Diane Sawyer -- either espousing her editorial fantasy or a quoting a third-hand comment from an anonymous "military wife" -- was dreadfully upset that the mass-murderer from Fort Hood was not named Smith. One can only imagine how thrilled she'd have been had he been named something like, oh I don't know, Palin.
From what I can deduce, had his name been Smith, it would be much easier for the Diane Sawyers of the Jurassic media to cover up what they fear really went on here. (In perhaps a related story, none of the 9-11 attackers were in the Smith family either.) And what appears to have gone wrong is that a poster-child for every wrong-headed, politically correct liberal program our great military has been forced to accept blew a gasket and took out thirteen unarmed American soldiers. Predictably blew a gasket, I might add.
While many facts have yet to be determined, what we do know is that a man not named Smith -- but named Hasan -- had some decidedly un-Smith-like beliefs, and he was rather adamant about espousing them. That is to say, this well-paid U.S. Army Major held some beliefs strangely coincident with the very people that most U.S. Army Majors are fighting. Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer the idea that sympathy with the enemy is called "treason" rather than the modern touchy-feely idea that it is simply a "healthy diversity."
Such diversity wasn't too damned healthy for about 45 soldiers, now was it? According to the coroner's report, many are even beyond sensitivity training at this point. Where is George Patton to slap some sense into someone when you need him?
We also know that a major who happens to be a devout follower of Islam -- the well documented religion of peace -- strode into one of the principal gathering points at Fort Hood and shot 40-some unarmed military personnel. Among them was a pregnant woman.
We also know that Major Hasan, quite consistent with many who follow Islam -- that well-documented religion of peace -- was quite taken with the idea of the Middle Eastern suicide bombers. He is known to have compared them with valiant U.S. soldiers throwing themselves on a grenade to save buddies. Now I hate to quibble, but isn't a suicide bomber actually the opposite of those diving on a grenade?
And while we're on the subject of Islam -- that well-documented religion of peace -- Hasan apparently agreed with Bin Laden's PR department that what the U.S. is doing in Afghanistan and Iraq is occupation. Further, the U.S. military is just a bunch of infidels. Hasan has indicated he was in favor of our losing the wars in both theatres.
Now in a country that would not stand for the idea of Derek Jeter switching to Philly red in the middle of the World Series, what sense does it make to have Major Hasan in our military? For crying out loud, "don't ask, don't tell" should not apply to the notion of whose side you are on!
In reality, though, this was not even a case of don't ask, don't tell. No one had to ask Major Hasan to tell people what he believed. He was against the war in Iraq, against the war in Afghanistan, and allegedly verbally pro-Allah as he was gunning down unarmed American soldiers.
Imagine if an American officer in World War II had shouted "Heil Hitler" as he killed unarmed soldiers. Would there be any soul-searching debate about "pre-traumatic stress syndrome" and other gobbledygook? And if his name were Schmidt -- oddly close to Smith actually -- would Diane Sawyer be in a snit?
Of course, this would never have happened in WWII. Things are different today. Somehow our military remains the best in the world while accommodating all kinds of fast-track programs for psychiatrist-officers whose names sound a lot like those on the roster at Gitmo while ignoring the detail that they might be anti-American.
And that's the real story here. He was not named Smith. He didn't act like a Smith or talk like a Smith or have allegiances like a Smith. He was so not-a-Smith that someone should have noticed. Or more to the point, our military should not be so eaten up with political correctness that the many who did notice were forced to shut up about it. This was so utterly predictable, which is to say utterly preventable.
That's not to say folks named Hasan should not be in the military. It just might be a good idea if they held onto some mundane, Smith-type attitudes, like perhaps being pro-American. This is not discrimination. All soldiers, regardless of their name, should be pro-American at a minimum. Surely this is logical.
Of course, what else is predictable is how the media is covering the story. In the words of an NPR report: "we know he took his faith seriously, but we can't say for sure that was a factor." Right. That's exactly what they say about anyone who bombs an abortion clinic, as we know. Finding out that Hasan is a follower of Islam is hard to discover in most reports, as was the fact that Eliot Spitzer was a Democrat.
Equally predictable is our President -- who is also not named Smith, by the way. Barack Hussein Obama was giving "shout-outs" to folks at a speech related to native Americans at the Department of the Interior shortly after the news of the Fort Hood tragedy broke. This is not George Bush rapidly finishing a two-minute story to the schoolkids he was already in front of after hearing the horrific news of 9-11 whispered into his ear. No. This was a President who had time to delay, cancel, or at least reprogram a very non-crucial photo op in light of the news.
The only thing missing was Jeremiah Wright hootin' and hollerin' about "America's chickens" and high-fiving and so on. I mean, God bleep America, we deserved it, didn't we? At the very least, Obama's reaction can charitably be characterized as cold. And not cool at all.
Now all we can hope is that the army and the FBI will have the courage to look into the reasons his name was not Smith, and what light that might shed on what happened. Like many, I suspect that there is a relationship there. We can only hope that the FBI will reverse their decision to not even "discuss" the idea that terrorism was involved.