“It really doesn’t matter how President Obama divides the Afghan baby, how he splits the difference between McChrystal and Biden. Because the war has been lost,” Thompson said on his radio show today. “I say this because of one sad and simple fact. The president does not have the will and determination to do what’s necessary to win it. His heart’s not in it, and never has been. The Taliban knows it. Al Qaeda knows it. Our allies know it. And the American people know it.

He’s probably right

Ann Althouse:

Holder imagines that he can hide inside that “thoughtful” routine that Obama so often relies on, but it is utterly pathetic here. Either he knows damned well what he’s doing and he’s lying or he’s outrageously unqualified for his job. His evasive style is so similar to Obama’s that he makes Obama look worse.

Dan Karipides at Wizbang isn’t buying it. He doesn’t believe Holder is this much of an amateur:

Which unfortunately leaves the second option. That, as Jay Tea suggested earlier, the administration plans to use the trial to go after Bush, Cheney, and the evil-Republicans-that-torture. Perhaps they were still counting on a public environment where such a tactic would be cheered. What Holder was truly unprepared for was anyone questioning the decision in the first place.

Bingo! And there you have it. This Administration is so cocky….so arrogant…they just could not believe that a decision like this would be questioned.

Jay Tea:

You first have to start off with the old truism that “conservatives think liberals are stupid; liberals think conservatives are evil.”

With that in mind, the Obama administration’s actions suddenly make perfect sense.

To them, the trial of the accused terrorists is merely a means to an end. And that end is, to them, a greater justice that must be served.

Some critics are asking questions like “what if they are not convicted?” What would happen if a jury finds — for whatever reason, such as mistreatment of the defendants at the hands of the government during their years of pre-trial detention — that to convict them would be unjust?

That doesn’t matter. The Obama administration is convinced that the fix is in. The conviction is a foregone conclusion to them; they simply can’t envision anything else happening. (As others have noted, these are the same people who couldn’t conceive of Chicago NOT winning the Olympics, or of the Democrats NOT winning the recent gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey — but we’re not dealing with reality here, but the Obama administration’s perceptions.)

So the conviction is in the bag. This is when the spirit of Rahm Emanuel raises its baleful head and repeats the mantra “never let a crisis go to waste.” Since there’s going to be a trial anyway, and the outcome is already gonna happen, what else can get get from it? What other benefit can we reap from this trial? What other enemies — besides these all-but-convicted-and-executed terrorists — can we pummel with this?

Why, of course, the Bush administration and the CIA.

How would a trial like this be an attack on Bush and the CIA you ask?

…the defense raises the “torture” argument. Obama’s Justice Department objects, just strenuously enough to get the whole issue argued before the judge and the press (if not the jury). This gets all the gory, lurid details out in the public, and demonstrates once and for all what evil, malicious, hideous, inhuman monsters Bush, Cheney, and all their supporters are once and for all.

In the end, all the evidence gathered by the “enhanced interrogations” will be set aside and the trials will continue towards their predestined guilty verdicts. And then the real fun begins — all that currently-confidential information is now not only public, not only part of the official legal record, but the Obama administration can claim to have resisted its release and only did so in compliance with the law. At that point, more legal action — civil and, possibly, criminal — can be brought against Bush-era officials, bringing more discredit on the Republican party in general — just in time for the 2010 or 2012 elections.

Which, of course, is the main focus on an administration that viewed the days between last November’s election and this past January 20 as a vacation between campaigns, and has yet to figure out when — or how — to start governing.

Win the fight against radical Islam? Who cares. Keep the homeland safe and secure? Who cares….just win the election baby!.

Just keep power.

That’s all that matters to them….

The danger in those years [2011/2012] will be that Ben Bernanke will attempt yet again to refloat the U.S. economy through inflation, buying government debt to fund the deficit and forcing short term rates well below the inflation rate. This danger is exacerbated by the Obama administration’s insouciance about deficits. Ben Bernanke on his own (and his predecessor Alan Greenspan) bears a large share of responsibility for the 2008 crash, but the Bernanke/Obama combination is potentially even more dangerous. If expansionary monetary and fiscal policies are pursued regardless of market signals, the U.S. will head towards Weimar-style trillion-percent inflation. That would make the government’s position easier as its mountain of Treasury debt became worthless, but devastate everybody else’s savings and impoverish the American people as Weimar impoverished 1920s Germany.

As I said, a train wreck. Probability of arrival: close to 100%. Time of arrival: around the end of 2010, or possibly a bit earlier. And at this stage, there’s very little anyone can do about it; the definitive rise of gold above $1,000 marked the point of no return.

Add to this a few more things:
Next January, people will pay more in taxes than they have in years-at a time when most are worse off than they have been in years (ie w greater effect)
Unemployment is expected to remain high, and even rise MORE before midterms in 2010
Democrats blew their one chance at real economic stimulus on political payoffs, and will increasingly be held to account (it’s already started) for is failure to stimulate, create, or save jobs
Democrats losing independent voters
Democrats are incumbents controlling Congress in a midterm election where the party in power will normally lose
Democrats have accomplished very very little (might not even pass healthcare)
Democrats have pushed back deficit control efforts to 2010
Democrats have broken EVERY major 2006 campaign promise that got them control of Congress

…and then there’s natsec issues
Obama/Dems promised to end the war in Iraq, but just before midterms will still have 50-70,000 troops in Iraq (though re-named from “combat brigades” to “security, logistics, and training forces”)
There’s no way that Afghanistan is gonna end or end well in the next 11 months
Iran has been a complete failure and will likely end w an Israeli strike+possible regional war in the next 11 months
And let’s not even start to talk about how Dems will can’t look tough on natsec before the midterms w a KSM trial of the millenium on 24/7cable!

So….what is it Dems are gonna use as a campaign crutch in 2010?

Two-thirds of Americans disagree with the Obama administration’s decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian court rather than a military court, according to a new national poll.

But six in 10 people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday say that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks should be tried in the United States, as the administration plans to do, rather than at a U.S. facility in another country.

The poll indicates that 64 percent believe Mohammed should be tried in military court, with 34 percent suggesting that he face trial in civilian court. Six in 10 people questioned say Mohammed should be tried stateside, with 37 percent calling for the trial to take place at a U.S. facility in another country.

“The decision to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in front of a civilian court is universally unpopular – even a majority of Democrats and liberals say that he should be tried by military authorities,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Despite that, most Americans say that he will get a fair trial in the U.S.”

Not sure what Holland’s point is here. Of course he would get a fair trial, but the majority of respondents, in a CNN poll for gods sake, understand that giving this scumbag a civilian trial is ludicrous:

Trying KSM in civilian court will be an intelligence bonanza for al Qaeda and the hostile nations that will view the U.S. intelligence methods and sources that such a trial will reveal. The proceedings will tie up judges for years on issues best left to the president and Congress.

Whether a jury ultimately convicts KSM and his fellows, or sentences them to death, is beside the point. The treatment of the 9/11 attacks as a criminal matter rather than as an act of war will cripple American efforts to fight terrorism. It is in effect a declaration that this nation is no longer at war.

~~~

Prosecutors will be forced to reveal U.S. intelligence on KSM, the methods and sources for acquiring its information, and his relationships to fellow al Qaeda operatives. The information will enable al Qaeda to drop plans and personnel whose cover is blown. It will enable it to detect our means of intelligence-gathering, and to push forward into areas we know nothing about.

This is not hypothetical, as former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy has explained. During the 1993 World Trade Center bombing trial of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman (aka the “blind Sheikh”), standard criminal trial rules required the government to turn over to the defendants a list of 200 possible co-conspirators.

In essence, this list was a sketch of American intelligence on al Qaeda. According to Mr. McCarthy, who tried the case, it was delivered to bin Laden in Sudan on a silver platter within days of its production as a court exhibit.

Bin Laden, who was on the list, could immediately see who was compromised. He also could start figuring out how American intelligence had learned its information and anticipate what our future moves were likely to be.

It’s crazy. Simply crazy.

Even more harmful to our national security will be the effect a civilian trial of KSM will have on the future conduct of intelligence officers and military personnel. Will they have to read al Qaeda terrorists their Miranda rights? Will they have to secure the “crime scene” under battlefield conditions? Will they have to take statements from nearby “witnesses”? Will they have to gather evidence and secure its chain of custody for transport all the way back to New York? All of this while intelligence officers and soldiers operate in a war zone, trying to stay alive, and working to complete their mission and get out without casualties.

And the other poll is about ObamaCare. Notice how the AP tries to hide some inconvenient numbers with a article entitled “AP POLL: Tax the rich to pay for health bill”

…what the Associated Press does not even mention in their story is probably the most relevant part:

In general, do you support, oppose or neither support nor oppose the health care reform plans being discussed in Congress? (IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE Is that strongly support/oppose or somewhat support/oppose?

To no surprise that’s opposed by 43-41%. Eleven percent neither support or oppose and 4% “don’t know.”

Also conveniently left out of their story is the response to whether people should be penalized if they do not buy the government-run health care: Sixty-four percent oppose. Why do you suppose that was left out?

Also left out was of the respondents, 37% are unemployed or retired. No wonder they want someone to pick up the tab.

Forty-two percent think they economy will get worse if this scam is shoved down our throats, while 28% think it will improve. Again, this is left out of the story.

Also, over the past five years, 86% of respondents said the care they received from physician or hospital was excellent or good, only 2% said it was poor. This was left out of the AP story. So why do we have to blow up the entire system?

That’s a couple different polls on the two hot button issues of the day which Obama and company should take heed….but won’t. Now granted, the opinions of a thousand people cannot tell us accurately the sentiments of the entire country but when two liberal rags take a poll and the numbers go against the liberal position….the liberals should take notice.

This war is a new kind of war. It is different from all other wars of the past, not only in its methods and weapons but also in its geography. It is warfare in terms of every continent, every island, every sea, every air-lane in the world.

That is the reason why I have asked you to take out and spread before you (the) a map of the whole earth, and to follow with me in the references which I shall make to the world-encircling battle lines of this war. Many questions will, I fear, remain unanswered tonight, but I know you will realize that I cannot cover everything in any one short report to the people. The broad oceans which have been heralded in the past as our protection from attack have become endless battlefields on which we are constantly being challenged by our enemies.

This week President Obama is in Asia. Next week he will be in Europe. He will actually order his plane-not to land, but to fly AROUND his troops in Afghanistan, his troops in the Persian Gulf, his troops in Iraq, and around Iran where he could land and give diplomacy one last serious chance before Israel attacks and casts the Arab world into war (from the Mediterranean Sea to the Bay of Bengal). Nope, Obama will fly around all those places-literally dodging his responsibility as a wartime commander and as a peace-seeking statesman. When did Presidents lose their courage? Maybe he needs to read up on his Democratic Party idol. I found it interesting.

MY FELLOW AMERICANS:
Washington’s Birthday is a most appropriate occasion for us to talk with each other about things as they are today and things as we know they shall be in the future. For eight years, General Washington and his Continental Army were faced continually with formidable odds and recurring defeats. Supplies and equipment were lacking. In a sense, every winter was a Valley Forge. Throughout the thirteen states there existed fifth columnists — and selfish men, jealous men, fearful men, who proclaimed that Washington’s cause was hopeless, and that he should ask for a negotiated peace.

Washington’s conduct in those hard times has provided the model for all Americans ever since — a model of moral stamina. He held to his course, as it had been charted in the Declaration of Independence. He and the brave men who served with him knew that no man’s life or fortune was secure without freedom and free institutions.

The present great struggle has taught us increasingly that freedom of person and security of property anywhere in the world depend upon the security of the rights and obligations of liberty and justice everywhere in the world.

This war is a new kind of war. It is different from all other wars of the past, not only in its methods and weapons but also in its geography. It is warfare in terms of every continent, every island, every sea, every air-lane in the world.

That is the reason why I have asked you to take out and spread before you (the) a map of the whole earth, and to follow with me in the references which I shall make to the world-encircling battle lines of this war. Many questions will, I fear, remain unanswered tonight, but I know you will realize that I cannot cover everything in any one short report to the people. The broad oceans which have been heralded in the past as our protection from attack have become endless battlefields on which we are constantly being challenged by our enemies.

We must all understand and face the hard fact that our job now is to fight at distances which extend all the way around the globe.

We fight at these vast distances because that is where our enemies are. Until our flow of supplies gives us clear superiority we must keep on striking our enemies wherever and whenever we can meet them, even if, for a while, we have to yield ground. Actually, though, we are taking a heavy toll of the enemy every day that goes by.

We must fight at these vast distances to protect our supply lines and our lines of communication with our allies — protect these lines from the enemies who are bending every ounce of their strength, striving against time, to cut them. The object of the Nazis and the Japanese is to of course separate the United States, Britain, China and Russia, and to isolate them one from another, so that each will be surrounded and cut off from sources of supplies and reinforcements. It is the old familiar Axis policy of “divide and conquer.”

There are those who still think, however, in terms of the days of sailing-ships. They advise us to pull our warships and our planes and our merchant ships into our own home waters and concentrate solely on last ditch defense. But let me illustrate what would happen if we followed such foolish advice.

Look at your map. Look at the vast area of China, with its millions of fighting men. Look at the vast area of Russia, with its powerful armies and proven military might. Look at the (British Isles) Islands of Britain, Australia, New Zealand, the Dutch Indies, India, the Near East and the Continent of Africa, with their (re) sources of raw materials — their resources of raw materials, and of peoples determined to resist Axis domination. Look too at North America, Central America and South America. It is obvious what would happen if all of these great reservoirs of power were cut off from each other either by enemy action or by self-imposed isolation:

(1.) First, in such a case, we could no longer send aid of any kind to China — to the brave people who, for nearly five years, have withstood Japanese assault, destroyed hundreds of thousands of Japanese soldiers and vast quantities of Japanese war munitions. It is essential that we help China in her magnificent defense and in her inevitable counteroffensive -for that is one important element in the ultimate defeat of Japan.

(2.) Secondly, if we lost communication with the southwest Pacific, all of that area, including Australia and New Zealand and the Dutch Indies, would fall under Japanese domination. Japan in such a case could (then) release great numbers of ships and men to launch attacks on a large scale against the coasts of the Western Hemisphere — South America and Central America, and North America — including Alaska. At the same time, she could immediately extend her conquests (to) in the other direction toward India, (and) through the Indian Ocean, to Africa, (and) to the Near East and try to join forces with Germany and Italy.

(3.) Third, if we were to stop sending munitions to the British and the Russians in the Mediterranean area, (and) in the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, (areas) we would be helping the Nazis to overrun Turkey, and Syria, and Iraq, and Persia — that is now called Iran — Egypt and the Suez Canal, the whole coast of North Africa itself and with that inevitably the whole coast of West Africa — putting Germany within easy striking distance of South America — fifteen hundred miles away.

(4.) Fourth, if by such a fatuous policy, we ceased to protect the North Atlantic supply line to Britain and to Russia, we would help to cripple the splendid counter-offensive by Russia against the Nazis, and we would help to deprive Britain of essential food supplies and munitions.

Those Americans who believed that we could live under the illusion of isolationism wanted the American eagle to imitate the tactics of the ostrich. Now, many of those same people, afraid that we may be sticking our necks out, want our national bird to be turned into a turtle. But we prefer to retain the eagle as it is — flying high and striking hard.

I know (that) I speak for the mass of the American people when I say that we reject the turtle policy and will continue increasingly the policy of carrying the war to the enemy in distant lands and distant waters — as far away as possible from our own home grounds.

There are four main lines of communication now being travelled by our ships: the North Atlantic, the South Atlantic, the Indian Ocean and the South Pacific. These routes are not one-way streets, for the ships (which) that carry our troops and munitions out-bound bring back essential raw materials which we require for our own use.

The maintenance of these vital lines is a very tough job. It is a job which requires tremendous daring, tremendous resourcefulness, and, above all, tremendous production of planes and tanks and guns and also of the ships to carry them. And I speak again for the American people when I say that we can and will do that job.

The defense of the world-wide lines of communication demands — compel relatively safe use by us of the sea and of the air along the various routes; and this, in turn, depends upon control by the United Nations of (the) many strategic bases along those routes.

Control of the air involves the simultaneous use of two types of planes — first, the long-range heavy bomber; and, second, the light bombers, the dive bombers, the torpedo planes, (and) the short-range pursuit planes, all of which are essential to (the) cooperate with and protect(ion) (of) the bases and (of) the bombers themselves.

Heavy bombers can fly under their own power from here to the southwest Pacific, either way, but the smaller planes cannot. Therefore, these lighter planes have to be packed in crates and sent on board cargo ships. Look at your map again; and you will see that the route is long — and at many places perilous — either across the South Atlantic all the way (a)round South Africa and the Cape of Good Hope, or from California to the East Indies direct. A vessel can make a round trip by either route in about four months, or only three round trips in a whole year.

In spite of the length, (and) in spite of the difficulties of this transportation, I can tell you that in two and a half months we already have a large number of bombers and pursuit planes, manned by American pilots and crews, which are now in daily contact with the enemy in the Southwest Pacific. And thousands of American troops are today in that area engaged in operations not only in the air but on the ground as well.

In this battle area, Japan has had an obvious initial advantage. For she could fly even her short-range planes to the points of attack by using many stepping stones open to — her bases in a multitude of Pacific islands and also bases on the China coast, Indo-China coast, and in Thailand and Malaya (coasts). Japanese troop transports could go south from Japan and from China through the narrow China Sea, which can be protected by Japanese planes throughout its whole length.

I ask you to look at your maps again, particularly at that portion of the Pacific Ocean lying west of Hawaii. Before this war even started, the Philippine Islands were already surrounded on three sides by Japanese power. On the west, the China side, the Japanese were in possession of the coast of China and the coast of Indo-China which had been yielded to them by the Vichy French. On the North are the islands of Japan themselves, reaching down almost to northern Luzon. On the east, are the Mandated Islands — which Japan had occupied exclusively, and had fortified in absolute violation of her written word.

The islands that lie between Hawaii and the Philippines — these islands, hundreds of them, appear only as small dots on most maps, but do not appear at all. But they cover a large strategic area. Guam lies in the middle of them — a lone outpost which we have never fortified.

Under the Washington Treaty of 1921 we had solemnly agreed not to add to the fortification of the Philippines (Islands). We had no safe naval bases there, so we could not use the islands for extensive naval operations.

Immediately after this war started, the Japanese forces moved down on either side of the Philippines to numerous points south of them — thereby completely encircling the (Islands) Philippines from north, and south, and east and west.

It is that complete encirclement, with control of the air by Japanese land-based aircraft, which has prevented us from sending substantial reinforcements of men and material to the gallant defenders of the Philippines. For forty years it has always been our strategy — a strategy born of necessity — that in the event of a full-scale attack on the Islands by Japan, we should fight a delaying action, attempting to retire slowly into Bataan Peninsula and Corregidor.

We knew that the war as a whole would have to be fought and won by a process of attrition against Japan itself. We knew all along that, with our greater resources, we could ultimately out-build Japan and ultimately overwhelm her on sea, and on land and in the air. We knew that, to obtain our objective, many varieties of operations would be necessary in areas other than the Philippines.

Now nothing that has occurred in the past two months has caused us to revise this basic strategy of necessity — except that the defense put up by General MacArthur has magnificently exceeded the previous estimates of endurance, and he and his men are gaining eternal glory therefore.

MacArthur’s army of Filipinos and Americans, and the forces of the United Nations in China, in Burma and the Netherlands East Indies, are all together fulfilling the same essential task. They are making Japan pay an increasingly terrible price for her ambitious attempts to seize control of the whole (Atlantic) Asiatic world. Every Japanese transport sunk off Java is one less transport that they can use to carry reinforcements to their army opposing General MacArthur in Luzon.

It has been said that Japanese gains in the Philippines were made possible only by the success of their surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. I tell you that this is not so.

Even if the attack had not been made your map will show that it would have been a hopeless operation for us to send the Fleet to the Philippines through thousands of miles of ocean, while all those island bases were under the sole control of the Japanese.

The consequences of the attack on Pearl Harbor — serious as they were — have been wildly exaggerated in other ways. And these exaggerations come originally from Axis propagandists; but they have been repeated, I regret to say, by Americans in and out of public life.

You and I have the utmost contempt for Americans who, since Pearl Harbor, have whispered or announced “off the record” that there was no longer any Pacific Fleet — that the Fleet was all sunk or destroyed on December 7th — that more than (1,000) a thousand of our planes were destroyed on the ground. They have suggested slyly that the Government has withheld the truth about casualties — that eleven or twelve thousand men were killed at Pearl Harbor instead of the figures as officially announced. They have even served the enemy propagandists by spreading the incredible story that ship-loads of bodies of our honored American dead were about to arrive in New York harbor to be put into a common grave.

Almost every Axis broadcast — Berlin, Rome, Tokyo — directly quotes Americans who, by speech or in the press, make damnable misstatements such as these.

The American people realize that in many cases details of military operations cannot be disclosed until we are absolutely certain that the announcement will not give to the enemy military information which he does not already possess.

Your Government has unmistakable confidence in your ability to hear the worst, without flinching or losing heart. You must, in turn, have complete confidence that your Government is keeping nothing from you except information that will help the enemy in his attempt to destroy us. In a democracy there is always a solemn pact of truth between government and the people, but there must also always be a full use of discretion, and that word “discretion” applies to the critics of government as well.

This is war. The American people want to know, and will be told, the general trend of how the war is going. But they do not wish to help the enemy any more than our fighting forces do, and they will pay little attention to the rumor-mongers and the poison peddlers in our midst.

To pass from the realm of rumor and poison to the field of facts: the number of our officers and men killed in the attack on Pearl Harbor on December seventh was 2,340, and the number wounded was 940. Of all of the combatant ships based on Pearl Harbor — battleships, heavy cruisers, light cruisers, aircraft carriers, destroyers and submarines — only three (were) are permanently put out of commission.

Very many of the ships of the Pacific Fleet were not even in Pearl Harbor. Some of those that were there were hit very slightly, and others that were damaged have either rejoined the Fleet by now or are still undergoing repairs. And when those repairs are completed, the ships will be more efficient fighting machines than they were before.

The report that we lost more than a thousand (air)planes at Pearl Harbor is as baseless as the other weird rumors. The Japanese do not know just how many planes they destroyed that day, and I am not going to tell them. But I can say that to date — and including Pearl Harbor — we have destroyed considerably more Japanese planes than they have destroyed of ours.

We have most certainly suffered losses — from Hitler’s U-Boats in the Atlantic as well as from the Japanese in the Pacific — and we shall suffer more of them before the turn of the tide. But, speaking for the United States of America, let me say once and for all to the people of the world: We Americans have been compelled to yield ground, but we will regain it. We and the other United Nations are committed to the destruction of the militarism of Japan and Germany. We are daily increasing our strength. Soon, we and not our enemies, will have the offensive; we, not they, will win the final battles; and we, not they, will make the final peace.

Conquered nations in Europe know what the yoke of the Nazis is like. And the people of Korea and of Manchuria know in their flesh the harsh despotism of Japan. All of the people of Asia know that if there is to be an honorable and decent future for any of them or any of (for) us, that future depends on victory by the United Nations over the forces of Axis enslavement.

If a just and durable peace is to be attained, or even if all of us are merely to save our own skins, there is one thought for us here at home to keep uppermost — the fulfillment of our special task of production –uninterrupted production. I stress that word “uninterrupted.”

Germany, Italy and Japan are very close to their maximum output of planes, guns, tanks and ships. The United Nations are not — especially the United States of America.

Our first job then is to build up production — uninterrupted production — so that the United Nations can maintain control of the seas and attain control of the air — not merely a slight superiority, but an overwhelming superiority.

On January 6th of this year, I set certain definite goals of production for airplanes, tanks, guns and ships. The Axis propagandists called them fantastic. Tonight, nearly two months later, and after a careful survey of progress by Donald Nelson and others charged with responsibility for our production, I can tell you that those goals will be attained.

In every part of the country, experts in production and the men and women at work in the plants are giving loyal service. With few exceptions, labor, capital and farming realize that this is no time either to make undue profits or to gain special advantages, one over the other.

We are calling for new plants and additions — additions to old plants. (and) We are calling for plant conversion to war needs. We are seeking more men and more women to run them. We are working longer hours. We are coming to realize that one extra plane or extra tank or extra gun or extra ship completed tomorrow may, in a few months, turn the tide on some distant battlefield; it may make the difference between life and death for some of our own fighting men. We know now that if we lose this war it will be generations or even centuries before our conception of democracy can live again. And we can lose this war only if use slow up our effort or if we waste our ammunition sniping at each other.

Here are three high purposes for every American:

1.

We shall not stop work for a single day. If any dispute arises we shall keep on working while the dispute is solved by mediation, or conciliation or arbitration — until the war is won.
2.

We shall not demand special gains or special privileges or special advantages for any one group or occupation.
3.

We shall give up conveniences and modify the routine of our lives if our country asks us to do so. We will do it cheerfully, remembering that the common enemy seeks to destroy every home and every freedom in every part of our land.

This generation of Americans has come to realize, with a present and personal realization, that there is something larger and more important than the life of any individual or of any individual group — something for which a man will sacrifice, and gladly sacrifice, not only his pleasures, not only his goods, not only his associations with those he loves, but his life itself. In time of crisis when the future is in the balance, we come to understand, with full recognition and devotion, what this nation is and what we owe to it.

The Axis propagandists have tried in various evil ways to destroy our determination and our morale. Failing in that, they are now trying to destroy our confidence in our own allies. They say that the British are finished — that the Russians and the Chinese are about to quit. Patriotic and sensible Americans will reject these absurdities. And instead of listening to any of this crude propaganda, they will recall some of the things that Nazis and Japanese have said and are still saying about us. Ever since this nation became the arsenal of democracy — ever since enactment of Lend-Lease — there has been one persistent theme through all Axis propaganda.

This theme has been that Americans are admittedly rich, (and) that Americans have considerable industrial power — but that Americans are soft and decadent, that they cannot and will not unite and work and fight.

From Berlin, Rome and Tokyo we have been described as a nation of weaklings — “playboys” — who would hire British soldiers, or Russian soldiers, or Chinese soldiers to do our fighting for us.

Let them repeat that now!
Let them tell that to General MacArthur and his men.
Let them tell that to the sailors who today are hitting hard in the far waters of the Pacific.
Let them tell that to the boys in the Flying Fortresses.
Let them tell that to the Marines!

The United Nations constitute an association of independent peoples of equal dignity and equal importance. The United Nations are dedicated to a common cause. We share equally and with equal zeal the anguish and the awful sacrifices of war. In the partnership of our common enterprise, we must share in a unified plan in which all of us must play our several parts, each of us being equally indispensable and dependent one on the other.

We have unified command and cooperation and comradeship.

We Americans will contribute unified production and unified acceptance of sacrifice and of effort. That means a national unity that can know no limitations of race or creed or selfish politics. The American people expect that much from themselves. And the American people will find ways and means of expressing their determination to their enemies, including the Japanese Admiral who has said that he will dictate the terms of peace here in the White Mouse.

We of the United Nations are agreed on certain broad principles in the kind of peace we seek. The Atlantic Charter applies not only to the parts of the world that border the Atlantic but to the whole world; disarmament of aggressors, self-determination of nations and peoples, and the four freedoms — freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

The British and the Russian people have known the full fury of Nazi onslaught. There have been times when the fate of London and Moscow was in serious doubt. But there was never the slightest question that either the British or the Russians would yield. And today all the United Nations salute the superb Russian Army as it celebrates the twenty-fourth anniversary of its first assembly.

Though their homeland was overrun, the Dutch people are still fighting stubbornly and powerfully overseas.

The great Chinese people have suffered grievous losses; Chungking has been almost wiped out of existence — yet it remains the capital of an unbeatable China.

That is the conquering spirit which prevails throughout the United Nations in this war.

The task that we Americans now face will test us to the uttermost. Never before have we been called upon for such a prodigious effort. Never before have we had so little time in which to do so much.

“These are the times that try men’s souls.”

Tom Paine wrote those words on a drumhead, by the light of a campfire. That was when Washington’s little army of ragged, rugged men was retreating across New Jersey, having tasted (nothing) naught but defeat.

And General Washington ordered that these great words written by Tom Paine be read to the men of every regiment in the Continental Army, and this was the assurance given to the first American armed forces:

“The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered, yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the sacrifice, the more glorious the triumph.”

So spoke Americans in the year 1776.
So speak Americans today!

FEBRUARY 23, 1942 AT 10:00 PM , E.W.T.

Are we at war – or not?

For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?

Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies – that he may not be guilty.

And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.

When the Justice Department sets up a task force to wage war on a crime organization like the Mafia or MS-13, no U.S. official has a right to shoot Mafia or gang members on sight. No one has a right to bomb their homes. No one has a right to regard the possible death of their wives and children in an attack as acceptable collateral damage.

Gwynne Dyer from the Salt Lake Tribune doesn’t deny that Nidal Hasan’s faith played a role in his going postal jihadi:

Let’s see, now. A devout Muslim officer, born in the United States but of Palestinian ancestry, is scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan in the near future. He opens fire on his fellow soldiers, shouting “Allahu akbar.” (”God is great” in Arabic.) What can his motive have been? Hard to guess, isn’t it? Was he unhappy about his promotion prospects? Hmm.

But what else does Dyer do? Blame America and the West for its campaign of warfare and persecution of Muslims:

America’s wars in Muslim lands overseas are radicalizing Muslims at home. Never mind that the home-grown Muslim terrorists who attacked the London transport system in 2005, and the various Muslim plotters who have been caught in other Western countries before their plans came to fruition, have almost all blamed the Western invasions of Muslim countries for radicalizing them.

Never mind, above all, that what really radicalized them was the fact that those invasions made no sense in terms of Western security. No Afghan has ever attacked the United States, although Arabs living in Afghanistan were involved in the planning of 9/11. There were no terrorists in Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction, and no contacts between Saddam and al-Qaida. So why did the U.S. invade those countries?

The real reasons are panic and ignorance, reinforced by militaristic reflexes and laced with liberal amounts of racism. But people find it hard to believe that big, powerful governments like those of the United States, Britain and the other Western powers involved in these foolish adventures could really be so stupid, so the conspiracy theories proliferate.

It is a testimony to the moderation and loyalty of Muslim communities in the West that so few of their members have succumbed to these conspiracy theories.

Lessee……

America is to blame for the dysfunction going on in the modern era of the Middle East? Racist America is “holding the Muslim man down”? American imperialism is responsible?

FA has found unclassified evidence from the U.S. Department of Defense (and hat tip to CJ, whose excellent milblog A Soldier’s Perspective is now on inactive duty) showing shocking and graphic day to day activities of the U.S. military’s campaign of aggression against Muslims:

U.S. soldier teases and mocks Afghan children:

U.S. Army Capt. Michael Wikstrom, a chaplain with Combined Security Transition Command – Afghanistan, shows Afghan children how to blow bubbles during a humanitarian aid delivery mission in Kabul, Afghanistan, July 24, 2009. (DoD photo by Senior Airman Marc I. Lane, U.S. Air Force)

U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class John Moyle, the platoon sergeant for 1st Platoon, 554th Military Police Company out of Stuttgart, Germany, gives a child a high-five while providing security during polling site assessments in the Nangarhar province of Afghanistan July 1, 2009. The unit is currently attached to Task Force Mountain Warrior, which is assessing polling sites in the province to ensure they are safe for residents. (DoD photo by Pfc. Elizabeth K. Raney, U.S. Army)

Afghan National Army commando Mohammed Jan, a Kandak commander with the 201st Corps, hands humanitarian assistance supplies to residents of a village in the Laghman province of Afghanistan May 23, 2009. The 1st Battalion, 178th Infantry Regiment, Illinois Army National Guard is working with the Afghan National Army to conduct a key leader engagement and to deliver humanitarian assistance to residents to build stronger relationships and fight insurgency. (DoD photo Spc. Jason Dorsey, U.S. Army)

U.S. Army Sgt. Juan Reyes high-fives an Iraqi boy while providing security in Sequor, Iraq, Sept. 9, 2009. Reyes is from the security detachment of 25th Special Troops Battalion, 25th Infantry Division. (DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Luke P. Thelen, U.S. Air Force)

Here we have a well-known U.S. Navy Admiral personally indoctrinating unsuspecting Afghan school girls with pro-U.S. propaganda:

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Navy Adm. Mike Mullen hands out notebooks during the opening of the Pushghar Village Girls School in the Panjshir Valley of Afghanistan July 15, 2009. The school was built by Greg Mortenson, a humanitarian and author of “Three Cups of Tea”, to promote and support community-based education for girls in remote regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley, U.S. Navy)

U.S. Navy Hospital Corpsman 3rd Class Brandon Sills hands out candy to children in the Helmand province of Afghanistan Aug. 25, 2009. Sills is attached to the battalion aid station of 3rd Battalion, 11th Marine Regiment. (DoD photo by Sgt. Christopher R. Rye, U.S. Marine Corps)

U.S. Army Command Sgt. Maj. Jimmy Carabello distributes school supplies to Afghan children during a humanitarian assistance mission at the Shigal district center in the Konar province of Afghanistan Aug. 19, 2009. Carabello is deployed with the 1st Battalion, 32nd Infantry Regiment. (DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Andrew Smith, U.S. Army)

U.S. Army Maj. Arnel David, from the 1st Infantry Division’s Federal Police Training Team, hands out clothing and toys to residents of a poor neighborhood in Baghdad, Iraq, Nov. 1, 2009. (DoD photo by Senior Airman Michael Wykes, U.S. Air Force)

U.S. Army Capt. Scott Warnke, with 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, shows a photograph to an Afghan child in the Anzala Khil village of Afghanistan Nov. 5, 2009. Warnke is deployed to Forward Operating Base Wolverine in the Zabul province of Afghanistan to conduct counterinsurgency operations in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. (DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Christine Jones, U.S. Air Force)

Kerry: And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not–

Schieffer: Yeah.

Kerry: –Iraqis should be doing that.

Here are photos of U.S. soldiers breaking “into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children”….

U.S. Army Capt. Charles Ford plays a video game with seven-year-old Wa’ad, who lost an arm and a leg to an improvised bomb, during a visit to the child’s home near Muqdadiyah, Iraq. U.S. soldiers from Hammer Company are arranging for the child to be fitted with prosthetic limbs.

An Iraqi man shows off his muscles after a house search by U.S. Army soldiers patrolling Baghdad’s Azamiyah neighborhood.
Anja Niedringhaus – AP

U.S. Soldiers with 30th Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division hand out toys to children during a human terrain team site survey mission in Kilabeen, Iraq, Sept. 15, 2009. (DoD photo by Spc. Benjamin Boren, U.S. Army)

U.S. Army Sgt. Maj. Cannaballo, from the 6th Iraqi Army Division’s Military Transition Team, interacts with Iraqi children while visiting the Al Wallah Elementary School with Iraqi soldiers in Al Hurriyah, Iraq, Oct. 25, 2009. (DoD photo by Spc. Jennifer Reed, U.S. Army)

A U.S. Soldier interacts with Iraqi children during a meeting to discuss potential medical micro-grants at the Qais Medical Clinic in the Radwaniyah area of Baghdad, Iraq, Oct. 3, 2009. The Soldier is from 1st Battalion, 150th Armor Reconnaissance Squadron, 30th Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Edwin L. Wriston, U.S. Navy)

U.S. Army Capt. Jayne Strathe, attached to the 1314th Civil Affairs Company, 17th Fires Brigade, talks with an Iraqi child at the Hojarat School for Boys and Girls in Basra, Iraq, Nov. 5, 2009. The Hojarat School is one of the schools selected for improvements by Soldiers with the company. (DoD photo by Spc. Samantha R. Ciaramitaro, U.S. Army)

Here we see an Iraqi child, terrified, as she attempts to ward off the U.S. aggressor:

Jan. 13: A U.S. soldier plays with a young girl during a patrol in Baghdad.
Jewel Samad – AFP/Getty Images

U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Robert Hoff gives kids high-fives, during a visit to a village, in Kirkuk, Iraq, May 14, 2009. Soldiers are visiting the village to distribute school supplies to children. Hoff is attached to Charlie Troop, 4th Squadron, 9th Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division out of Fort Hood, Texas. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Gustavo Olgiati, U.S. Army)

U.S. Army Sgt. Craig Wayman puts eye drops into an Iraqi girl’s eye during a combined medical evaluation in a village in Kirkuk, Iraq, on May 7, 2009. Wayman is a combat medic attached to Charlie Troop, 4th Squadron, 9th Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division. (DoD photo by Sgt. Gustavo Olgiati, U.S. Army)

In the following photo, we see a U.S. soldier do the despicable:

U.S. Army Master Sgt. Delano Wilson, assigned to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, gives an Iraqi child a soccer ball May 26, 2009, during a mission to check the progress of a water compact unit project near Babil, Iraq. The completed project will provide potable water to more than 4,000 Iraqi citizens. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kim Smith, U.S. Navy)

Photo source

Secret photo source

Secret photo source

How do U.S. soldiers get a hold of so many soccer balls to begin with? Quite simply, they steal them from the Iraqis before rigging them with explosives through a mission directive known as Operation Soccer Ball.

Here are a couple of photo leaks of the soccer thieves in action:

A U.S. soldier plays soccer with a boy at the Al zawra club in Baghdad November 26, 2007.
REUTERS/Mahmoud Raouf Mahmoud

A U.S. Army soldier plays soccer with an Iraqi boy while on patrol in Baghdad’s Azamiyah neighborhood.
Anja Niedringhaus – AP

An U.S. soldier from 1st Platoon, Bravo Company (Bulldogs), 1-502 Infantry Battalion, kicks a soccer ball to an Iraqi boy while he patrols the Shi’ite-dominated Chercook neighbourhood in Baghdad’s Khadamiya district, May 10, 2008.
REUTERS/Oleg Popov

Not content with beating Iraqis on the field of battle, this U.S. soldier has to humiliate Muslims in a game of foosball:

A U.S. soldier plays foosball with residents by the side of a road in Baghdad’s Adhamiya district July 10, 2008.
REUTERS/Omar Obeidi

Afghan boys react as they play a game of marbles with a U.S. officer with Alpha Company, 32nd Infantry Regiment (not pictured) in the village of Damman, Kunar Province, eastern Afghanistan February 16, 2009.
REUTERS/Oleg Popov

A boy shakes hands with a U.S. soldier at the end of the opening ceremony of a playground which was renovated by U.S. forces in Baghdad’s al-Harthiya district, November 6, 2008.
REUTERS/Ceerwan Aziz

Beanie Babies are another popular weapon in the arsenal of the U.S. military.

Happy recipient of beanie baby

Nothing quite like seeing a U.S. soldier armed to the teeth, with three beanie babies to unload upon unsuspecting Iraqi children:

Source

Source

(Photo source and story)

Iraqi children proudly show the stuffed toys they received through Beanies for Baghdad. The program, started in 2003 by a soldier deployed to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom, has sent more than 1 million toys to children in Iraq and Afghanistan. Courtesy photo
Photo source

This U.S. soldier is infecting this innocent Iraqi child with U.S. cooties:

Iraqi children are currently suffering from a cooties epidemic at levels unheard of since Operation Iraqi Freedom began.

U.S. Army Sgt. Mark Davenport holds a child while on patrol in the Taji Qada, northwest of Baghdad, May 16, 2008. Davenport is the senior medic assigned to the 25th Infantry Division’s Company A, 1st Battalion, 27th Infantry Regiment “Wolfhounds,” 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team “Warrior,” Multinational Division Baghdad.
U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Brad Willeford

Apparently, there have been some reports of U.S. soldiers forcing Iraqi children into the role of indentured servant. FA has found the physical proof:

A young boy feeds a U.S. Army soldier during a New Year’s Eve party for orphans and poor children in a suburb of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad December 31, 2003.
REUTERS/Zohra Bensemra

Maj. Tracy Fong, officer for the 13th Corps Support Command Civil Affairs, plays with an Iraqi boy. (US Army photo by Spc. Blanka Stratford)

The U.S. military is the most respected institution in Iraq, and many Iraqi boys dream of becoming American soldiers. Yes, young Iraqi boys know about “GoArmy.com.”-Michael Yon

We’ve all heard about how al Qaeda recruits children. Did you know our U.S. forces are doing the same? Here we see an Afghan boy testing out a new chemical weapon provided to him by the U.S. military:

A U.S. Soldier with the Nangahar Provincial Reconstruction Team plays with an Afghan child June 4, 2009, during a mission to deliver medical and school supplies to women and children in the Behsood District Women’s Prison in the Nangarhar province of Afghanistan. Silly string can be so much fun! (DoD photo by Spc. Nathaniel Allen, U.S. Army)

8/25/2008

The following two photos made frontpage headlines around the world a few years ago, as clear evidence of how U.S. soldiers utilize Iraqi children as human shields:

A boy seeks shelter behind a U.S. soldier as gunshots ring out following a car bomb explosion in Baghdad. At least 21 were killed in the bombing and 66 wounded, police and hospital officials said.
Khalid Mohammed- AP

This photo, which appeared on the front page of this morning’s edition of The New York Times, shows an Iraqi boy taking cover behind a U.S. soldier as civilians fled the sound of gunshots following a suicide bombing yesterday in central Baghdad that killed at least 21 people and wounded 66 others.Photo taken by Khalid Mohammed, AP

And more photos here and here and here.

These must be the photos of Muslim abuse that drove Nidal Hasan to massacre his fellow U.S. soldiers (or I suppose the non-graphic “retelling” of such abuse and violence, driving him into anti/pre-traumatic stress/violence disorder). Allah be praised! Hasan has done right, defending his fellow Muslims from such Crusader aggression. As Amy Proctor points out:

The discussion is about Muslim soldeirs troubled by fighting in Middle Eastern countries. Well, that should raise red flags to the military. WE’RE FIGHTING TERRORISTS AND IMPOSTER MUSLIMS, not good devout law abiding Muslims. Why would a Muslim soldier have a consciencious objection to fighting Muslim heretics who kill women and children, who behead and rape? They shouldn’t unless they are sympathetic to their cause. THAT IS CAUSE FOR ALARM.

Who uses the mentally handicapped to carry out suicide bombings?

Who uses human shields?

Who fights from behind mosques?

Who organized the rape of 80 women to recruit them as suicide bombers?

Who recruited 24 children to act as homicide bombers?

Who is accused of baking children and then serving them up to the parents?

Who is committing Muslim on Muslim violence? Muslims in the U.S. military or al Qaeda and the Taliban?

Because of current difficulties in trying to help a fledgling democracy take root in Afghanistan, people blame the U.S. for the corruption of Karzai’s government and the suffering of the Afghan people. Because Iraq isn’t transformed over night into a stable, functioning democracy, people blame the U.S., forgetting the decades of suffering Iraqis suffered under the brutality of Saddam and his muderous sons.

It’s funny to hear lefties call Karzai a “U.S. puppet” when he’s acting in ways we don’t approve of. Do we have influence? Sure. But Afghanistan has sovereignty over its own self-determination. Let’s not forget that Afghanistan in the previous 20 years suffered under the Soviets and the Taliban governance. Today, there is a promise and potential for a brighter future. That’s thanks to the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. Today, Iraq is on the path to a brighter and more prosperous future. That’s thanks to the overthrow of Saddam.

Nothing is guaranteed and it is up to Iraqis and Afghans themselves to take the opportunity they have been given today, to make that bright future into a present-day reality.

What is needed in the Muslim world is not blame, conspiracies, misperceptive propaganda, and the mentality of victimhood.

Jean-Francois Revel, in his 2002 book Anti-Americanism, writes:

But the truth is that the United States’ actions historically have been far less damaging to Muslim interests than the actions of Britain, France, or Russia. These European powers have conquered Muslim countries, occupied and indeed oppressed them over decades and even centuries. American, on the other hand, have never colonized a Muslim nation. Americans evince no hostility towards Islam as such today; on the contrary, their interventions in Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo, as well as the pressure exerted on the Macedonian government, were designed to defend Muslim minorities. And the coalition of twenty-eight countries, led by the United States, that removed the Iraqi army from Kuwait was formed at the request of the Saudis, who feared what the Butcher of Baghdad might do next; so here again the Americans and their allies were defending a small Muslim country against a secular dictator who had used chemical weapons against the Muslim Shi’ites in the south and the Muslim Kurds in the north. It is strange that America-hating Muslims see nothing disturbing in the fact that Iraq, with a largely Muslim population, has attacked Muslim countries- first Iran in 1981, then Kuwait in 1990- in primitively imperialistic and bellicose fashion. Likewise in Algeria, Muslims have been massacring their coreligionists since 1990.

The greatest killer of Muslims are other Muslims.

America was not the historical cause of the emergence of Israel, which arose as a result of endemic European anti-Semitism. And Muslims may perhaps remember that in 1956 it was the United States’ unilateral intervention that stopped the Anglo-French-Israeli military operations in Egypt during the Suez Crisis.

Another myth that has been strenuously maintained since September 11 is that of a moderate and tolerant Islam.

George W. Bush stressed it.

Barack Obama perpetuates the belief.

The burden of proof that “Islam is a religion of peace” is upon its practitioners- both “moderates” and “extremists”. Not on the rest of the world.

You, too, can personally help U.S. soldiers terrorize innocent children all over the world. Just go here.

In 1942 eight Germans, all with extensive time spent previously in the US including George Dasche who became an American citizen after serving in the US Army, were trained for three weeks as saboteurs by the National Socialists, after a two week interval of relaxation they were divided into two teams of four and transported in two different submarines for America. Dasche’s group landed on Long Island, the other group landed in Florida.

The Long Island group was spotted and hailed by a Coast Guard patrolman, they tried to bribe him with several hundred dollars, he refused the bribe and phoned in an alert. The saboteurs buried their explosives and uniforms and left for New York City.

Upon arrival in New York City, Dasche phoned the FBI and tried to turn the group in, the FBI thought his call was a hoax and ignored him.

A short time later, the uniforms and explosives were uncovered on the beach in Long Island; thus a national manhunt ensued for National Socialist saboteurs.

After being rebuffed by the New York FBI office, Dasche drove to Washington DC and turned himself in to the FBI headquarters. Again he was considered a crank until he opened a suit case with eighty thousand dollars in it.

With the assistance of both Dasche and coconspirator Burger, all eight National Socialist saboteurs were arrested. Both Dasche and Burger maintained they were promised immunity by their cooperation with the FBI. In the end, all the conspirators cooperated with authorities and freely admitted that they contracted to disrupt American war production with explosives; although they didn’t actually engage in espionage, they maintained they all agreed to the mission to escape the National Socialists.

Because of the legal situation of the time, it is safe to assume that FDR decided to try the National Socialist saboteurs by military tribunal rather than a civilian court because of two main reasons.

First: At that time, buying a weapon to commit a crime was not a crime. An effort to use the weapon had to be exercised before a crime was committed. Therefore, even though the saboteurs had a huge supply of explosives, they had made no effort to employ them. Thus no crime had been committed.

Second: A military tribunal could prosecute the more serious crime of enemy combatants behind enemy lines in civilian clothes. Under military law this was a capital offence.

FDR decided to use the military tribunal to insure convictions and executions. In twenty days the men were tried, convicted, and executed except for Burger and Dasche, they were given life and thirty years respectively, the tribunal was halted for three days while the Supreme Court heard an argument challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunals.

The Supreme Court issued a per curiant opinion (an unsigned opinion) affirming the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

The defense maintained that the saboteurs had not undertaken the effort to use the explosives and their efforts were merely a ploy to escape the National Socialism of Germany. The eight generals hearing their case were unconvinced and found them all guilty and sentenced the six to death and they were executed in the electric chair within six hours of the verdict being delivered.

Justice Stone began drafting the Supreme Court’s decision after the executions had been carried out. Stone felt that it was imperative that a unanimous decision was necessary because of the gravity of the crimes, not to mention the fact that the executions were almost simultaneous with the convictions.

Known as the Ex Parte Quirin decision it is not regarded as one of the highlights of the Supreme Court’s Legacy, despite being well received publicly. The decision was reached on July 31, 1942, but did not release its decision until October 29, 1942.

Justice Frankfurter asked Frederick Weiner, an expert on military justice, to provide his opinion. Weiner concluded that the court had been “careless and uninformed (in its) handling of the Articles of War.” Of course this is the area that should have been the primary focus of the decision.

FDR thought he was sending a clear message to Hitler and the National Socialists, yet he ended up leaving a murky precedent for the future.

The Quirin decision maintained legislation authorizing military commissions for the types of offences in question; however, in the time line of Quirin there was a declaration of war. On November 13, 2001, the military was ordered to try suspected terrorists by military tribunals.

President Bush relied on a joint resolution of congress to serve as a replacement for a formal declaration of war along with two provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, successor to the Articles of War.

Consequently, prisoners in the War on Terrorism were to denied protection granted by the Geneva Convention, ratified in 1949 and now considered to be a part of United States municipal law in accordance with Article 6 paragraph 2 of the Constitution, (the Supremacy Clause).

In addition the United States Supreme Court in Handan vs. Rumsfeld ruled that common paragraph 2 of the Constitution and Article 3 of the Geneva Convention applies to detainees in the war on Terror and that military tribunals are in violation of United States and International Law.

Because treaties become law in our country, and because of procedural sloppiness in the past, we are trying men who have admitted planning the terrorism of 9/11. Because of the laws of discovery, they will have access to all the secret files of the CIA and FBI that refer to them. Thus our intelligence people throughout the Middle East will be compromised and we will be left with almost no Intelligence sources. The water boarding/torture debate will rage for months or maybe years while these murderers receive millions of dollars of legal aid from us. In the end, there is an excellent chance that they will be found innocent and be free to walk upon American soil as free men.

Of course if this travesty comes to be, the blame will be Obama’s, as a matter of fact, the closing of Guantanamo, an insipid and thoughtless campaign promise has precipitated this miscarriage of justice and no matter how this plays out, Obama will be held responsible.

Burger and Dasch were released in 1949 and deported to Germany. Dasche spent the rest of his life trying to be readmitted to the US without success.

President Obama, we are at war. The Islamic Terrorists are not cooperating with your transformation of our society into a Politically Correct Utopia with nomenclature that neutralizes the ugliness of war. They do not chant Obama, Obama, they do not faint on cue, they pay no attention to subjective pandering by sexually mis-oriented news journalists like Chris Mathews. Their war is a fanaticism that welcomes death while destroying us, the Infidel. Although you may see yourself whispering Allahu Akbar during your death and accruing your place in heaven, the vast majority have no interest or sympathy with Islamic Terrorism, we seek to destroy it.

This war is no longer about your narcissistic view of yourself and your ratings; it is about us, the American people and the fanatic bastards who want to kill us. No they are not like Christian Fundamentalists or Conservatives or Jews or even Muslims, they are radical Islamic fascists or terrorists and they are at war with us and with you, whether you are your incompetent sycophants posing as advisors care to admit it or not.

At Fort Hood you related this purposely confusing message:

This is a time of war. And yet these Americans did not die on a foreign field of battle. They were killed here, on American soil, in the heart of this great American community. It is this fact that makes the tragedy even more painful and even more incomprehensible.

It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know – no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor. And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice – in this world, and the next.

These are trying times for our country. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America, our allies, and innocent Afghans and Pakistanis. In Iraq, we are working to bring a war to a successful end, as there are still those who would deny the Iraqi people the future that Americans and Iraqis have sacrificed so much for.

Here, at Fort Hood, we pay tribute to thirteen men and women who were not able to escape the horror of war, even in the comfort of home.

You have finally admitted that we are engaged in a war, although we seem reluctant to wage war and regard the opinions of anti-American foreign journalists and the of Third World Dictators, as important in how we conduct our contingency operation. May I, as an American remind you that a war is not a police raid on a DC crack house.

While you weigh General McChrystal’s request for more troops on the political scale of public opinion and claim that victory is not an option you are comfortable with; I ask you to contemplate the works of General MacArthur, “In war there is no substitute for victory.”

And yet these Americans did not die on a foreign field of battle. They were killed here, on American soil, in the heart of this great American community. It is this fact that makes the tragedy even more painful and even more incomprehensible.

It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know – no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor.

Yes these Americans like the Americans of 9/11 were killed by Fanatic Islamic Terrorism, like the families of Flight 93, the survivors and families of the victims have no interest in a Muslim Crescent pointing to Mecca being erected on the site of killing.

The tragedy is painful Mr. Obama, but you make it more painful and incomprehensible by refusing to declare this an act of terrorism and by refusing to admit that Mao’s concept of Political Correctness embraced so fervently by the Left is an antiquated idea and is a major component contributing to Major Hasan’s Act of Terrorism against America; thus this heinous act was allowed to happen beneath the watchful eyes of the FBI and Senior Military Officers.

Policies like words have consequences, fear of speaking up and crossing a line of Political Correctness and Diversities Demarcation has guaranteed that this scenario will play out again on your watch President Obama and still we are full steam ahead without a point of direction on a pointless mission, according to you, since you refuse to define our mission, knowing only that Victory makes “you” uncomfortable.

It my be hard to comprehend the twisted logic, but we don’t need to comprehend the logic; it is enough for us to know that our enemy is evil and we must destroy him, not give him our money and love him into submission.

We the American People have stood our ground like the Revolutionary hero General Parker, who told his men before the Battle of Lexington, “Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here!” President Obama, they have begun this war twice, how long can you deny the existence of the evil psychopathic killers who want to convert us or kill us.

And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice – in this world, and the next.

We know that your speeches are written by some Liberal Harpie seekng political advantage in the morgue of Fort Hood, but trying to make you sound Like Maximus in the Coliseum is laughable and a crime against script writers.

“I am the husband of a murdered wife, the father of a murdered son, and will have revenge in this world or the next.” Maximus: Gladiator, Speaking to Caesar in the arena, a pivotal and emotionally charged moment of the film.

Nice try Mr. President, but using the same line as an apologist for the United States and a President who doesn’t seek victory in war, once again you are left looking like an incompetent and impotent fool. Hint: Hire competent speech writers and get rid of the Marxist Yes Men that you surround yourself with.

You said it, “the same extremists” these are the people we need to slip our dogs of war onto. They need to be hunted down and slaughtered in a very undiplomatic and politically incorrect method. We realize you have a Socialist Agenda planned to cripple our economy and enslave the American People, but at this moment we are engaged in a war that has unnecessarily become a slow war of attrition against our troops and soon against our civilian population. Perhaps you should consider priorities and crush these Islamo Fascists before you implement your Marxist Agenda and weaken our economy to the point that we can no longer afford to carry the war to the aggressor or is that your intention?

This actually happened the day before Nidal Hasan went Jihadi-postal (but don’t let that inconvenient fact stop me from making an eye-catching headline blurb!).

According to the Danville Express,

Police arrested 22-year-old Abdul Walid Hamid of Hayward on the evening of Wednesday, Nov. 4, after he reportedly tore a crucifix from a person’s neck and scared others at Stoneridge Shopping Center.

Hamid, an employee at a mall kiosk near Starbucks, has been charged with battery, terrorist threats and grand theft.

According to reports, Hamid was yelling “Allah is power” and “Islam is great” while holding a pen in a fist over his head. Witnesses said he shouted anti-Christian comments, said police.

Lt. Mike Elerick of the Pleasanton Police Department said the man was not provoked and didn’t threaten violence, but he committed robbery when he grabbed and broke a crucifix off someone’s neck.

I’d say that constitutes assault/battery as well, and was an act of violence.

Coworkers told police that Hamid’s actions were out of the ordinary and that he had worked at the kiosk for years.

Police also said they weren’t aware of a prior criminal history for the man.

“We had multiple people calling 911,” Elerick said. “One female was crouching down and hiding from him. He definitely scared quite a few people.”

Elerick said much of the man’s speech was similar to the loud scene of the Christian activists who frequent downtown Pleasanton. The big difference, however, was that Hamid was on private property and had physical contact with someone.

“Mall management has the option of making a citizen’s arrest on anybody and asking someone to remove themselves for any reason,” he said. “If there was no physical contact between Hamid and the customers, with just his actions alone, the mall would have asked that he be removed.”

Hamid was reportedly not cooperating and was arrested by force and taken to John George Psychiatric Pavilion in San Leandro for an evaluation. Police said the case would be forwarded to the District Attorney’s Office for review and possible charges.

I wonder if he’ll receive the same psychiatric evaluation as Nidal Hasan?

Hamid was arraigned Tuesday morning at Alameda Superior Court in Pleasanton on charges of battery, grand theft, exhibition of a deadly weapon and a possible hate crime. Deputy District Attorney Ronda Theisen requested his bail remain at $27,000.

Calling it a bizarre case, Theisen also asked that Hamid, who is still in custody, be ordered to stay out of Stoneridge Shopping Center.

Through an interpreter, Hamid requested a public defender and was scheduled to appear in court at 9 a.m. Thursday where he is expected to enter a plea.

Hamid’s been working in the mall kiosk for years, yet needs an interpreter?!

Incidentally, the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council

has not received a single report recently of a U.S. soldier being harassed “simply because he was Muslim.”

The only backlash that seems to be the result here, is MSM pushing the PC mantra and not acknowledging that Islam has a part to play in the narrative, here.

And even if a Muslim, in or out of the military, has received some taunts and verbal abuse, SO WHAT? Grow some thicker skin! Grow up.

Amy Proctor:

I’m a military wife who works in the chapel. That’s my full time job besides being a mother. In the many military posts I’ve been stationed in, we bend over backwards to accomodate and welcome ALL religions. We even have Wiccan services. We have Jewish, Muslim…. that isn’t to say that Muslims are never teased or looked on with suspicion, but ill treatment is rare. In fact, I would bet my soul that Muslim soldiers are treated far better in the military than single female soldiers.

Most Christians in the military are VERY tolerant. We see all different kinds of faith operating within the military and all around the world. It’s simply our experience that we live.

Let me tell you a little something about that article you linked to. The discussion is about Muslim soldeirs troubled by fighting in Middle Eastern countries. Well, that should raise red flags to the military. WE’RE FIGHTING TERRORISTS AND IMPOSTER MUSLIMS, not good devout law abiding Muslims. Why would a Muslim soldier have a consciencious objection to fighting Muslim heretics who kill women and children, who behead and rape? They shouldn’t unless they are sympathetic to their cause. THAT IS CAUSE FOR ALARM.

We have a friend whose a Major in the Army. He’s also a good devout Muslim. He fought in Iraq and had no problem doing so because he understood he was fighting evil men, not good Muslims. In fact, he was protecting the innocent Muslim civilians by fighting al-Qaeda, the insurgency and other terrorists.

I will say that for the charge that “This (sterotyping) could have been done by a rightwing Christian group”, I say, so what? Sterotyping isn’t exactly as dangerous as picking up a pistol and murdering 14 innocent people, is it? And since when do Christians have to give up their religious views to accomodate the Muslims? They think we’re infidels, we think they’re in a false religion. That’s life. These people are soldiers and need to man up and deal with criticism.

~~~

I would also point out that per the article, U.S. soldiers would be IDIOTS not to look out for suspicious behavior. To do what they’re saying, and just accept all Muslim soldiers without expecting their character to speak for themselves, is the same reckless blind-eye-turning that led to this massacre to begin with.

CH Houston said, “Our Muslim soldiers are accepted well.” Then he says “It’s dangerous to stereotype. This could have been done by a right-wing Christian group.”

“This”? What “this” is he talking about, sterotyping? What a crime. Please, let’s not talk about the damage right-wing Muslims have done.

This article didn’t site any specifics except some Ft. Hood Muslim troops felt “ridiculed”. Well, join the club, fellas. Guess what ridicule I went through when Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart were found to be hyopcrites? Or when reports of child molesting priests surfaced? It’s called LIFE. I’ve been ridiculed about my faith because of the actions of others on this blog all the time. So? We all fight apostacy in our faiths, mostly by setting the right example with our personal lives.

Life happens, people. Man up. It’s as I said before, no one is actually doing anything to Muslim soldiers. It’s all theories and feelings people are talking about, as if Muslim soldiers are under some sort of threat. It’s not as if non-Muslim soldiers are picking up guns and shooting the Muslim soldiers, after all. That would be insane.

ZWERDLING: Well, at the end of 2007, the government sent Hasan to the militarys medical school, its nicknamed USUs, right here in the Washington, D.C. area. And pretty soon the psychiatrists and officials and professors there were very worried about Hasan and they started having a series of conversations and meetings in early 2008, wondering – is it possible that Nidal Hasan is psychotic? Psychotic is a word that people throw around in daily conversation.

INSKEEP: Right.

ZWERDLING: It basically means out of touch with reality.

Yup…I’d say anyone who thinks he’s going to be granted 73 virgins for mass murder is “out of touch with reality”.

INSKEEP: And if doctors are using this word, they mean it in that very specific, clinical way.

ZWERDLING: They did, although this was, you know, conference room and hallway conversation. It was not you know, he was not sent, puzzling enough, to a mental evaluation, but what made them wonder if he was psychotic is that one thing is that they kept telling him over and over again – and Ive gotten documents that show this – Nidal, youre doing a really bad job; I mean academically you are just not cutting it. And he basically would blow them off and ignore them.

Number two, some of his papers seem to have disjointed thinking. Thats actually a symptom of psychosis. They just one of his papers sort of went off into a religious diatribe. It just seemed my sources say it just seemed very out of touch with reality. So they were quite concerned about him.

INSKEEP: And they also used, if Im not mistaken, the word fratricide.

ZWERDLING: Well, so some of the supervisors and professors started, you know, musing over coffee and talking about him in a worried way, and one told his colleagues – do you think if hes deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq that he could leak military secrets to Islamic extremists?

And another psychiatrist at USUs wondered to colleagues – do you think this guy is capable of committing fratricide? Nidal Hasan

INSKEEP: Killing his fellow soldiers.

ZWERDLING: Thats right. And back in 2003, in Kuwait, an American Muslim sergeant set off hand grenades that killed two people and wounded 14. And Im told that Hasan was obsessed with this case and actually wanted to study the minds of Muslim soldiers who committed fratricide, even though his supervisors said there was no evidence that they knew of that there were any more cases like that.

There is now….

INSKEEP: We should be clear – in fact its part of your story – that there was no formal psychiatric evaluation of this man. But still, you have doctors and colleagues who are very concerned about him. I mean what did they do about it?

ZWERDLING: They sat around trying to figure out where could we sent Nidal Hasan that would do the least harm? One psychiatrist said, you know, in the military theres a long tradition – when you have somebody who is a loser or is a failure or youre worried about, you try to create a job for them where they can, you know, do as little harm as possible. And they decided, lets send him to Fort Hood.

Wow…that decision certainly turned out brilliant, didn’t it?

Why Fort Hood? Because Fort Hood has a bigger mental health staff than most Army bases, and they thought, you know, at least if he goes to Fort Hood and he doesnt do anything of value, theres plenty of other people to pick up the slack. But number two, there will be lots of psychiatrists around there to help him and monitor him.

But one psychiatrist said to me, you know, we were sort of hoping hed go to Fort Hood and disappear.

We need to lose the political correctness before we find ourselves ignoring the warning signs, yet again. MSM certainly seems to be doubling down on the PC narrative, rather than waking up.

Is this really a good idea? Is it all about keeping a political campaign promise?

Bringing such notorious suspects to U.S. soil to face trial is a key step in President Barack Obama’s plan to close the terror suspect detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama initially planned to close the detention center by Jan. 22, but the administration is no longer expected to meet that deadline.

“For over 200 years our nation has relied upon a faithful adherence to the rule of law,” Holder told a news conference at the Justice Department. “Once again, we will ask our legal system in two venues to answer that call.”

The plan that Holder outlined Friday is a major legal and political test of Obama’s overall approach to terrorism. If the case suffers legal setbacks, the administration will face second-guessing from those who never wanted it in a civilian courtroom. And if lawmakers get upset about terrorists being brought to their home regions, they may fight back against other parts of Obama’s agenda.

Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona called bringing Mohammed to New York “an unnecessary risk” that could result in the disclosure of classified information. Kyl maintained the trial of Omar Abdel Rahman, the so-called “blind sheik” who was tried for a plot against some two-dozen New York City landmarks, caused “valuable information about U.S. intelligence sources and methods” to be revealed to the al-Qaida terrorist network.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the federal courts are capable of trying high-profile terrorism.

“By trying them in our federal courts, we demonstrate to the world that the most powerful nation on earth also trusts its judicial system a system respected around the world,” Leahy said.

The decision outraged family members of some Sept. 11 victims.

“We have a president who doesn’t know we’re at war,” said Debra Burlingame, whose brother, Charles Burlingame, was pilot of the hijacked plane that crashed into the Pentagon. She said she was sickened by “the prospect of these barbarians being turned into victims by their attorneys,” if the trial winds up focusing on allegations that the suspects were tortured after their capture.

“I don’t think these people should get the benefit of being subjected to our system of jurisprudence,” said Bruce De Cell, whose son-in-law, Mark Petrocelli, was killed at the World Trade Center. “They are terrorists. I don’t think they should be tried in a civilian court.”

The New York case may force the court system to confront a host of difficult legal issues surrounding counterterrorism programs begun after the 2001 attacks, including the harsh interrogation techniques once used on some of the suspects while in CIA custody. The most severe method _ waterboarding, or simulated drowning _ was used on Mohammed 183 times in 2003, before the practice was banned.

Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter made no secret of his radical Islamic views. He passed out business cards with the acronomyn SOA indicating he was a “soldier of Allah.” Hasan gave a bizzare PowerPoint presentation in which he quoted the Koran (slide 43): “I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that Mohammed is the Messenger.”

In secret, Hasan was in contact with Al Queda and and a string of radical Islamists.

As Hasan began to fire on the unarmed soldiers at Fort Hood he shouted the Jihadi war cry: “Allahu Akbar.”

So why has it been so difficult for the “news” media to call this a terrorist act?

PC News: Networks Downplay Terrorism, Muslim Connection in Ft. Hood Attack
All three networks mention ‘terror’ only after Obama hints at ideology during funeral ceremony.
By Carolyn Plocher and Dan Gainor
Culture and Media Institute
November 11, 2009

• Networks Decide Attack Wasn’t Terror: 85 percent of the broadcast stories didn’t mention the word “terror.” ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news referenced terrorism connections to the Fort Hood attack just seven times in 48 reports.
• ABC, CBS, NBC Follow White House Line: Before Obama’s Nov. 10 speech, 93 percent of the stories had ignored any terror connection. But after Obama hinted at what ABC called “Islamic extremist views,” all three networks mentioned terrorism.
• Alleged Attacker’s Muslim Faith Not Important Either: Slightly more than one-fourth (29 percent) of evening news reports mentioned that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was a Muslim. Of those, half (7 out of 14) defended the religion or included experts to do so.

Two possible explanations:

First, the recognition of this atrocity as a terrorist attack means that Obama has to take personal responsibility for the failings of his Administration to “connect the dots” to prevent this attack. The same folks who insisted Bush should have done something prior to the September 11th attacks will have a hard time defending the Obama Administration when it’s clear there were red lights flashing indicating that Hasan was a problem. It happened on Obama’s watch. If they can say it’s not a terrorist attack they can escape responsibility for failing to prevent it.

There is also a political dimension to the denial. Evan Thomas, the Editor of Newsweek gave away the game as he reacted to the news that Hasan was a Muslim:

“I cringe that he’s a Muslim. I mean, because it just inflames all the fears. I think he’s probably just a nut case but, with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going.”

So, already the attack has become politicized by the left. But they didn’t stop there.

Second, there seemed to be an instant reaction to the attack to blame the military. All those wars and deployments were bound to make a soldier snap. But of course that explanation is hard to support given that Hasan had never been deployed overseas. The best the left can do is to blame Bush for a war which they claim radicalizes Muslims (despite the fact that Muslims were radicalized long before Bush came to office).

Now that the Muslim and terrorist connection is established beyond a shadow of a doubt the “news” media goes to it’s last resort: there are “Christian nuts” too. Maybe so, but last time I checked they haven’t flown planes into buildings, beheaded Muslims with dull knives or shot up an Army base. And there certainly has been no “Muslim backlash” despite the number of worried columns with that theme have appeared in the New York Times.

Political Correctness Shielding the Next Terrorist?

With the left and their media acolytes so willing to support the politically correct culture of denial that led to the Hasan atrocity one wonders how many other shooters or bombers or whatever are hiding in plain sight? And wouldn’t it be nice that those on the left who would accuse us of wanting to put all Muslims in internment camps cared a bit more for the safety of the citizens who might be the next target?

Cherie Cullen/ Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates met with Sgt. Kimberly D. Munley at a hospital in Ft. Hood, Texas, on Tuesday.

Not to take anything away from Sgt. Munley, who is indeed a hero, more information each day is coming to light. From the NYTimes, we have this eyewitness account of the actions of Munley’s fellow officer that day:

The witness, who asked not to be identified, said Major Hasan wheeled on Sergeant Munley as she rounded the corner of a building and shot her, putting her on the ground. Then Major Hasan turned his back on her and started putting another magazine into his semiautomatic pistol.

It was at that moment that Senior Sgt. Mark Todd, a veteran police officer, rounded another corner of the building, found Major Hasan fumbling with his weapon and shot him.

How the authorities came to issue the original version of the story, which made Sergeant Munley a national hero for several days and obscured Sergeant Todd’s role, remains unclear. (Military officials also said for several hours after the shooting that Major Hasan had been killed, although he had survived.)

Six days after the deadly shooting rampage at a center where soldiers were preparing for deployment, the military has yet to put out a full account of what happened.

At a news conference outside the post on Wednesday, Lt. Col. John Rossi refused to take questions about who shot Major Hasan or why the initial reports said it had been Sergeant Munley rather than Sergeant Todd.

“These questions are specific to the investigation and I am not going to address that,” Colonel Rossi said.

Public affairs officials also declined to make Chuck Medley, the director of emergency services at the post, available for questions. It was Mr. Medley, who oversees the post’s civilian police and fire departments, who gave the first account of how Sergeant Munley stopped the gunman.

On Tuesday night, Lt. Col. Lee Packnett, of the Army’s Office of the Chief of Public Affairs at the Pentagon, declined to say whether it was Sergeant Todd who had shot Major Hasan. “It could have been, but the final outcome will be determined by the results of the ballistics tests.”

In an interview on Wednesday, Sergeant Todd’s wife, Lisa, said he had asked the Army to protect his identity in the immediate aftermath of the shootings. Her husband did not consider himself to be the real hero of the day, she said. “They were in this together,” she said.

Neither Sergeant Todd nor Sergeant Munley were made available by the military for this article, but on Wednesday on the “Oprah Winfrey Show,” they offered their first public comments on the shooting. They did not give a detailed chronology of what happened, nor did they say who had fired and hit the suspect.

Both are members of the civilian police force at Fort Hood. Sergeant Todd said on the talk show that he and Sergeant Munley had arrived at the Soldier Readiness Processing Center in separate squad vehicles about the same time.

Sergeant Todd acknowledged that he had played a major role in bringing the violence to an end. He said that he had fired at the suspect, kicked his weapon away and placed him in handcuffs. It was the first time in his 25 years in law enforcement and the military, Sergeant Todd said, that he had used his weapon.

“I just relied back on my training,” Sergeant Todd said. “We’re trained to shoot until there is no longer a threat. And once he was laying down on his back, his weapon just fell into his hand and I’m, like, ‘O.K., now’s the time to rush him and secure him.’ ”

~~~

He said he was walking in a roadway between the main building, known as the Sportsdome, and five smaller buildings. Major Hasan was headed toward the main building, the witness said, when Sergeant Munley came around the corner of a smaller building. Major Hasan wheeled on her and shot her several times, the witness said. It was unclear whether she squeezed off a shot or not, but she fell over backward, disabled with wounds in her legs and one of her wrists, the witness said.

Major Hasan then turned his back on her and began to shove another magazine into his pistol. He did not appear wounded, the witness said. A few seconds later, Sergeant Todd came around another corner of the same building. He raised his weapon and fired several times at Major Hasan, who pitched over backward and stopped moving.

“He shot her, turned away from her and was reloading, when he was shot,” said the witness, who was nearby.

On the Winfrey show, Sergeant Munley, 35, said the incident was confusing and chaotic. “There were many people outside pointing to where this individual was apparently located,” she said. “When I got out of my vehicle and ran up the hill, that’s when it started getting bad and we started encountering fire.”

Sergeant Todd, 42, is a native of California who spent most of his adult life as a military police officer in the Army. He left the military police after 25 years to join the civilian force at Fort Hood. Like most members of the military, he has moved around a lot, serving at four bases in the United States and two in Germany.

Ms. Todd said her husband did not seem upset in the wake of shooting Major Hasan.

“He say’s he’s O.K.,” she said. “And I have to take him at his word.”

Thank you Sgt. Todd!

I think it speaks volumes to his character, not only in his actions that day, but in his inaction after that day, in not seeking the limelight and the pats on the back. A true hero.

Ozier Muhammad/The New York Times
Senior Sgt. Mark Todd, of the Killeen Police Department, was outside the visitors center at Fort Hood on Thursday morning.

Soldiers present were also heroes, of course, with reports of shielding others from the danger as well as treating the wounded.

The petite police officer, who stands 5 feet 2 inches tall, said she was hit by three bullets. One struck the knuckle of her right hand; one passed through her right knee, then hit her left leg; and one pierced the femoral artery in her left thigh.

“I knew from the amount of blood and the color of the blood that was coming out” of the thigh wound that it was gravely serious, Munley said, sitting in a wheelchair with a blanket spread over her legs.

The soldiers who ran to help her knew it, too; even as she urged them to get pressure on the wound, they were fashioning a tourniquet.

Bleeding stanched, Munley immediately entered what “Today” hosts Ann Curry and Meredith Viera — themselves working mothers — dubbed “Mommy Mode.” She located her cellphone and arranged for someone to pick up her 2-year-old daughter (an older daughter, age 12, presumably gets home from school on her own).

“So the balancing act of motherhood and being a police officer did not end, even at that moment, for you,” said Curry.

“Absolutely not,” Munley said, smiling slightly. “It never does.”

Having your femoral artery cut is a life-threatening matter, and thanks to the training of our soldiers and law enforcement and the quick-action decisions they made that day, we can be grateful that more lives were not lost last Thursday.

A first responder during the Fort Hood shooting renders honors after aiding his fellow soldiers, November 5, 2009.
REUTERS/US Army III Corps/Handout