There is a story from yesterday by Andrew McCarthy of National Review Online that covers what can only be the work of Rod Serling or Gene Roddenberry, for it is so difficult to comprehend that it resembles more science fiction than reality. Sadly, it appears that the two have collided, and we are living in a bizarre place in time.
Even if the Hasan murders had not happened at Fort Hood, this development nevertheless has so many things wrong with it that I scarcely know where to begin to sort it out. The fact that the story actually is about a Muslim instructor at the very same Fort Hood only adds to the blurring of the lines of sanity.
The soldiers at Fort Hood who are about to deploy to Afghanistan are receiving, at the behest of the Defense Department, an education on the wonders of Islam from an "instructor" named Louay Safi. According to McCarthy, "Safi is a top official of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and served as research director at the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT)." And now, after the terrorist attack by Major Hasan, our Defense Department decided that it would be just swell to have this man teach our kids before they go fight the Taliban, who are Muslim.
I am struggling at the moment to resist the urge to launch into a profanity-laced tirade, and the knowledge that readers here have come to trust that their eyes are safe from such things is weighed heavily against the enormity of this idiocy, which begs for a break from protocol. It is only knowing that doing so would not change anything that prevents me, so consider yourselves spared, this time.
Louay Safi has his own website. On this website, he writes on the aftermath of the Fort Hood attack by Hasan, and he complains of the unfair treatment of Muslims in its wake.
"When a person who happens to be a member of an established religion, say a Christian or a Jew, commits a crime, the media refers to him as a criminal and questions his act. When, however, the one who commits the crime happens to be a Muslim, the media refers to him as a Muslim and question his faith."What seems to be lost on Safi (or is he simply equivocating) is the fact that Christian criminals don't yell "For Jesus" before they kill people, and Jewish criminals, to my knowledge, have not been reported to yell "Lachaim!" before the commission of their crimes. Does Safi not know that Hasan shouted the terrorist trademark, "Allahu Akbar!" before gunning down his victims? Or is he using the Muslim practice of rewriting history to suit the whims of Muhammed?
The bigger question is; is this the sort of twisted logic he is attempting to stuff into the heads of those young men and women in Fort Hood before they are sent to battle the Taliban? I am automatically wired to lay this at the new Commander in Chief's feet, but I have to question the command at Fort Hood for allowing this to go on. I also have to wonder what happened to common sense and integrity at the Department of Defense.
Obama's speech to the West Point Cadets seems to have been aimed more at the Muslim world, a message that we're coming in on the 4:17 PM flight at gate #3 and our itinerary is to hang around for perhaps 18 months, after which we'll be heading home. Now it seems that he's also letting them know that our contingent will be comprised of soldiers who "feel your pain".
Good God, when can I awake from this nightmare? Sphere: Related Content
Posts
3 comments:
Lay every bit of it at the feet of Obama. His political correctness is being injected into the military by his administration. It's also the reason 4 Navy Seals are being court martialed for giving a notorious terrorist a fat lip and a punch in the stomach. Never mind that he burned, mutilated and hung 4 Americans along with countless other heinous acts. No wonder you want to shout and swear. It's becoming harder and harder to remain civil given the daily dumping of dung from Washington.
Also, loved your comment on the arrival and departure time for the troops. I think many in the audience could relate.
EJ
Funny how the left works, eh EJ? Even in my outrage I am compelled to seek the political "center".
You are correct, shame on me for wavering.
It has come to a point when the intentions of our military must come under scrutiny. It has been hypothesized within our domain that the US military would never accept, nevertheless carry out orders to deploy and take US soil. This also includes the harming of US citizens. That civil war scenario is where this come to play. That said, if this sort of capitulation is occurring now within the DOD, where can we expect it to stop? Is that boundary cast in stone? And exactly who is and who is not "the enemy"?
Post a Comment