Skip to content

Why Hasan Is An Islamic Terrorist

November 12, 2009

Sally Quinn

Bill O’Reilly redeemed himself last night when he departed from his recent trend toward political correctness and excoriated Sally Quinn, the Washington Post doyenne, for being unwilling to call Nidal Malik Hasan what he actually is – an Islamic terrorist.  Finally, after realizing how foolish she was coming across in pushing the emotional distress angle and questioning whether Hasan was motivated by terrorism, Quinn conceded that Hasan was a Muslim terrorist after all.  She probably forfeited dozens of Georgetown holiday party invitations as a result of her departure from the dogma of the liberal establishment.

Quinn, who in denouncing Sarah Palin during the campaign once said “I don’t see how you can make your family your first priority,” shares the liberal antipathy to making the war against Islamic terrorists a priority either.  In order to make it a priority, you first have to be able to clearly define who the enemy is.  Until O’Reilly shamed her into admitting the obvious, Quinn was as nonsensical on the subject as most liberal cable TV commentators like Chris Matthews and Alan Colmes continue to be.

So here is a simple explanation of what terrorism means and why Hasan’s actions fit well within the definition.

According to U.S. statute, the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

Lets look at each element of this definition and see how Hasan fits in:

  • “Premeditated” –  Nidal Malik Hasan bought his guns, loaded them, brought them to Fort Hood and began shooting.
  • “Politically motivated” – Hasan has been quoted as approving of suicide bombing and the murder of army recruits by another Muslim.
  • “Noncombatant targets” -The term “noncombatant” is interpreted to include, in addition to civilians, military personnel who at the time of the incident are unarmed and/or not on duty. Most if not all of Hasan’s victims were reported to be unarmed until a policewoman was able to bring him down and was also shot in the process.
  • “By subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience” – Well it is true that Hasan appeared to be operating alone, although he had clandestinely contacted on several occasions his former radical imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, after the latter fled to Yemen and became a recruiter for al Qaeda.
    As for intending to influence his audience, he shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’ (the jihadist mantra) right before starting his bloody rampage.

Of course, apologists for Islamic terrorism ignore the plain facts and prefer to wallow in the psychological disease of political correctness.  Tragically, the Army was paralyzed by this disease and failed to heed the warning signs.  One government  investigator claimed:

Had we launched an investigation of  Hasan, we’d have been crucified.

An ironic use of the word “crucified” to be sure, but all too true because of the climate created by those more concerned about the civil liberties of extreme Islamists than the safety of the American people.

Advertisements
7 Comments
  1. Albalan0779 permalink
    November 12, 2009 11:17 am

    This type of political correctness only plays into the massive error that Islam and followers of Muhammed are in their belief concerned with the well-being of believers of any other faith at all, if racism is to be called into question we should all remember that Islam regards people of all other faiths as Infidels and second class citizens at best. Where does the fault of racism lie there?That said I am sure there are many Muslims who regard themselves as moderate and would never think of treating another human being without respecting them as equals. Problem is we hardly hear any of these people saying so. Maybe they should be searching their soul asking if they should stay Muslim at all given this basic belief of Islam.

  2. Boson Higgs permalink
    November 12, 2009 11:34 am

    Hey !!!

    Stop that !!!
    Haven’t you gotten the memo???!!!
    There is NO war on terrorism(tm)
    It’s now “Man-caused Disaster(tm)”

    Hasan is “Disaster-Man ™”

  3. Rochmoninoff permalink
    November 12, 2009 1:00 pm

    It occurred to me last night that Hasan isn’t a terrorist or even a murderer(!).
    He’s a brave and courageous soldier.
    a brave courageous ENEMY soldier.

    How did that ENEMY agent end up wearing our uniform and pointing a gun at our troops on one of our bases? Its been obvious for years who’s side he’s on and it’s not ours.

  4. November 13, 2009 12:24 am

    Mmmm….. Islamic….

  5. November 13, 2009 5:53 am

    As someone who was in the WTC at the moment the 1st plane hit, I am especially sensitive to terrorist threats. There weren’t any red flags in this case – there were bombs bursting in the air. There was so much evidence & reports of his behavior, his words, his beliefs, that someone must be held accountable for having ignored the glaring obvious threat he posed. Not only should he not have been in the military, he should have been brought arrested for consorting with the enemy. He phoed al qaida 20 times and no one thought this guy might be a terrorist? Heads must roll!

Trackbacks

  1. doyenne define – Why Hasan Is An Islamic Terrorist – David Horowitz’s NewsReal Blog (blog) | news headlines
  2. No, Dana Perino Hasn’t Forgotten September 11 « NewsReal Blog

Comments are closed.