Fort Hood Report Omits Hasan's Name
The U.S. military has pulled its head out of the sand long enough to release the 86-page report Protecting the Force: Lessons From Fort Hood. Absent in the report is Major Nidal Hasan’s name and his connections with Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical cleric in Yemen. No mention of radical Islam or terrorism is made at all.
The report reads like an action novel without characters. How can our military protect us from an enemy that is nonexistent to them? Recently, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was referring to terrorist attacks as "man caused events," but from this report one would assume Fort Hood was an event with no man, and no cause.
The FBI was aware of Hasan’s contact with al-Awlaki. They believed the 20 emails to al-Awlaki were part of Hasan’s research into the mindset of Muslim soldiers who turn on their comrades. At the same time, Hasan’s colleagues at Walter Reed raised concerns with their superiors about his mental stability. Where did the FBI receive its information about Hasan’s research? How many military officers are in direct contact with known terrorists to write research papers? Isn’t that an act of terrorism?
John Lehman, a 9/11 Commission member, believes the report's silence on Islamic extremism “shows you how deeply entrenched the values of political correctness have become. It’s definitely getting worse, and is now so ingrained that people no longer smirk when it happens.”
Is this political correctness or suicide? Are we so concerned with others' views that we ignore our own values? After every attack, we review, hold hearings, and enact new laws. Maybe we need to think outside the box instead of asking the same people the same questions.
As the saying goes, “if we keep doing what we did, we keep getting what we got.”