Filed under: Freedom, Islam, Military, National Security, News of the Weird, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Nidal Hasan Convicted, Political Correctness, Silencing Dissent
Major Nidal Hasan the U.S. Army Psychiatrist who opened fire on dozens of soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, has been found guilty of murdering thirteen people and of attempted murder of thirty-two by a panel of senior officers. In the sentencing phase of the trial, the panel has recommended that he be put to death, an unusual punishment for a military tribunal. The entire incident remains classified by the U.S. government as “workplace violence” — a ludicrous euphemism for what was clearly a jihadist attack, and what Major Hasan has admitted that he intended.
Hasan, a U.S.-born Muslim, admitted responsibility for the shooting at the start of the trial, saying he had been on the wrong side of a war against Islam and had switched over. During the proceedings, he declined to call any witnesses, testify or give a closing argument. He was prohibited by military law from entering a guilty plea.
At a pretrial hearing, the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, ruled that Hasan could not defend himself by arguing that he carried out the killings to protect Taliban leaders in Afghanistan. Instead, the defendant chose to make his case to the public through communiques and authorized leaks to newspapers, arguing that he was waging jihad because of the United States’ “illegal and immoral aggression against Muslims” in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Now the trial enters an appeals process, which will take several years. Hasan clearly prefers the death sentence, but appeals courts are unlikely to allow him to represent himself.
Those not on trial were those who, out of reluctance to offend or to appear Islamophobic, passed him on through training, ignoring his Jihadist outbursts, close association with Anwar al Awaliki the Muslim Imam who had decamped for Yemen, and statements about Islam. Even after the shooting, a ranking officer in his division remarked that it would be the greatest of tragedies if our diversity is harmed.
There are increasing signs that political correctness has reared its ugly influence in our nation’s military. So far it has killed far more of our soldiers than just the 13 at Fort Hood. The “Blue on Green” attacks in Afghanistan, where our troops are forbidden to carry loaded weapons to show their trust of their Afghan trainees is an inexcusable violation of basic safety — yet such a thing could not happen without orders and policy from above.
The “workplace violence” designation deprives the Fort Hood’s wounded of benefits, and recognition in a shameful way. The Obama administration still insists that Nidal Hasan was not a terrorist — an ongoing and embarrassing lie.
In the meantime, military training has become a strange world where the Founding Fathers have become depicted as extremists and conservative groups are defined as “hate groups.”
Saying “Give me liberty or give me death” qualifies Patrick Henry as an extremist, according to the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute training guide which has been obtained by Judicial Watch under a Freedom of Information Act Request. …
Under a section titled “Extremist Ideologies,” the document states, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.”…
“Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publicly espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place,” the Pentagon guide advises.
This is an emerging, and very troubling pattern.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Freedom, National Security, Politics, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Murdered 13 - Injured 30, Political Correctness, The Court Martial of Nidal Hasan
Mark Steyn is always right on top of his game with a cogent observation that skewers the hypocrisy, or political correctness, or pointed observation that sheds a brilliant light on the events of the day.
Today he pointed out that the “court-martial of Major Nidal Hasan is taking longer than World War II.”
On Dec. 7, 1941, the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor was attacked. Three years, eight months and eight days later, the Japanese surrendered. These days, America’s military moves at a more leisurely pace. On Nov. 5, 2009, another U.S. base, Fort Hood, was attacked — by one man standing on a table, screaming “Allahu akbar!” and opening fire. Three years, nine months and one day later, his court-martial finally got underway.
Do read the whole thing. This is a strange and disturbing episode in the history of the United States Military. Michael Ramirez captures the essence in another of his superb political cartoons. (click to enlarge)
We are apparently to have a military stripped of most of its effectiveness and weakened by budget cuts so the president can have more money to spend on infrastructure (?) compulsive political correctness, leftist notions that war is not nice, and a remarkable unconcern for the well-being of the troops who stand ready to protect the rest of us. Actions speak louder than words. The president always has words; sometimes they have meaning. His actions demonstrate the real agenda.
Filed under: Freedom, Islam, National Security, Politics, United Kingdom | Tags: Muslim Jihadists, Political Correctness, The Fear of Offending
After two Muslim terrorists slashed, eviscerated and beheaded a British soldier on a London street in broad daylight a few yards from his barracks, and in full view of civilians and unarmed British policemen, it took 20 minutes for armed police to arrive to do something about the terrorists.
British policemen, however, quickly arrested an 85-year-old woman for shouting “Go back to your own country” outside Gillingham Mosque, handcuffed her and took her away in a van. A Kent Police spokesman said “An 85 year old woman from Chatham was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence.”
Pat Condell is a British citizen who believes in plain speaking, and frequently speaks plainly. As Sergeant Friday used to say “Just the facts, ma’m.” Political correctness is a real problem, when the possibility of offending someone becomes more important that lives and safety. Political correctness is antithetical to a free people.
ADDENDUM: The Holder Justice Department says it will help enforce Islamic Sharia Law.
DOJ: Social Media posts trashing Muslims may violate Civil Rights
In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.
We have previously established that the Obama administration has no respect for the separation of powers in the Constitution. Add to that the Bill of Rights. Mr. Obama and Mr. Holder need to re-read the First Amendment. This is a lawless administration.
Filed under: Domestic Policy, Latin America, Law, Media Bias, Politics, Progressivism, The Constitution, The United States | Tags: Euphemisims Mislead, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness
Mr. Virtual President Bill Whittle speaks at a Virtual Town Hall about the problem of immigration, and has some important things to say.
Also in the news, the Associated Press has refined their Stylebook to eliminate the phrase “illegal immigrant”. Also “illegal alien,” “an illegal”, “illegals” or “undocumented”).
Back in October of 2012, AP had reaffirmed use of the term “illegal immigrant.” Why do we not say “undocumented immigrants” or “unauthorized immigrants?”
To us, they said, these terms obscure the essential fact that such people are here in violation of the law. It’s simply a legal reality….What they lack is the fundamental right to be in the United States.
Jay Leno considered the AP change and asked why they just don’t consider them “Undocumented Democrats?”
We are deep into a territory where political correctness is so rampant that the language no longer represents reality. If reality is too uncomfortable to face, we shall just change the language that describes it. Like putting a tire patch on a hot air balloon, and hoping it holds.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Election 2012, Media Bias, Politics | Tags: Integrity, Political Correctness, Shame
It’s time to re-emphasize some of our traditional values. Love of America. patriotism, belief in free-market capitalism, integrity, common sense, and how about shame? We badly need to revive shame. How did we get here? The recipe began with political correctness; multiculturalism; diversity; a huge dose of self-esteem; the idea that we must never, never be judgmental; equality of outcome; and God knows what else.
The self-esteem movement alone has led to a couple of generations of kids with the highest self-esteem in the world, and the least knowledge.
Colleges and Universities are so intent on political correctness and non-judgmentalism that they so regularly violate the Constitutional Right to Free Speech, that a whole organization has had to come into being to combat the trend — FIRE. At the same time, the same colleges and universities trumpet the idea that they are teaching “critical thinking.” They celebrate Diversity, but it is diversity only of skin color or ethnic origin. Diversity of thought or opinion is not allowed. Leftist professors freely admit that they don’t want conservatives on the faculty.
How come Democrats were not ashamed to put out a campaign commercial showing Paul Ryan pushing an elderly woman in a wheelchair over a cliff? Anything goes? What about the Joe Soptic commercial? An older gentleman says that Mitt Romney ruined his life and killed his wife. Democrats obviously feel no shame at the complete lies and nasty insinuations.
Mr Soptic’s story is a sad one. Through twenty years of decline and layoffs in the steel company (GST) where he was employed and twenty years of an industry declining under international competition, he was oblivious and clung to his job. By 1993, ARMCO (which owned GST) lost $641 million. Bain bought GST for $80 million and invested $100 million in modernization. GST becomes the US leader in the manufacture of steel rods. In 1994 GST had revenues of $1 billion. In 1997, GST had a major labor strike.
In 1999, Mitt Romney gives up his job as CEO of Bain Capital and leaves to rescue the Olympics. Liberals are attempting to make much of the fact that Romney’s name was still on the SEC filings as CEO, but it takes time to sever the ties with a company that you founded. His partners all agree that he ended his participation in the company in 1999. Over two years later, Joe Soptic is laid off by GST. He had earlier turned down a buyout. In 2001 GST is one of 31 steel companies that went bankrupt. He lost his health insurance, but his wife has health insurance through her job. Joe Soptic finds a job after 6 months as a school custodian. He turns down offer of insurance. In 2003, Mrs. Soptic leaves her job and loses insurance. Mitt Romney becomes Governor of Massachusetts. In 2006, Mrs. Soptic goes to hospital for pneumonia, doctors discover inoperable cancer and she dies.
Fast forward 6 years to 2012. The Obama campaign finds Joe Soptic, who is still bitter about losing his job and the death of his wife. (Looking for someone else to blame for the misfortunes of his life?), (Or paid to tell a sad story for a commercial?) Soptic does an ad for the Obama campaign in May, blaming Romney for the loss of his job, of dumping his steel plant for big profits while having no understanding of the grief he was causing Joe Soptic.
White House denies knowing anything about Joe Soptic’s story, but earlier in the year Priorities USA (Obama Super PAC) had used the same Joe Soptic in the same shirt in a separate ad blaming Romney for shutting down GST, sure that Bain made all sorts of money from GST, which went bankrupt, calling him a “vampire.” Stephanie Cutter, the Obama Campaign Deputy Campaign Manager, professed to know nothing about Joe Soptic and said emphatically that they had no connection with Priorities USA (Obama super PAC) because that would be illegal. It is against the law to have any connection. But on the conference call with Joe Soptic, Stephanie Cutter, Obama Campaign Deputy Manager, says “Thank you Joe. We really appreciate you … sharing your experiences.” Later that same day, Stephanie tweeted:
So much for the “no connection because that’s illegal.”
None of the laid-off workers seemed to be aware that GST was just one of 31 steel companies that went under that year. Businesses fail for lots of reasons, bad management, economic forces, international competition, over-generous union contracts, but this might be a first that blames the greed of a man who had left the company and the management of it two years earlier. Creative destruction is something that happens in a free economy. Failed businesses fail, new ones start. Nobody gets a lifetime guarantee of anything — and you have to pay attention to what is happening around you.
Ugly, irresponsible ads happen in politics. There should be some shame involved. Portraying Paul Ryan as pushing a crippled old woman over a cliff was shameful. Even more so were the tweets that appeared as soon as the Ryan choice was announced. Things like “Ryan’s dad died really young, maybe we’ll get lucky and he will too.” (paraphrased) I hope he dies soon, and so on. Is disagreement so frightening to Democrats?
The entire Joe Soptic ad was a lie. The Paul Ryan ad was a lie. But the useful idiots that immediately start with the death wished because they disagree? Or is it just disagreement? Do they even know what Paul Ryan’s plan entails? He’s finding a solution to a system — Medicare — that is about to go bankrupt and collapse, and make it viable going forward.
Our economy is in deep trouble. Lying to the public about that simple fact is shameful. People need to know what is happening to them. There are real policies to be debated. Have you no sense of what is decent and proper? Have you no shame?
You can find any of these ads easily on YouTube. I’m not posting them here.
Filed under: Politics | Tags: Being Responsible, Bureaucracy, Political Correctness
This was a post from Small Dead Animals, a Canadian blog.
Reported in the U.K. Daily Mail:
41-year-old Simon Burgess was feeding swans in a shallow pond in Walpole Park in Gosport, England last year when he suffered an epileptic seizure and fell unconscious into the water. Twenty-five emergency personnel arrived on scene but Burgess remained floating face down, twenty-five feet from shore, for over half an hour after the first responders arrived.
Even though they could all swim, the first fire crew to arrive hadn’t been ‘trained’ to enter water higher than ankle-deep. Instead they waited for ‘specialists’ to arrive to retrieve his body. They had decided Mr Burgess must surely be dead because he had been in the water for ten minutes. When a policeman decided to go in anyway, he was ordered not to. A paramedic was also told not to enter the water because he didn’t have the right ‘protective’ clothing and might be in breach of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992.
The tragic incident made headlines around the world, held up as a shocking example of ludicrously risk-averse Britain. And it prompted a coroner to demand that fire, police and ambulance services improve training to prevent a repeat.
The paper discovered that:
- The ‘ankle-deep’ rule was meant for fast-flowing water and is taken from guidelines drawn up to deal with floods.
- Other rescue agencies believe people can survive submerged for much longer than ten minutes – some will still try resuscitation at 90 minutes.
- The incident happened despite a previous reassurance from the Health and Safety Executive that firefighters would not face prosecution if they performed acts of heroism that break rules.
- Mr Burgess could have been reached within two minutes of emergency crews arriving at the scene – as proved by our reporter who went into the lake and waded 25ft to the spot where his body had been floating.
Filed under: Humor, Politics, United Kingdom | Tags: Inspired Insults, Patriotic Prejudice, Political Correctness
The rottenest bits of these islands of ours
We’ve left in the hands of three unfriendly powers
Examine your Irishman, Welshman or Scot
You’ll find he’s a stinker as likely as not.
The English the English the English are best
I wouldn’t give tuppence for all of the rest.
The Scotsman is mean as we’re all well aware
And bony and blotchy and covered with hair;
He eats salty porridge, he works all the day
And he hasn’t got Bishops to show him the way.
The English are noble, the English are nice
And worth any other at double the price.
And crossing the Channel one cannot say much
For the French or the Spanish the Danish or Dutch
The Germans are German, the Russians are Red
And the Greeks and Italians eat garlic in bed.
The English are moral, the English are good
And clever and modest and misunderstood.
•Flanders & Swann, A Song of Patriotic Prejudice
Filed under: Military, National Security, Politics | Tags: Political Correctness, U.S. Air Force Academy, U.S. Air Force Instruction 336-2706
Political Correctness constantly rears its ugly nature, yet, though we scoff and sneer, nothing ever happens to make it go away. What is political correctness and why is it so offensive?
Think of other terms like courtesy, manners, thoughtfulness, which the thesaurus mentions before it veers off into chivalry, gentility, complacency and good breeding. These latter terms, at least, refer to interaction with another specific person or persons.
Political correctness is a creature of bureaucracy and refers to the fear of offending— not a real person— but a nebulous someone, somewhere. Synonyms are more likely to be found under absurdity, or irrationality. Why should we care if we offend some unknown person in some unknown venue? The general desire to be courteous should cover the situation.
Political correctness says that you must follow these rules—although we know they are silly— but they are in the rule book, and my boss knows they’re silly, and his boss knows they’re silly, but if we don’t follow the rules, he might be criticized because he did mot instruct the people for whom he is responsible that they had to follow the rule.
Political correctness says of the rule-maker that he, by making the rule, has assured that no one,anywhere, can be offended if the rules are followed, and the rule-maker is absolved of all blame.
In that vein, I urge you to read this short editorial from the Washington Times. It explains how political correctness has cast a spell on our armed forces.
The U.S. military’s success in Pakistan this week proved the importance of maintaining a team focused on accomplishing dangerous missions. Others on the left prefer to look upon the armed forces as a playground to experiment with fringe ideas. Take the Air Force Academy which reportedly held a ceremony on Tuesday to dedicate a pile of rocks in the academy’s “worship area for followers of Earth-centered religions.”
It must be like having to perform your real job while wading through molasses. One rule, then another and another that have nothing to do with your real tasks, until in the end it’s all molasses. Do read the whole thing.
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Freedom, History, The Constitution | Tags: Diversity, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness
Perhaps it began in the European Union. The continent of Europe has been the site of one bloody war after another for centuries. The nations of Europe, exhausted after the Second World War, wanted to stop. Anti war rallies were very much in vogue while the Cold War left an aggressive Soviet Union threatening from the East.
The European Union’s birthrate has dropped below replacement rate. Which means, if nothing else, that the young workers to support Europe’s aging welfare state simply would not be there. The EU encouraged immigration, particularly from their former colonies. Immigration did not necessarily mean assimilation, immigrants were not always welcomed, and belonging wasn’t necessarily a part of the multicultural vision.
All the differences people brought with them were theoretically to be melded into the colorful tapestry of the modern multicultural state. Differences in language, custom, religion and race were to make the tapestry richer and more interesting, and anyone who publicly disagreed could be investigated by the thought police and charged with the sin of racism. Careers could be destroyed by incorrect thought by anyone indigenous, white and male. Freedom of thought was officially out of fashion and official language was closely controlled. Keeping your head down became a way of life.
Overnight, all has changed. Angela Merkel, chancellor of a country where political correctness is carefully nurtured, has just told us that multiculturalism “has failed utterly.” France’s President Sarkozy has been saying the same thing for some time. Prospect, Britain’s leading left-wing intellectual monthly carried a headline “re-thinking race; has multiculturalism had its day? And now Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron has delivered a reasoned demolition of “state multiculturalism” and made a start at rooting it out of official British policy. In Switzerland a referendum about minarets revealed the population’s concerns about Islamism. In Canada a leader of the country’s Muslim community, Tarek Fatah, has spoken out to say that just like Britain, Canada’s multiculturalism will fail.
Cameron delivered the analysis at the annual conference on international security in Munich. It removed multiculturalism from the categories of welfare and anti-discrimination policy to that of national security and anti-terrorism, where conservatives have an advantage over the left.
His argument is that terrorism is threatening the West, not only in Afghanistan, but also at home. It has its roots in the underlying “extremist ideology” of Islamism. Young Muslim men in Britain begin their road to jihad by picking up this ideology from institutions, leaders and organizations subsidized by government money and official favors. It is further promoted by multiculturalism which encourages different cultures to live separate lives, and delivers impressionable young men into the hands of state-funded extremists. It would have to be confronted by denying funds to bodies that preach hatred and separatism, and ideologically as well.
Both Mark Steyn and John O’Sullivan have insisted that one reason for the success of extremist Islamism is the absence of British patriotism. Multiculturalism has refused to offer its new citizens the real opportunity to become British. To offer real assimilation and pride in their country’s national identity. Multiculturalism and political correctness have created a vacuum where British patriotism ought to be.
America has been a melting pot from the beginning. And when we wrote a Constitution, we wrote that into it. American was already a blend of immigrants from many countries with many languages and many religions. Our national identity became a country of immigrants united by ideas of freedom and opportunity, protected by a Constitution in which the people gave the government some few limited powers, with lots of checks and balances.
That has not made us immune to the liberal elite’s embrace of multiculturalism and diversity to enhance their push for radical equality and insistence that racism is the greatest problem in American life. Our history and deep national patriotism have made multiculturalism and diversity more often the subject of jokes, but it is there and needs to be rooted out.
Americans who made multicultural jokes, and laughed at diversity and got kicked out of college by the faculty language police were in the right. Our elites should take notice of what is happening across the water.
Filed under: Freedom, Islam, National Security, Terrorism | Tags: Political Correctness, Poor Public Relations, Thwarting Terrorist Attacks
The controversy over new airport security regulations continues apace. And as is usual in America, the anger also brings out American good humor. Saturday Night Live has a great skit, there have been bumper stickers (funny but raunchy) and plenty of offensive pictures of stupid searches of little children and of course, nuns.
John Podhoretz pointed out at Commentary that the anger about the intrusive screening is due as much to the recent election as about the procedures themselves. We have a government that has been enormously high-handed, presuming to rule rather than serve. The Democrat majority in Congress has forgotten that they are to represent us, to listen to us, rather than to control us.
The folks at Homeland Security essentially said ‘We’re going to do this intrusive search and feel you up, and if you don’t like it we will fine you thousands of dollars, and we’re going to do it at the busiest time of the year at the nation’s airports.’
They didn’t say, but what is obvious to everyone is that you have to take off your shoes now because Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, with an extensive criminal record, managed to get on an America-bound plane in spite of screeners suspicious of his disheveled appearance, and would have succeeded had not his shoes been wet and had not passengers subdued him.
They didn’t say, but is obvious, that you must have this intrusive groping because Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab managed to get on a Detroit-bound plane with explosives in his underwear, in spite of the fact that his father had called the American embassy to warn that his youngest son was dangerous, the young man was not dressed for the winter weather in Detroit, did not have his own passport, bought a one-way ticket with cash, and had no luggage. And he had been in Yemen studying with the Imam Anwar al Awlaki.
Homeland Security did not mention Major Nidal Malik Hassan, the Fort Hood shooter, who presented so many warning signs that they might as well have been flashing in neon lights. He was investigated by the FBI which looked at his emails to the Imam Anwar al Awlaki, which said things like “I can’t wait to join you in the afterlife” “When is jihad permissible” and asked how to transfer funds abroad without coming to the attention of authorities.
John Pistole who seems to be in charge of TSA didn’t feel that it was necessary to discuss the new screening procedures with the public in advance of putting them into effect. Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, wrote an op-ed in USA Today, in which she said “scanners are safe, pat-downs discreet.” Passengers reporting in indicate that the pat-downs are not only not discreet, but offensive.
We appreciate that Homeland Security is trying to keep the American people safe. It would seem that international screening for planes bound for the US leaves something to be desired. Their record of incompetence at public relations is breathtaking. The idea of fining someone who refuses to be groped by screeners $11,000 for leaving the screening area without permission is ludicrous. The TSA people need more training in public relations, and in plain old common sense.
The American people are sick of political correctness. Treat us like grownups — inform and ask before you order and demand — use some judgment. Stop trying to pretend that Islamic radicals trained in Yemen and Afghanistan are just ordinary people whose origins and religious extremism cannot be mentioned. It is a dangerous world, and we appreciate efforts to protect the American people. But to cope with a dangerous world, we need straight talk and sensible precautions addressed in a straightforward manner. This one, once again, was a public relations disaster.