« | »

NYT: Lawmakers Call Hasan ‘Terrorist’!

From a highly incensed New York Times:

Lawmakers Call Ft. Hood Shootings ‘Terrorism’

By DAVID JOHNSTON

November 19, 2009

WASHINGTON — A Senate committee on Thursday opened the first public hearings into the Fort Hood shootings, with several legislators asserting that the incident in which 13 people were killed was a terrorist attack by a homegrown extremist who may have slipped past law enforcement and military authorities.

Hours later at a Pentagon news conference, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announced that former Army Secretary Togo West and a former chief of naval operations, Vernon Clark, would lead a broad Pentagon review of the circumstances surrounding the shootings in which 13 people were killed and 43 were injured.

Mr. Gates said the 45-day review would look into how the military identifies service members who might be a threat to others and how well military bases are equipped to respond to such incidents.

At the Congressional hearings, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, a Connecticut independent who is chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said that the Nov. 5 shootings allegedly carried out by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, was a “homegrown terrorist attack” and that law enforcement and military agencies may have failed to act appropriately.

“The purpose of our investigation is to determine whether that attack could have been prevented, whether the federal agencies and employees involved missed signals or failed to connect the dots in a way that enabled Hasan to carry out his deadly plan,” Mr. Lieberman said. “If we find such negligence we will make recommendations to guarantee, as best we can, that they never occur again.”

But Mr. Lieberman’s hearing made only limited headway because the Obama administration has refused his requests for witnesses from the F.B.I. and Defense Department. Mr. Lieberman said he had spoken with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Mr. Gates, who told him they would cooperate with his inquiry, but did not want to compromise the criminal investigation.

As a result, Mr. Lieberman proceeded with several non-government experts and former officials, including Frances Fragos Townsend, formerly the homeland security adviser to President George W. Bush. She expressed concern that “political correctness,” and fear of intruding on Major Hasan’s free speech rights, may have interfered with the sharing of information earlier this year, when an F.B.I.-led counterterrorism team examined his e-mail exchanges with Anwar al-Awlaki, a well-known radical cleric, but found nothing amiss…

Clearly the New York Times is offended at Mr. Lieberman and other lawmakers calling Major Hasan "a home grown" terrorist. Indeed, they are probably far more outraged at such language than they are at Mr. Hasan’s rampage.

But Mr. Lieberman’s hearing made only limited headway because the Obama administration has refused his requests for witnesses from the F.B.I. and Defense Department.

We realize it’s tiresome to constantly make Bush versus Obama comparisons.

But just imagine what this article’s headline and lede (lead) would have been if this had happened with President Bush and Attorney General Gonzales in charge.

Subpoenas would be issued by the usual suspects in Congress. And our media watchdogs and the rest of the left would be having massive, round the clock conniptions.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, November 20th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

5 Responses to “NYT: Lawmakers Call Hasan ‘Terrorist’!”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    On the one hand, Hasan’s being paralized is some sort of justice in its own right since the playing out of this whole thing will be ridiculous and farcical. It is truly one time where I find no shame in admitting that his discomfiture gives me satisfaction, except for the fact that others have to tend to him and that takes valuable resources away from soldiers who need care and attention.

    Odd twist, that.

    Not calling him a terrorist is like saying the airliners that flew into the WTC towers were “slightly off-course”.

    Frankly, I’m sick of the uber-left mindset to create a whole society from scratch and re-invent everything and that just by saying a thing is so, somehow makes it so.

    And I also cannot believe that there are that many millions of people who have never been faced with “dreams vs. reality” in their own daily lives.

  2. johnbyrnes says:

    LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS

    The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifies how each of our programs have failed us. When supervisors, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifically on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” standout, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters.

    Major Hasan was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?

    The use of subjective/qualitative indicators, prone to stereotype individuals by culture or religion; versus quantitative indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstrue, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificity of “aggression” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses on campus failing us?

    The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com

    • proreason says:

      It wouldn’t have mattered if the military had a machine that could have identified terrorists with 100% accuracy.

      They were ordered by the president to not pursue.

      It came from the very top.

      Elections have consequences.

  3. canary says:

    Why aren’t they focusing on Hasan ongoing doing work for Obama’s Homeland Security since January 2009.

    And now we have an ‘interpreter’ on earlier 9/11 trail going to prison. Did the interpreter misquote the terrorist, and is this still going on?

    Obama appointed quite a few muslims to be on the Dept Homeland Security.

    We never hear how Kundra is doing as Obama’s personal W.H. created czar, though we know charges were only filed against Kundra’s former co-workers. hush ssshhh.

  4. MinnesotaRush says:

    “WASHINGTON — A Senate committee on Thursday opened the first public hearings into the Fort Hood shootings, with several legislators asserting that the incident in which 13 people were killed was a terrorist attack by a homegrown extremist who may have slipped past law enforcement and military authorities.”

    Oh, oh! The o-blah-blah ain’t gonna be happy!


« Front Page | To Top
« | »