How Do We Defeat an Enemy Whom We Refuse to Recognize?

Are we reliving the Clinton years when acts of terror were treated like any other "crime", rather than what they truly are, acts of war? Also, is the Obama Administration partly to blame for the lax in security because of its new policies which essentially deny that there is an Islamic terror problem?

Dick Morris addresses these topics:

FT. HOOD ATTACK WAS TERRORISM
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

"In his nationally televised remarks following the horrendous killings at Ft. Hood, President Obama never mentioned the T word. The attack was an act 'of violence.' No mention of terrorism.

In fact, the Ft. Hood shooting is the first terror attack on American soil since 9-11. But Obama, reluctant to take the rap for inadequate protections against such attacks, is doing everything he can to make it look like an adult version of the Columbine school shootings. We are treated to stories about the killer’s dread of being sent back to Afghanistan and his deformed personality.

But, the fact is that Major Nidal Malik Hasan jumped on a table, yelled 'Alah Hu Akhbar' and began the shooting rampage that killed 13 people and wounded 30 more.

Ilana Freedman, CEO and Senior Analyst for the Gerard Group International, which provides intelligence analysis for business and homeland security, describes Hasan as a 'lone wolf terrorist' who acts without apparent coordination with any other person or organization. But that does not make him any less of a terrorist.

The dividing line, of course, between a terrorist and a psychopathic killer is political motivation. His statements right before opening fire would indicate that Hasan was motivated by fanaticism and a commitment to Islamic fascism, even though President Obama bends over backwards to avoid saying so.

Obama’s refusal to call the attack terrorism, and to heed the warning signs about the porous nature of our security system that allowed it to happen on a military base, recalls President Clinton’s deliberate decision to downplay the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. He did not visit the site of the attack and treated it as a crime, promising to find those guilty and punish them, rather than to attack the international groups that funded and enabled them.

There may be no groups behind Major Hasan’s attack, but the fact that he was an officer in the Army, with full access to a military base and its arsenal of weapons, while holding the views he did, is the first indication of a laxity in security under President Obama. This attack did not take place in a shopping mall or a school, where security procedures are, understandably, relaxed. It happened on the highest security place of all - a military base! That the military failed to spot the possibility of an attack and had no measures in place to prevent it must be laid at the feet of the commander-in-chief of that military: President Barack Obama.

Many commentators have warned that the diminution of security and the weakening of our anti-terrorist protections would leave us vulnerable to be hit again. Now it has happened. And the president is doing everything he can to blur the distinction between murder and terrorism.

It was his failure to understand the difference between an act of war and a crime that undermined President Clinton’s administration’s anti-terror efforts and led directly to 9-11. It would appear that President Obama is going down the same road of denial and minimization of political harm. There may be casualties at Ft. Hood, but Obama is determined that his popularity will not be among them."


I must correct Morris. The Fort Hood shooting was not the first attack on American soil since 9/11. A Muslim killed a soldier and wounded another at an Army recruiting center in Little Rock Arkansas on June 1, 2009. Was that not an act of Islamic terror? Of course, the American Pravda did their best to avoid covering the story.

Then we have this nonsense coming out of Obama's Dept. of Homeland Security, via Gateway Pundit:

Janet Napolitano On Ft. Hood Killer: “This Was an Individual Who Does Not, Obviously, Represent the Muslim Faith”

"He was screaming 'Allahu Akbar' Janet.
Janet Napolitano told an Arab audience today that anti-Muslim sentiment will not be tolerated.
FOX News reported:


'“This was a terrible tragedy for all involved,” Napolitano told reporters in the United Arab Emirates’ capital Abu Dhabi. “Obviously, we object to — and do not believe — that anti-Muslim sentiment should emanate from this.”

Napolitano said her agency is working with state and local groups to try to deflect any anti-Muslim anger after the Thursday attacks by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The shootings left 13 people dead and 29 wounded.

“This was an individual who does not, obviously, represent the Muslim faith,” she said after meeting with a group of women university students.'"


How absolutely absurd! Though in all fairness, Napolitano's comment sounds like something George W. Bush might have said.

The good news is that the American people are not that stupid. They realize that the Fort Hood shootings were an act of terror. Even my ultra-liberal mother who always makes excuses for Islam has considered it, and that was before I shared my thoughts on the matter. I was so proud of her for having such a rational moment. If she has seen just a small flicker of light in this nightmare, than chances are moderate Americans are well aware of what went down at Fort Hood.

God help us all! How do we defeat an enemy whom our government refuses to recognize?

UPDATE: Great article on the Left and Terror