Fort Hood Trial: Don’t Say the “T” Word

fort_hood_trialThe Fort Hood shootings constituted the largest massacre on a military base in the history of the United States. There is overwhelming evidence that the defendant’s motivations were religious in nature.  But as the trial ensues, the US government continues to bend over backwards to avoid calling the massacre an act of Islamic terrorism, consistent with Islamist demands not to associate Islam with terrorism.

On November 5, 2009, Army Major and psychiatrist Nidal Hasan took his semi-automatic pistol and headed to the Soldier Readiness Processing Center on the military base at Fort Hood.  There, soldiers were being cleared for deployment to Afghanistan and Iraq.  Hasan fired a spray of bullets killing 13 people and wounding over 30 others.  It was the worst massacre on a military base in US history.

Hasan had purchased a gun that would be efficient in a high-target environment and attended weeks of target practice.

Two days prior to the blood bath, Hasan gave away his furniture, disseminated business cards that read Soldier of Allah, and emailed Al-Awlaki saying he looked forward to joining him in the afterlife.

Dressed in traditional Islamic garb, Hasan appeared at the Fort Hood military base prepared to fulfil his Islamic duty to defend his Muslim brothers.

Upon his arrival to the scene, he bowed his head in prayer, then jumped up and screamed “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is the greatest!) before unloading his ammunition at unarmed soldiers.

Reports indicate that army officials were cognizant of Hasan’s increasing radicalization since 2005.  Hasan had given a seminar which revealed his Islamist ideology, during which he justified suicide bombings.  He also expressed increasing ambivalence about serving in the military since the US was “killing Muslims”.

Additionally, an investigation discovered conclusive evidence that Hasan had significant email communications with Anwar Al-Awlaki, a prominent Al-Qaeda operative who was a target of  Obama’s targeted killing drone program.  Hasan’s emails asked whether it was acceptable to kill innocents during jihad and when suicide bombings were justifiable.  He also regularly visited jihadi websites which condoned suicide bombings.

Hasan was charged in a Military Court under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with 13 counts of pre-meditated murder and 32 Counts of attempted murder.

He appeared before a board of mental health professionals to determine his fitness to stand trial.  At his hearing, Hasan confessed to the murders and claimed he did it to “defend Taliban leadership.”  He showed no remorse.  Never-the-less, the board ruled he was sane.

Hasan is representing himself at trial.  The trial commenced August 6, 2013.  During Hasan’s opening statements, he confessed the murders and blatantly asserted his jihadi motives.  He explained that he had “switched sides” and regards himself as mujahideen.

The prosecution has had almost 90 witnesses and Hasan has engaged in virtually no cross-exam.  Some believe that he is purposely leading a strategy of defenselessness in order to achieve martyrdom.  Though he denies it, Hasan’s past statements indicate that he wished he had been killed so he’d become a martyr and that government execution would still qualify him as such.

So the question remains, how should Hasan’s mass murder be characterized?

An independent commission conducted an investigation of the Fort Hood shootings. DoD released its report in January 2010.  It found that the Pentagon was unprepared to defend itself against internal threats.  DoD and other government agencies have characterized the massacre as “workplace violence” and omitted any mention of Islamist ideology or terrorist behavior.

The leaders of the investigation stated that their concern was “actions and effects, not necessarily motives”.  And, Army Chief of Staff General George W. Casey proclaimed that “as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.”

The FBI determined that because Hasan had no co-conspirators, further investigation was unnecessary.

In his public address and at the eulogy, President Obama also refused to acknowledge the role of Islamic terrorism in the massacre.

Yet motive is what distinguishes one type of homicide from another.  A homicide victim is equally dead regardless of motive.  But our legal system and moral code mandate that intent be taken into account when determining what, if any punishment should be accorded.

The omission of the terrorist motives in the Fort Hood massacre is resulting in the denial of purple hearts for the fallen soldiers, and a denial of medical benefits and financial compensation for the survivors.

Though the UCMJ does not have terrorism in its code as a possible charge, the military court could have waived jurisdiction, allowing Hasan to be prosecuted in Federal Court where a charge of domestic terrorism would have been in order.

Even if Hasan was not criminally charged with terrorism, the government could make a political determination that this was a terrorist act, allowing the victims to be properly compensated.  DoD officials claimed that Hasan could have argued he couldn’t get a fair trial due to accusations of criminal liability.

However, Hasan has already admitted criminal guilt.  Therefore, it is more likely that the government’s characterization of the massacre as workplace violence was made in line with its pattern of denial regarding Islamist ideology.

This Administration has rewritten all national security training material to delete all reference to Islamic terrorism and has launched an aggressive campaign of interfaith dialogue and  “peer pressure and shaming” to stifle all debate on the issue of Islamism.

The Administration has also formed close alliances with Islamist organizations in a quest to silence all speech critical of Islam, in a manner tantamount to blasphemy codes.

Free speech constitutes a human right and is critical to maintaining the cause of freedom.  It is especially important to allow open debate on the nature of national security threats and their motivational ideology.

Denying the threat of Islamic radicalism has consequences.  Resulting policies hamper America’s ability to defeat those that wish us harm.  Whether the Benghazi attacks, the Fort Hood massacre or other Islamic terrorist attacks, most Americans realize that purging the language does not eradicate threats.

This awareness does not apply to the Administration, however, where the folly continues.

This article was commissioned by The Legal Project, an activity of the Middle East Forum.

Deborah Weiss, Esq. is a regular contributor to FrontPage Magazine and the Washington Times.  She is a contributing author of “Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Terrorist Network” (Palgrave MacMillan, 2011).  A partial listing of her work can be found at

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  


  • bluffcreek1967

    The Communist/Leftist march through our American institutions is certainly evident in the trial of Major Nidal Hasan. The Left has polluted everything, including our military, and political-correctness rules the thinking of our politicians, educators, and judges. What kind of court is this when the defendant not only admits to his murderous deed, but openly declares WHY he did it and sets forth his reasons? Yet, all of this is ignored, downplayed or not allowed into evidence because it runs counter to the politically-correct narrative that it had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction!

    • Carmichael

      I like your website, Ambrose.

      • bluffcreek1967

        Thanks Carmichael! Tell your friends.

  • ziggy zoggy

    The Army chief of staff thinks “diversity” is more important than the lives of its soldiers. Utterly insane. Is that what America fights for now? Diversity is a code word for non-White, non-male and non-Christian. A military is supposed to be a fighting force, not a propaganda arm for the left.

    • David of Edinburgh

      ‘Diversity’ is simply a word transformed into a concept that perpetuates division.

    • davarino

      I agree ziggy,this diversity B$ has gone out of control. Its like all the robots line up with the montra of the day and repeat some of the stupidest things ever heard. We are supposed to believe that diversity is the most important thing, above anything else. Diversity will cure the economy, because all these other cultures have so much to add. Diversity will make the military better some how, from the very important input from these other cultures. What do these other cultures have to add? If they were so great their countries would be great, but their not. We have very little to learn from them.

  • TheOrdinaryMan

    Deliberately killing American soldiers–an act of war, whether you call it terrorism or not. Hasan has admitted to making war on U.S. troops. Thus calling the murders & woundings “workplace violence,” and the rewriting of all training material, to omit references to terrorism and/or jihad, is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, in time of war. Treason on Obama’s part, no?

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Deliberately killing American soldiers–an act of war, whether you call it terrorism or not.

      In this case, it was clearly an act of war because jihad, in stark contrast to terrorism, is holy war in the cause of Allah for the establishment/expansion of Islam and waged only by Islamic culture alone against all other religions and all infidels, while terrorism, on the other hand, is perpetrated for all kinds of various political causes and perpetrated by people from all societies and cultures. In other words, jihad and terrorism are two very different and distinct manifestations altogether. Indeed, Nidal Hasan fashions himself to be a Mujahideen, holy warrior fighting in the cause of Allah in defense of the Islamic Empire. Thus, if his actions were not acts of war, then acts of war don’t exists.

  • Poupic

    Just ask Hassan why he murdered US soldiers in Fort Hood. He’ll tell you!

  • tagalog

    The UCMJ is what it is, but the UCMJ also follows the Constitution, and the Constitution criminalizes treason and defines it as making war on the United States, or giving aid and comfort to its enemies. The Constitutions also prescribes the death penalty for treason.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Don’t Say the “T” Word

    Okay I won’t because jihad, in stark contrast to terrorism, is holy fighting in the cause of Allah for the establishment/expansion of Islam and is waged against infidels by Muslim society and culture alone, while terrorism, on the other hand, is perpetrated for all sorts of various political causes and by people from all societies and cultures. Moreover, terrorism unlike jihad is always and only violent, while jihad, on the other hand, is both violent and non-violent, but overall astronomically far more non-violent relative to violent. Indeed, mass Muslim immigration to the West, which is really stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad for the eventual nefarious purpose of demographic conquest, is far more ubiquitous relative to violent jihad attacks. Moreover, it also facilitates violent jihad attacks that are misconstrued as being terrorism by both Dhimmicrats and Republicans on our homeland.

    It’s only hypocritical Republicans blinded by political correctness that pillory BHO and the unhinged Left for being too political correct to acknowledge terrorism at the same time those same hypocritical Republicans pillory people like me for pointing out the truth.

    • guest

      what are you smoking ?

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Ah…a hypocritical Republican blinded to the hilt by political correctness!

      • Northstar

        He’s a Muslim troll.

        • kikorikid

          OYM, you are a master of taqiyya..
          Your dissimilitude is apparent and striking.
          Hasan commited a terrorist act while
          carrying out JIHAD.
          “Workplace Violence” is used to avoid
          blaspheme and therefore remain Shariah Compliant.

          • Northstar

            Anyone who claims not to understand that terrorism is a form of Jihad is a troll with a disruptive agenda.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Anyone too dumb to understand that jihad and terrorism are really two very different and distinct manifestations altogether is a gullible useful idiot infidel and a mentally incompetent loon.

    • kikorikid

      80% of ALL terror acts are acts of Jihad carried out
      by Islamic Jihadist.
      OYM The only thing I sense when I read your

      • ObamaYoMoma

        80% of ALL terror acts are acts of Jihad carried out
        by Islamic Jihadist.

        It isn’t difficult for most people to understand, but apparently you aren’t most people. Anyway, jihad, in stark contrast to terrorism, is holy fighting in the cause of Allah for the establishment/expansion of Islam and it is always and only waged by Muslims alone, while terrorism, on the other hand, is not even an Islamic manifestation, as it is perpetrated for various political causes unrelated to Islam and also perpetrated by people of all societies and cultures.

        Furthermore, jihad, again in stark contrast to terrorism, is both non-violent and violent, but overall astronomically far more non-violent relative to violent, while terrorism, as its name implies is always and only violent. In other words, jihad and terrorism are not one and the same thing, but instead two very different and distinct manifestations altogether, with one being a manifestation specifically and only of Islamic culture, while the other is a widespread manifestation of all cultures and societies.

        Indeed, mass Muslim immigration to the West is really stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad for the nefarious purpose of demographic conquest and it is astronomically far more ubiquitous relative to violent jihad attacks such as the 9/11 violent jihad attacks, for instance. Additionally, mass Muslim immigration is also used to facilitate violent jihad attacks in the West as well. Now, because jihad is always conflated as being terrorism, which again is always and only violent, the many non-violent varieties of jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration to the West for the nefarious purpose of stealth demographic conquest, because it isn’t violent, manifests totally unopposed throughout the West today.

        Hence, it is vitally important that the West learns to understand the stark differences and obvious distinctions between what is jihad and what is terrorism so that it can adequately defend itself from the scourge of Islam before it is too late.

        One more thing, Ron Paul kooks and self-hating leftwing loons love to blame America first and especially American foreign policy and American capitalism for generating terrorists. However, Muslims aren’t terrorists. They are jihadists instead, and they are not motivated by American foreign policy or American capitalism, as jihad is the highest pillar of Islam and also a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon all Muslims in one form or another, as the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is the subjugation into Islamic totalitarianism of all religions and all infidels through jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law. Therefore Ron Paul kooks and self-hating loons are incredibly mentally deficient.

        you are a MUSLIM TROLL!!!!!!

        And you are a brainwashed loon!

        • kikorikid

          Nobody gives a sh.. about non-violent Jihad.
          You keep repeating that as though that
          somehow mitigates Violent Jihad. YES, terror
          attacks are used by many groups. It is
          your dog breath Muslim Jihadist that have
          carried out over 21,000 lethal Terror attacks
          since 9-11-01. Likewise nobody gives a
          sh.. that violent Jihad is carried out under
          the “text and tenants” of Islam. That is a piss
          poor excuse to commit murder. AND that
          is what your Muslim Jihadist are doing.
          It is becoming apparent to more and more
          that the proper way to handle this contemporary
          scourge of mankind is thru the use of force.
          I have no fear of Islam so there is no PHOBIA,
          I have an endless anger. I think the Mongols
          had it right.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Actually moonbat, non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad is the primary mechanism in which Islam created its empire. As a matter of fact, in the next 30 to 50 years, Europe will begin becoming Islamic and totalitarian, but it won’t be from violent jihad you moonbat, it will be from non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad. Whew…talk about mentally deficient!

          • kikorikid

            I am quite familiar with “Civilization Jihad and
            Creeping Shariah”, so are many others and
            more coming. You talk as though all of what
            you say is inevitable. Talk about delusional.
            and arrogant. As for the U.S.A., I’d say we
            have close to three hundred million people here
            who will not give up their BLTs and BBQ
            shortribs. The historic “Islamic Empire” was
            established with by the sword and the use
            of “All strategems of

          • ObamaYoMoma

            You are an intellectual midget!

          • kikorikid

            Your statement that in “30 to 50 years” is a very
            good example of obfuscating Taqiyya.
            There are already No-Go zones all over
            Europe and the UK. Islamist have managed
            to have the majority of food products produced
            in Australia marked as Hallal.
            The “Arabic National Museum” in Dearborn, Mich.
            seems fine sitting across from city hall but that is
            only unti you look on the roof and see the
            dome of the mosque. Taqiyya in action.
            Your Muslim million man march,scheduled
            for 9/11 is being answered with a TWO million
            man Biker march,you should go.
            If or when you ever get the courage to
            start marking off No-Go zones in the
            United States you WILL run smack dab
            into the current event of American vigilantyism.
            See ya there!

  • geneww1938

    Avoid any reference to what enables a Muslim instant access to heaven since without martyrdom or jihad for Allah, their acceptance to heaven is based on their good deeds for Allah out-weighing their other deed. With life in prison where his good deed are limited would be a mild form of where he will spend eternity unless he repents …

  • tokoloshiman

    This is outrageous and mind did a once proud nation sink to these pitiful depths and become such a wet sock as to become the laughing stock of the world.

  • Hewlett Harris

    We deserve anything Nidal Hasan does to this country. We worship..”The Law”.
    We bow before..”The Law”. “The Law” is our GOD.

    We allow this guy to stick the knife in time and time again. We allow him to insult us and to spit in our faces and just ask him to do it some more.

    Yes, We deserve whatever he does to us. We are beyond ALL HELP.

  • Ron Lewenberg

    This isn’t terrorism or work place violence. It is Jihad. The proper “t” word is TREASON.Hassan by his own admission and defense adhered to our enemies and waged war on America.

    • kikorikid


  • Terry Zach

    He’s a terrorist. Cut his junk off and hang him with a rope braided from pig skin.

  • kikorikid

    The Commander in Chief stopped anyone in authority from
    calling the shooting “terrorism” as that would be a blaspheme,
    and not Shariah Compliant.