Army Refuses to Admit Cause of Ft. Hood Massacre. Still.

When US Army Major Nidal Hassan opened fire last November in the Ft. Hood soldier readiness center filled with military and civilian personnel, he shouted, “Allah Akbar.” He’d been in frequent contact with Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical Yemeni cleric. He’d even given a PowerPoint presentation warning of further attacks on Army personnel if Muslims in the U.S. armed forcers weren’t given conscientious objector status. Within hours of the massacre, it was all too clear to anyone with more processing power than an Atari 2600 that Hassan had carried out a jihadi attack on a US military base. Clear unless you’re Army brass, that is…

This week, Brigadier General Joseph DiSalvo presented the army’s Award for Valor to the widow and children of Chief Warrant Officer (retired) Michael Cahill. Cahill, a civilian contractor working as a physician assistant, saw Hassan open fire in the crowded readiness center and charged him, holding a chair over his head for protection. Hassan shot him dead.

At the presentation ceremony this week, General DiSalvo said this:

Although we may never know why it happened, we do know that heroic actions took place that day . . . he will forever be a source of inspiration.

Really, General? Exactly who doesn’t know why it happened?

Hassan was a soldier in radical Islam’s war on infidels in general and America in particular. A war that started in the early ’90s (if not earlier). Since 9/11, this war has included attacks on American soil by the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, the Little Rock shooter and the Times Square bomber. And that’s just in the U.S. So far.

It’s extremely difficult for me to use this word for what the General exhibited here, but cowardice is the only term that conceivably applies to his reluctance to describe the attack for what it was. It turns my stomach to use the word when referring to an active duty serviceman. Someone who has enlisted and promised to lay down his life to protect this country. Something I’ve never done myself.

But by disingenuously attributing the murders to some sort of cosmic mystery, the General dishonored Cahill, as well as the other twelve murder victims and the twenty-nine people who were injured. Failure to describe them as casualties of war diminishes the circumstance of their deaths and willfully obscures what actually happened.

Cahill’s extraordinary bravery stands on its own. Even DiSalvo’s pathetic attempt to misrepresent the cause of his death as the functional equivalent of a tornado or a traffic accident can’t take anything away from the bravery and valor he displayed trying to stop Hassan.

Because of this PC timidity, Ft. Hood (and just about every other domestic US military installation) remains an unarmed free-fire zone. Soldiers still can’t carry sidearms on base. During wartime. Then again, you can’t carry in New York City either. And DC is only nominally better.

By all means, let’s not allow the rank an file to protect themselves in the middle of a war the enemy has shown the ability to carry to American soil. Someone might be offended.

comments

  1. avatar Paul R says:

    Wow, tough stuff Dan. While I agree there is a bit of PC going on, using the c word is beyond the pale IMHO.

    The brass is clearly trying to make this shooting go away but I wonder why they bother as the press is compliant as there has been no follow up what so ever.

    May they rest in peace; but may the rest of us stay frosty.

    1. avatar Daniel Zimmerman says:

      It gave me no pleasure to write that, but I can’t think of any other way to put it and convey what’s happened here.

      1. avatar Paul R says:

        I’m not sure that is what happened. Cowardice is not to be taken lightly Dan, but I’m sure you know that.

        Reading your post, the hairs on my neck stood up. We, on this side of the debate, need to pick our words carefully.

        1. avatar Pat C says:

          Courage and cowardice encompass many things. One may display courage in combat or other high-risk situations and be a complete wuss in terms of moral courage (though I would think examples of this are hard to find).
          The General would fit the latter description. The Army’s tepid response to a painfully obvious jihadi attack is frightening in several ways. One, it shows how badly PC has beaten down our leadership. Two, it shows the effectiveness of the Muslim Brotherhood’s long-term strategy of destroying our society from within by turning our own freedom and tolerance against us.
          Finally, there is no good reason why Officers and Staff NCO’s shouldn’t carry their sidearms on base when we are at war with an enemy that has demonstrated the ability to infiltrate our armed forces. Forcing combat troops to rely on police protection almost makes me embarrassed to be a veteran.

        2. avatar Vincit Veritas says:

          “Two, it shows the effectiveness of the Muslim Brotherhood’s long-term strategy of destroying our society from within by turning our own freedom and tolerance against us.”

          Really? That is the second most relevant thing this situation says?

  2. avatar Tony says:

    Dan, as a career Soldier I unfortunately have to agree with your representation of the General. Part of the problem is that Generals get their promotions by vote of Congress so they tend not to speak the truth lest it offend those who can promote them and further their career.

    In Iraq, inside the wire, we basically did the equivalent of California carry. But the point remains, we could carry and had loaded magazines at the ready. Personally I think most security at bases in the States is really security theatre. There is no reason why Soldiers in stateside bases should have to depend on Police from the local community for protection.

    All honor is due CW4 (Ret) Cahill for his actions. BG DiSalvo needs to brush up on his Army Values, particularly Integrity.

  3. avatar Aaron says:

    Add to that the DC shooters… also a Jihadist attack.

  4. avatar RAN says:

    I concur with Tony. My father served in the military. I served in the military and my son is serving in the military. A nation that cannot name its enemies won’t be able to achieve victory over them. This kind of elitist group think is why we have drivel like the speech our president made regarding Israel and Palestine. If this general doesn’t have a brass set to name the enemy he shouldn’t be a general. To much CYA going on and not enough people willing to tell things like they are. It’s stuff like this that leaves a bad taste in my mouth and makes me want to spit.

    1. avatar TTACer says:

      As a vet I am sure you have noticed that no matter whether the letter after the guy sitting in the oval office’s name was ‘d’ or ‘r’ anyone with a star on their shoulder was a political animal, and not necessarily a tactical or strategic beast.

  5. avatar Homobangbangamus says:

    Well, if you want to get ahead in the military these days, becoming PC and preferably adopting a lefty point of view is the current ticket.

    In order to assure control of the military, if you are a Marxist, you have to vet the officer corps and make sure that it’s members are your side, or at least will follow any order that you give them. But to assure positive control, they must be ideologically pure and pose no threat to your assumption of power.

    I wish I was just kidding about this.

    1. avatar Tony says:

      All this reminds me of a story I came across a few days ago. It was about how lots of NCOs are leaving the Army and the prime reason was poor leadership. If the Officers are going to get the big bucks then they need to lead and live up to their oath rather than think only about their next promotion.

    2. avatar Vincit Veritas says:

      Actually shutting up and doing what you’re told no matter what is pretty much central to any army, regardless of the nation or political affiliation. Most high school sports teams too.

  6. avatar Rich says:

    ‘Gun Free Zones’ are the most dangerous places you can be located in. They are a killers dream. Liberals want to create more of them inviting more mayhem and distruction. We keep our kids in them, we keep our young adults in them, and we visit them to mail packages. Schools, Post Offices, and Universities. Now in addition we keep our soldiers in them.

  7. avatar TSgt B says:

    Dan,
    EXCELLENT POST!!! Thanks for calling a spade a spade. This type of thing is one of the many reasons I chose to retire shortly after the election of William Jefferson (B.J.) Clinton – as a career NCO with plans to advance, I ran into a wall of P.C. bullshit, from one-side “race relations” training to the revocation of the First and Second amendments. I could go on for quite a while. Suffice to say that I agree 100% with your description of this general, a disgrace to the uniform and all whom have honorably served. Anymore, it’s all freakin’ politics. God help our Great Nation.

  8. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    Why should we be so concerned with calling someone in the military a “coward?” If the term fits, then use it. The issue I have is this overarching reverence most people (even free thinkers that post here) display towards the military. They are the enforcement arm of the empire abroad! Why must we support “our” troops through numerous illegal and immoral wars, none of which any military member has objected to? It is not the pen to paper legislation we must fear, but rather those who enforce it.

    1. avatar Agitator says:

      You don’t have to support the wars, or the political leaders that initiate (or continue) them. I’m an Army reservist slated to deploy next year, and I certainly don’t. However, describing these conflicts as something that no “military member has objected to” reveals you as either misinformed, uninformed, or wilfully obtuse. Most of us didn’t exactly sign up with the express intent of mowing down whoever our political masters point us at. Its usually something a wee bit more pedestrian, such as paying off college loans, trying to escape small (or even large) towns with tanking economies that offer no chances at advancement, earning the GI bill, and that sort of thing. Very few people actually WANT to play in the sandbox for a year; rather, the people who join up do so because it is their best opportunity. Making a blanket statement to the effect that no one in the military objects to the current state of events is foolish.

      Cue idiotic statements from Magoo… now.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        I concur that there may be all manner of reasons that one chooses to join the military, however once the order comes to travel overseas in order to kill for the empire, what excuse to you have for complying? There have been precious few objections from the ranks at having to deploy and destroy. It’s a contradiction to say one doesn’t support the war, but then willingly deploys in support of that war! Where are the Revolts of the Admirals, where are the conscientious objectors, where are the deserters, where are those within the military with principle enough to say “I withdraw my consent and I will not support illegal and immoral wars any longer?” You may be my case in point if you don’t support the war, in principle, yet are ready and willing to physically support the war by deploying. Actions speak louder than words and both the military, in general, and those miltary members that illegally fight overseas, in particular, deserve neither my support nor my respect.
        The purpose of the empire’s army gang is to fight other gangs in order to consolidate power. I’m sorry that you were duped into joining with the promise of those more “pedestrian” benefits, but the fact remains that you are in direct support of the regime which the military serves. If you don’t support that regime or their particular wars, put your principles into action and quit! Take the red pill and WAKE UP!

        1. avatar Vincit Veritas says:

          It’s a little easier to point fingers when you’re not actually serving. Deserting, aside from being a crime (technically punishable by death), forces you to abandon your brothers, violate your oath, and also renders you incapable of owning a firearm for the rest of your life (that whole eventual dishonorable discharge thing).

          Also, just if you were curious about, you know, facts:
          According to the Pentagon, more than 5,500 military personnel deserted in 2003–2004, following the Iraq invasion and occupation.[17] The number had reached about 8,000 by the first quarter of 2006.[18] Another report stated that since 2000, about 40,000 troops from all branches of the military have deserted, also according to the Pentagon. More than half of these served in the US Army [5]. Almost all of these soldiers deserted within the USA. There has only been one reported case of a desertion in Iraq. The Army, Navy and Air Force reported 7,978 desertions in 2001, compared with 3,456 in 2005. The Marine Corps showed 1,603 Marines in desertion status in 2001. That had declined by 148 in 2005.[19]

        2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

          I find it very interesting that you put “abandon your brothers” prior to “violate your oath.” Our oath, and subsequent loyalty, is to the Constitution, even before our brothers in arms. Refusal to follow illegal/un-Constitutional or immoral orders is not only NOT a violation of our oath, but is a solemn DUTY of the oath. Any “brother” who follows un-Constitutional orders has already abandoned the true patriots. As a side note, being “dis-allowed” from owning a firearm is quite a different thing from being “incapable” of owning one. Regardless of the “law”, one still maintains the God-give right and righteous prerogative to exercise their rights to property and self-defense.

          As for your statement regarding desertion facts, a cumulative desertion rate over 11 years of 2.7% (40,000 deserters/~1, 477, 000 active personnel) is barely even statistically significant and definitely not the numbers I’d expect from men of supposed integrity who value the Constitution. I don’t think that less than a quarter of a percentage point per year can be construed as some sort of mass exodus of principled men. By the way, I am serving and I will resign once my agreed upon contract expires. However, if I am ordered to violate my oath by lending material support to illegal wars, I will refuse and I encourage all others to do the same. It’s is very discouraging to see so many young men willing and even eager to fight and kill in obvious and direct violation of the Constitution.

    2. avatar Allan says:

      You shouldn’t support the U.S. military, and it shouldn’t support or defend you!

  9. avatar Res Publica Americana says:

    These are the same sort of people that came up with permits, registration, and specific licensing for firearms dealers. There’s far too many decent people in the military, as it happens, and the big boys really don’t want them armed outside of combat.

  10. avatar Ralph says:

    Our military bases are disarmed, border agents carry beanbag guns, toy guns are demonized, the most dangerous cities in America prohibit self-defense and the economy is in the shitter. America has finally become a liberal’s paradise.

    1. avatar Mothergoose says:

      Yes, and I hear the sky is falling as well?

  11. avatar Aharon says:

    Dan, long ago I served in combat arms and later in Army Intelligence (go easy on the oxymoron jokes please). I have no problem with calling the General’s white-washing of events PC cowardice because that is what it is to anyone who doesn’t have their head in the sand of denial or lies. JFK once said that moral courage is a rarer commodity than courage in battle. The brash Eric Holder once called America a nation of cowards. To restate Holder’s intent; the timidity put upon the masses of sheeple by the elites, the twisted and corrupt modern values, and the lack of moral courage has made many Americans into cowards. I recall Obama’s words at the memorial for those murdered at the base. He referred to the terrorist and traitor as a “misguided individual”. Obama is an elitist, an opportunist, and a moral coward.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email