Political Correctness Made Cowards of Them All

Wednesday, August 21, AD 2013

 

 

The farce that is the courtmartial of mass killer Major Nidal Hasan  is wending on its way with the military judge restricting evidence of Hasan’s jihadi motives:

Prosecutors will not be allowed to enter evidence that Nidal Hasan intended to commit jihad in his mass murder spree at Fort Hood nearly four years ago, the judge in the court-martial ruled yesterday.  Col. Tara Osborn also struck from evidence the correspondence between Hasan and al-Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki, although she did allow prosecutors to use records of Hasan’s Internet usage and search histories at the time of the shooting.

For my sins no doubt, I have spent the last 31 years as an attorney.  I have done more than my fair share of criminal defense during that time.  I cannot express adequately just how ridiculous this ruling of the court is.  Hasan has already admitted in open court that he was the shooter and that his motivation was jihad.  I can only assume that the true motivation behind the court’s absurd ruling was the same motivation that caused the administration to classify Hasan’s multiple murders as being workplace violence.

This courtmartial circus is merely the culmination of Hasan’s entire involvement with the Army during which he may as well have been wearing a sign saying “ENEMY COMBATANT”.  His superiors knew that Hasan was at best deranged and at worst a soldier for the jihadis.  The soldiers that Hasan murdered did not die because Hasan made any attempt to conceal what he was and is, a jihadist, but because his superiors cravenly did not wish to stand up against him for fear of harming their own careers and being accused of anti-Islamic bias.

NPR of all places has an excellent report showing that before he was assigned to Fort Hood from Walter Reed, that his superiors knew that Hasan was a likely threat:

 

 

When a group of key officials gathered in the spring of 2008 for their monthly meeting in a Bethesda, Md., office, one of the leading — and most perplexing — items on their agenda was: What should we do about Hasan?

Hasan had been a trouble spot on officials’ radar since he started training at Walter Reed, six years earlier. Several officials confirm that supervisors had repeatedly given him poor evaluations and warned him that he was doing substandard work.

Both fellow students and faculty were deeply troubled by Hasan’s behavior — which they variously called disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent, and schizoid. The officials say he antagonized some students and faculty by espousing what they perceived to be extremist Islamic views. His supervisors at Walter Reed had even reprimanded him for telling at least one patient that “Islam can save your soul.”

Participants in the spring meeting and in subsequent conversations about Hasan reportedly included John Bradley, chief of psychiatry at Walter Reed; Robert Ursano, chairman of the Psychiatry Department at USUHS; Charles Engel, assistant chair of the Psychiatry Department and director of Hasan’s psychiatry fellowship; Dr. David Benedek, another assistant chairman of psychiatry at USUHS; psychiatrist Carroll J. Diebold; and Scott Moran, director of the psychiatric residency program at Walter Reed, according to colleagues and other sources who monitor the meetings.

NPR tried to contact all these officials and the public affairs officers at the institutions. They either didn’t return phone calls or said they could not comment.

But psychiatrists and officials who are familiar with the conversations, which continued into the spring of 2009, say they took a remarkable turn: Is it possible, some mused, that Hasan was mentally unstable and unfit to be an Army psychiatrist?

One official involved in the conversations had reportedly told colleagues that he worried that if Hasan deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak secret military information to Islamic extremists. Another official reportedly wondered aloud to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of committing fratricide, like the Muslim U.S. Army sergeant who, in 2003, killed two fellow soldiers and injured 14 others by setting off grenades at a base in Kuwait.

Continue reading...

14 Responses to Political Correctness Made Cowards of Them All

  • It has taken the U.S. Army 44 months to even put this blatantly guilty man on trial. Either the procedural articles in the Code of Military Justice are nonsense or there is a crew of JAGs up and down the hierarchy who need to be flushed out of the service for efficiency’s sake. When I had to know something about this (ca. 1986), New York State Courts could process a murder case from arrest to jury verdict in a median of 13 months.

    What Glenn Reynolds said about Bradley Manning applies in this case: the scandal is that he was in the Army to begin with.

  • I do not doubt that you are correct in your assessment, Don but I think that there is a more subtle problem going on: equal employment opportunity and discrimination law have created a paralyzing environment for employers and that prevents them from taking action in a timely fashion.

    I have observed many examples of bizarre, counterproductive behavior in employees that absolutely demanded action but were dealt with with kid gloves. I observed directly, for example this incident in 2000:

    A supervisor, having repeatedly received complaints about a clerk’s dirty and smelly sweatpants, brought him into his office to again remind him about the dress code and to tell him that he would have to go home and change. The employee flipped out, knocked all of the files of of the supervisor’s desk, and stormed out. (I was standing 3 feet away because the raised voices made me consider that I may need to physically intervene.) He then stormed over to the Deputy Director’s office, shook a fist at her as she jumped out of her chair and put the rolling chair and desk between her and him, and threatened “I’m going to beat you into a bloody mess!” By that time, the supervisor, me, and two other officers had gotten between him and her and were forcing him out of the office. He then stormed out of the building.

    The result? 2 days Admin Leave and a referral to the Employee Assistance Program – voluntary, of course.

    I’ve heard many similar anecdotes – only one as bad – in the last 20 years. The stories come from hospitals, government, non-profits, and private companies; All seem to have similar stories of management shackled by human resources rules that are far more restrictive even than the law.

    I have had every single hiring decision challenged in some way. We win all of them because I spend an immense amount of time making sure that I am getting the best possible hire and following the rules to the letter. Mind ye, it isn’t hard to get good employees in this horrible economy. I see 100+ applicants for every $45K job. Calling those who were interviewed but not selected is a real mixed bag. On the last hire – January – one non-selectee said “I know I was the best qualified candidate so why didn’t you give me the job.” Of 213 applicants, she “knows” she was the best qualified?

    We can’t call former supervisors to get the scoop on past employment and wouldn’t get anything we could use even if we could. We can’t be honest with those who ask us for an assessment either, cordoned to specific, useless information like verifying that a person did, in fact, work for us during a specific timeframe.

    All of this employment and discrimination law creates a backdrop for the kinds of incidents you describe. It makes managers fearful of doing their jobs and it puts the organization’s attorneys in the position of holding back on the reigns of justice for fear of suits. The delays can be deadly.

    What is particularly galling is that I have yet to see a legitimate EEOC, employment, or discrimination case that originated from organization action in the last 10 years. Even the biggest cases are speculative and the majority of the employee or applicant actions are resolved by organizations out of fear, not fault.

    Is it any wonder that companies prefer to do business in places without such laws? This is, to my mind, the “elephant in the room.” Business recognizes that they won’t be sued in India or China or Russia or Chile or Brazil and won’t be making employment decisions in an environment of paralyzed fear.

    So, there you have it, my rant for the day. I’m going to have my second cup of coffee now.

  • Jonathan Swift couldn’t concoct such a parody.

    I anticipate reading a MSM defense of the drone strike that liquidates Major Hasan . . .

  • With this development, as with news that Al Jazeera US has launched, tells me that Islam has conquered in the West, but not by a head-on conflict, which failed centuries ago, because of the internal rot, as outlined by David above.

    I really think we’re done for at least for the next generation or two. What comes next? Barbarians a la the downfall of Rome? It’s frightening for a family man.

    Yes, there are pockets of resistance but outposts are continually surrendered. We’ve been told that we should no longer debate the marriage issue but focus on other topics. What other topics? What’s left? I’m not an anti-clericalist (right or left-wing) but the clergy and hierarchy as a corporate body (I don’t mean individuals) lost the culture wars decades ago. They’ve lost on the “gay” issue. Before that it was contraception and divorce. Even where the rules were still on the books, the message was frequently watered down or the clergy was complicit by their silence. They are going to have to be a lot more outspoken, and clear (i.e. in plain black and white, not so many useless ambiguities) to make up for the damage.

    Only Russia’s Putin for all his vices seems to voice common sense on cultural issues. A strange irony! I say all this having keep my pessimism and paranoia at bay for years. I just can’t do it any longer. Sorry. If there’s cause for hope, let me know! I would love to be an optimist.

  • Re: Mr. Spaulding’s remarks. It is indicative of the pathology of public discussion in this country that one would be hard put to think of a public advocate for repealing employment discrimination law even though millions have been through the kabuki theatre of the contemporary job interview as conducted by enterprises concerned with compliance and even though everyone is aware that discrimination is widely practiced and permitted for applicants outside certain preference categories. I can think of three occasions in 35 years where I have read a published argument for repeal. One was by the publisher of an obscure and long defunct alternative weekly in Rochester, N.Y. – a man of libertarian sympathies (that would have been around 1990 and the man in question would now be in his late 50s and in some other line of work), one was by the political theorist Gottfried Dietze (foreign born, had tenure, now deceased), and one was by the legal scholar Richard Epstein (has tenure). Dr. Dietze told his students that his arguments (offered in his monograph America’s Political Dilemma and encompassing much more than the new civil rights legislation) were considered so outre in 1968 he could not persuade anyone to review the book. He was a personal friend of Wm. F. Buckley and the book was accessible to the general reader, but Buckley would not allocate space to a review. (Dietze was offering normative arguments. The practical problems with employment discrimination law had not hit home).

  • I feel sorry for Hasan. Wait, wait, hear me out.

    He is trying to be perfectly clear about his religious struggle.

    It will not restore the dead to life with loved ones here and now.

    But he is trying to educate Americans about the logical extremes of Islam.

    The Obama administration, the military, the media are trying to shut him up.

  • on topic,

    with the new disparate impact guidance from EEOC, and Tom Perez beginning his reign of terror at Labor,

    I expect I could start a business organizing white people with criminal backgrounds to apply for jobs so that companies can hit their quota of rejected white criminals.

  • I find it curious that I agree with Matt A’s observation about Putin.

    We will never know what Putin has done. As a regional KGB chief, covering Moscow during the Soviet Era, I think we can safely say that he has probably done much that would be classified as a crime in the US.

    And yet, his efforts to restore something akin to a conscience and general mores in Russian society are laudable. I am reminded of Augustine of Hippo’s father who, though utterly pagan, sought to instill a kind of virtue in Augustine.

    Of course, following that idea out, it was Christ that saved Augustine, not his father’s pagan virtues. Let us pray that Christ will redeem us before we experience the horror of another fall of Rome.

  • It baffles me that the powers in charge can present this charade with a straight face. It is so blatantly obvious that Hasan is a jihadi terrorist that to assert otherwise is absolutely stupefying. It violates the truth in much the same way that Nancy Pelosi says that abortion is “sacred ground” violates the truth. It does so by creating an absolute fiction to substitute for what all of one’s senses are screaming into the brain, and then believing it to be true. The only parallel I can think of is the cult of personality surrounding the Kim dynasty in North Korea. There, the truth is whatever the dictator says, and to even consider an alternative is treason worthy of death. I saw a documentary where American eye surgeons went to North Korea and operated on people who could not receive care from domestic surgeons. Then, with the surgeon who actually did the operation standing right there removing the bandages, these patients praised Kim for restoring their eyesight with a charismatic religious fervor that would put a Pentecostal to shame.

    It’s really a satanic perversion of what is holy. Christ proclaimed that He is the way, the truth, and the life. Truth and life are thus holy. In this instance, truth is defied as Christ Himself is defied. Instead, a falsehood is substituted and worshiped, created out of the imagination of the State and demanding obedience from all. And so they create a lie that doesn’t even contain a shred of the truth, demanding that we bow down before it no matter how absurd. In fact, the more absurd, the better. The further they can get from the truth, the further they can get from Christ, and so the lie they create gets even more and more absurd. May Heaven help us!

  • Addendum to my original comment: A large number of priests and bishops are good and holy men. Without them we could not get through this cultural catastrophe. We need the Church founded by Christ. I was merely voicing my extreme frustration — which I rarely do, being more like Mr. Spock in my public comments — with many of those in positions of leadership. But that’s humanity for you.

    On a separate point, I enjoyed David Spaulding’s further comments on Putin. Is a comparison with Constantine in order? The man had his character defects but he was God’s chosen instrument as the proximate material means of ending anti-Christian persecution. I’m not saying that Putin’s role here, but such could be the case with a leader in the future.

  • What were those thirteen he killed chopped liver?

    I am volunteering to be one of the shooters in Hasan’s firing squad. I’d pop him in the gut.

    I am buying a case of Stoli. Putin (in banning pro-sodomy propaganda) is more Catholic than . . .

  • Hasan insists that he is a soldier of Allah, with a mission to kill Americans in behalf of Islam. He will be found guilty, and that should reverse the “workplace violence” nonsense that unjustly denies proper recognition and benefits to the victims of his attack. Such political correctness is a total inversion of reality, typical of that which pervades our sick latter day culture.

  • I can only assume that the true motivation behind the court’s absurd ruling was the same motivation that caused the administration to classify Hasan’s multiple murders as being workplace violence.
    –Donald R. McClarey

    At the time, no Christian filmmaker was available for convenient scapegoating. Or the DOD PC-munists weren’t as cunning as their counterparts in Hillary’s State Department and hadn’t thought of that ploy.

    As for Col. Tara Osborn the courts martial judge, she herself is another argument against tolerating females in the military.

  • News form Killeen, TX: The jihadi was convicted of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.

    Sentencing Monday.

Three Years and Counting

Tuesday, December 4, AD 2012

 

 

Hattip to Ann Althouse.  Major Nidal Hasan on November 5, 2009 at Fort Hood murdered 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded 29 others.  Since that time his trial has been pending.  And pending.  And pending.  The latest development?  The military judge presiding over the case has been removed.  Why?  Because, pursuant to regulations, he ordered that Hasan be forced to shave his beard.

Although the military judge here stated that [Hasan’s] beard was a ‘disruption,’ there was insufficient evidence on this record to demonstrate that [Hasan’s] beard materially interfered with the proceedings,” the unsigned ruling said.
“Taken together…. the decision to remove [Hasan] from the courtroom, the contempt citations and the decision to order [Hasan’s] forcible shaving in the absence of any command action to do the same could leave an objective observer to conclude that the military judge was not impartial.”

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Three Years and Counting

  • What an abject farce this trial has become for justice. Hasan should have been court-martialed and executed within six months. Does having a Muslim for a president have anything to do with this unconscionable miscarriage of justice.

  • In Scotland, we have a rule, going back to the Wrongeous Imprisonment Act of 1701, that an accused in custody must be served with an indictment, containing a list of witnesses and productions, within 80 days of the accused being charged. This time limit cannot be extended. The diet must call within 110 days of detention and the assize must be sworn within 140 days. This can be extended only by reason of sickness of the accused or a witness.

    These rules work, even in the most complex cases, which this, plainly, is not.

  • Beacuse the “rule of law” is no longer operative in the United States of America.

    Disparate treatment, compare and contrast: lone-wolf, jihadi Hasan and Arab Christian producer of a YouTube Muslim truth documentary that was seen by 16 people saw.

    Here is a picture from Tahrir Sq. that will never be seen in the USA:

    https://twitter.com/betsy_hiel/status/276027241115295744/photo/1

  • The Fifth Amendment: Habeas Corpus which Obama has obliterated with the National Defense Authorization Act. Each and every law must be applied with equity. Perhaps Hasan ought to be tried under the Articles of War as a traitor.

Work Place Violence. Sure.

Friday, October 19, AD 2012

2 Responses to Work Place Violence. Sure.

  • Workplace violence?
    After watching this heartbreaking story and how the Osama administration tries cowardly to deny this assault for what it truly is, I believe its only fair to call every day Osama is in Our White House TRULY WORKPLACE VIOLENCE on us.

    Every single day is an assault on Americans from Osama. Yes Osama! Call it what it is.

  • Thanks for linking to this powerful video.