facing his first deployment — a prospect that scares even trained fighters, many of whom become increasingly frantic before going to war, according to surveys…

If it turns out that Major Hasan did in fact break partly under the stress of the job and impending deployment, many veterans would not be surprised…

The New York Times is nothing, if not predictable.

Of course they had nary a concern for these doctors until one of their own needs a tailor made excuse. And here comes The Times to do the tailoring:

And hanging over it all, for psychiatrists and psychologists in today’s military, is the prospect of their own deployment — of working under fire in Iraq or Afghanistan, where the Pentagon has assigned more therapists to combat units than in previous wars.

Sure, we believe that psychiatrists and psychologists see a lot of combat.

The New York Times has told us so, so it must be true.

In studies of therapists working to soothe mental distress in victims of violence, whether criminal, sexual or combat-related, researchers have documented what is called secondary trauma: contact distress…

“Contact distress”? The Times is even willing to make up new diagnosis out of whole cloth to protect their heroes.

Funny how now of this explains Mr. Hasan’s internet postings or his passing out of Korans or his shouting of ‘Allahu Akbar!’

But we’re supposed to forget that any of that ever happened.

And of course if you only read The New York Times, you would never know it ever did happen.

From a disappointed New York Times:

All Afghan War Options by Obama Aides Said to Call for More Troops

By PETER BAKER and HELENE COOPER

November 8, 2009

WASHINGTON — Advisers to President Obama are preparing three options for escalating the war effort in Afghanistan, all of them calling for more American troops, as he moves closer to a decision on the way forward in the eight-year-old war, officials said Saturday.

The options include Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s request for roughly another 40,000 troops; a middle scenario sending about 30,000 more troops; and a lower alternative involving 20,000 to 25,000 reinforcements, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Officials hope to present the options to Mr. Obama this week before he leaves on a trip to Asia.

While some civilian and military officials believe Mr. Obama is seeking a middle ground in the debate over Afghanistan, aides denied he has made any decision or is leaning toward any of the options. Still, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates appears to be supportive of the middle option, some officials said, and his view is thought to be pivotal because of Mr. Obama’s respect for him and his status as a holdover from a Republican administration…

The range of alternatives under discussion suggests that the president has rejected the extremes on either end. He appears inclined to send more troops — with the only question being how many — and seems not to be seriously considering General McChrystal’s highest proposal of 80,000 more troops…

McClatchy Newspapers reported Saturday that Mr. Obama is nearing a decision to approve the middle option being drawn up by advisers, citing unnamed administration and military officials. White House officials denied Mr. Obama has made a decision or favors any of the options at this point, noting that they have not been formally presented to him. But administration officials confirmed that the 30,000-troop plan is under consideration…

Officials are focusing on an approach predicated on the belief that the Taliban cannot be entirely eradicated in Afghanistan and that Al Qaeda is the real threat to American interests. The main goal for American forces, then, would be to protect the 10 most important population centers in Afghanistan and keep the Taliban isolated long enough to train Afghan security forces to take over the fight.

Mr. Obama has met with his national security advisers seven times since General McChrystal sent his assessment Aug. 31. Officials hope to schedule another meeting this week…

If this report is true (which is always something to bear in mind with any New York Times story), and all of the options entail sending troops, why not just send the lowest number of troops (20,000) for starters?

What harm would it possibly do? And it would certainly be better than doing nothing. And we are sure the soldiers in the field in Afghanistan would appreciate any reinforcements.

Or is Mr. Obama determined to wait until the Senate votes on healthcare reform, so that he doesn’t risk losing his ‘netroots’ storm troopers foot-soldiers?

(You know, the ones who were so decisive in the elections last Tuesday.)

The range of alternatives under discussion suggests that the president has rejected the extremes on either end. He appears inclined to send more troops — with the only question being how many — and seems not to be seriously considering General McChrystal’s highest proposal of 80,000 more troops.

Isn’t it odd that this is the first we have heard about this request for such 80,000 more troops? And this minor detail is only mentioned in passing in this article.

But why should we care what the general in charge should think needs to be done?

From a giddy New York Times:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi smiles during a press conference at the U.S. Capitol, Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009 in Washington after the passage in the house of health care reform.

Sweeping Health Care Plan Passes House

By CARL HULSE and ROBERT PEAR

November 8, 2009

WASHINGTON — Handing President Obama a hard-fought victory, the House narrowly approved a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s health care system on Saturday night, advancing legislation that Democrats said could stand as their defining social policy achievement.

After a daylong clash with Republicans over what has been a Democratic goal for decades, lawmakers voted 220 to 215 to approve a plan that would cost $1.1 trillion over 10 years. Democrats said the legislation would provide overdue relief to Americans struggling to buy or hold on to health insurance.

“This is our moment to revolutionize health care in this country,” said Representative George Miller, Democrat of California and one of the chief architects of the bill…

On the House floor, Democrats exchanged high-fives and cheered wildly — and Republicans sat quietly — when the tally display showed the 218th and decisive vote, after the leadership spent countless hours in recent days wringing commitments out of House members…

The successful vote came on a day when Mr. Obama traveled to Capitol Hill to make a personal appeal for lawmakers to “answer the call of history” and support the bill…

“Today’s may be a tough vote, but it was in 1935 when we passed Social Security,” Representative John Dingell, Democrat of Michigan and the dean of the House, said as the debate drew to a close late Saturday.

Some Democrats said they voted for the legislation so they could seek improvements in it. “This bill will get better in the Senate,” said Representative Jim Cooper, a Tennessee Democrat who has been outspoken in his criticism of some provisions of the bill but decided to support it. “If we kill it here, it won’t have a chance to get better.” …

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said he would bring a bill to the floor as soon as possible…

Lawmakers credited Mr. Obama with converting a final few holdouts during his appearance at a closed-door meeting with Democrats just hours before the vote. Democratic officials said that Mr. Obama’s conversation Saturday with Representative Michael H. Michaud, Democrat of Maine, was crucial in winning one final vote.

Many Democrats also credited Speaker Nancy Pelosi for pulling off a victory that proved tougher than many had predicted. “She really threaded the needle on this one,” said Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts…

The wall of Republican opposition gave Democrats little room to maneuver, and they worked to corral as many party members as they could…

The House vote was a significant step in the long-sought Democratic goal of enacting broad changes in the way health care is delivered in the nation…

It seems only fitting to post the New York Times article announcing this landmark achievement.

Since they have done as much as any to get it passed – against the wishes of the majority of the American citizenry.

Let’s hope these Democrat Congressman remember them when they are looking for work next year.

That is, if The Times is still in business

From the New York Daily Mail:

Miss England Rachel Christie loses crown after allegedly assaulting Miss Manchester Sara Jones

By Jose Martinez 

Saturday, November 7th 2009

Miss England Rachel Christie was stripped of her crown after a blowup in which she was accused of clocking Sara Jones, the reigning Miss Manchester, at a porn-themed party.

"Rachel will concentrate on clearing her name and focus on training for the 2012 Olympics until this case is resolved," Miss England pageant organizers said in a statement. "Rachel is very upset about the matter."

Christie, the first black Miss England and a niece of Olympic gold medalist Linford Christie, was charged with assaulting Jones in the full-costumed rumble over the strapping "Gladiators" star known as Tornado.

Published accounts of the sexy slugfest at a Manchester nightclub said Jones was clubbed in the face "several times" after she and Christie tangled over Tornado, a Royal Marine commando whose real name is David McIntosh.

The beefy star of the "American Gladiators"-like show, who lists his inspiration on the show’s Web site as vengeful Vietnam vet John Rambo, had moved on to Christie after a prior romance with Jones.

The bad royal blood boiled over when Jones (5-foot-5 with a 34B bust) apparently flashed Christie (5-foot-10, 34B) a racy text message Tornado sent her.

Dressed as an angel, the hell-raising Christie was accused of knocking around Jones, who was outfitted as a cavegirl…

We normally eschew posting about such goings on in the world of the show business.

But this article, like our other recent beauty pageant articles, is just too much of a sign of the times to ignore.

(Thanks to Proreason for the heads up.)

From the UK’s Telegraph:

The Muslim Community Center, the mosque attended by Army Maj. Nidal M. Hasan when he lived in the area, is seen in Silver Spring, Md. on the evening of Friday, Nov. 6, 2009.

Fort Hood shooting: Texas army killer linked to September 11 terrorists

By Philip Sherwell and Alex Spillius
7 Nov 2009

Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt. His mother’s funeral was held there in May that year.

The preacher at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organisations.

Hasan’s eyes "lit up" when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki’s teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas, the scene of Thursday’s horrific shooting spree.

As investigators look at Hasan’s motives and mindset, his attendance at the mosque could be an important piece of the jigsaw. Al-Awlaki moved to Dar al-Hijrah as imam in January, 2001, from the west coast, and three months later the September 11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hamzi and Hani Hanjour began attending his services. A third hijacker attended his services in California.

Hasan was praying at Dar al-Hijrah at about the same time, and the FBI will now want to investigate whether he met the two terrorists.

Charles Allen, a former under-secretary for intelligence at the Department of Homeland Security, has described al-Awlaki, who now lives in Yemen, as an "al-Qaeda supporter, and former spiritual leader to three of the September 11 hijackers… who targets US Muslims with radical online lectures encouraging terrorist attacks from his new home in Yemen"…

Investigators at this stage have no indication that he planned the attacks with anyone else. But they are trawling through his phone records, paperwork and computers he used before the attack during an apparently sleepless night.

Five of the 13 victims were fellow mental health professionals from three units of the army’s Combat Stress Control Detachment, it was disclosed yesterday…

What does seem clear is that the army missed an increasing number of red flags that Hasan was a troubled and brooding individual within its ranks.

"I was shocked but not surprised by news of Thursday’s attack," said Dr Val Finnell, a fellow student on a public health course in 2007-08 who heard Hasan equate the war on terrorism to a war on Islam. Another student had warned military officials that Hasan was a "ticking time bomb" after he reportedly gave a presentation defending suicide bombers…

But let’s not jump to any conclusions.