It’s the Teleprompter’s fault no doubt. Next time they’ll have to start that thing early.
(old Ol' Glory rejection)
Both Allahpundit and I referenced this blast from the past at the time Barack Obama bowed to Abdullah earlier this year. It’s worth posting again, not just because Obama pulled another boneheaded protocol violation and bowed to an emperor, but in this case bowed to the same emperor with whom Bill Clinton almost committed the same protocol violation. Douglas Jehr, in a 1994 New York Times report, made it clear that had Clinton actually executed a full bow, it would have destroyed a precedent dating to the founding of the Republic:
It wasn’t a bow, exactly. But Mr. Clinton came close. He inclined his head and shoulders forward, he pressed his hands together. It lasted no longer than a snapshot, but the image on the South Lawn was indelible: an obsequent President, and the Emperor of Japan.
Canadians still bow to England’s Queen; so do Australians. Americans shake hands. If not to stand eye-to-eye with royalty, what else were 1776 and all that about?...
Guests invited to a white-tie state dinner at the White House (a Clinton Administration first) were instructed to address the Emperor as “Your Majesty,” not “Your Highness” or, worse, “King.” And in what one Administration aide called “some emperor thing,” an Army general was cautioned that he should not address the Emperor Akihito at all as he escorted him to the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery.
But the “thou need not bow” commandment from the State Department’s protocol office maintained a constancy of more than 200 years. Administration officials scurried to insist that the eager-to-please President had not really done the unthinkable.
The New York Times didn’t have much to say after Obama’s bow to Abdullah despite having scolded Clinton in this manner for almost bowing to Akihito. Now that Obama has done “the unthinkable” twice, and this time to Akihito, will the New York Times have anything to say about it? Will any of the national news media inquire as to whether the Obama administration has changed American protocol from its 233-year norm of not bowing to royalty, and exactly what “hope and change” that represents?
Defending the decision of the United States to drop nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during WWII is not a comfortable thing to do when you're in Japan. But if you're President of the United States, you must do it. Diplomatically, yes. With sympathy for the civilian victims, yes. But you must do it.
But when it came time today for Barack Obama to fulfill that fundamental duty, he failed. The very first reporter [from Fuji TV] called on at the joint press conference with PBO and Japanese PM Hatoyama in Tokyo today put the question to Pres. Obama in blunt and explicit terms:
JAPANESE REPORTER: What is your understanding of the historical meaning of the A-bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Do you think it was the right decision?
Obama took a deep breath, paused . . . and punted.
PBO gave a halting response that utterly failed to answer the question. The closest he came was to observe that Japan "has a unique perspective on the issue of nuclear weapons as a consequence of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I'm sure it helps to motivate the Prime Minister's deep interest in this issue."
The reporter tried again: "do you believe the US dropping of nuclear weapons on --"
Obama cut him off, choosing to answer an unrelated question on the situation in North Korea.
Will the MSM report Obama's duck and cover?
~ Theodore Roosevelt 1907"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
"The effort to keep our citizenship divided against itself," the colonel continued, "by the use of the hyphen and along the lines of national origin is certain to a breed of spirit of bitterness and prejudice and dislike between great bodies of our citizens. If some citizens band together as German-Americans or Irish-Americans, then after a while others are certain to band together as English-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans, and every such banding together, every attempt to make for political purposes a German-American alliance or a Scandinavian-American alliance, means down at the bottom an effort against the interest of straight-out American citizenship, an effort to bring into our nation the bitter Old World rivalries and jealousies and hatreds." (Snopes)
JERUSALEM – Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign for the Democrat nomination deliberately appealed to white supremacy, fear and anxiety, charged longtime Barack Obama colleague and Weatherman terrorist William Ayers and wife, Bernardine Dohrn.
In a co-authored article in the socialist Monthly Review magazine, the two radicals argued last year's national elections had "racist" undertones and that President Obama's ascent to power can be used to "build a new society."
"[Hillary] Clinton flagrantly appealed to white voters' identity as 'workers' or 'women' – offering white people any reason to vote against Obama without saying he's black – and followed the ancient and dismal road of racial discourse that appeals to white supremacy, fear and anxiety," wrote Ayers and Dohrn.
The two referenced a New York Times opinion piece by feminist activist Gloria Steinem, "Women are Never Front-Runners," written on the eve of the New Hampshire primary. Steinem argued the gender barrier had not yet been broken and asked, "Why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one?"
Ayers and Dohrn charged Steinem had asserted a "superior victim status on the part of white, powerful women."
The duo went on to claim the 2008 presidential elections had racist undertones.
"The invisible race talk was about 'blue collar' or 'working class' or 'mainstream' or 'small town' or 'hockey mom' or 'Joe the plumber,' but we were meant to think 'white,'" they wrote.
Continued Ayers and Dohrn: "All the talk of Senator Barack Obama's exotic background, all the references to him as 'unknown, 'untested,' a 'stranger,' or a 'symbolic candidate,' or 'alien,' a 'wildcard,"'or an 'elitist.' ... The discourse was all about race, us and them, understood by everyone in the United States even when the words African American, black or white are not spoken."...
An attorney for Sarah Palin has delivered a letter threatening legal action against an anti-Palin blogger who was the source of a divorce rumor that the attorney for the former Alaska governor called "categorically false."
Publication of the letter at a Web site that repeated the rumor has uncovered circumstantial evidence that the anti-Palin blogger "Gryphen" is a kindergarten teacher at an Anchorage elementary school.
Saturday, the rumor that Todd and Sarah Palin were divorcing created an online uproar. CNN stringer/anti-Palin blogger Dennis Zaki published a thinly-sourced "news" item asserting that "multiple sources" had confirmed the rumor first published by "Gryphen" at his Immoral Majority blog.
Zaki obtained a copy of a letter from Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein, ordering "Gryphen" to retract the allegations -- calling them "complete fabrications, false and defamatory" -- or face legal action. The Van Flein letter, published by Zaki with the name of the recipient blacked out, ended with this sentence:
"If you do not have an attorney, please let me know if you want to be served with the summons and complaint at the kindergarten where you assist or at your residence." (Emphasis added.)
By publishing the letter, Zaki inadvertantly provided valuable information to an anonymous tipster who compiled online research indicating the identity of "Gryphen," whose Immoral Minority blog received more than 170,000 visits in July. Blogger Dan Riehl received the same information.
The tipster also forwarded examples of the Immoral Minority blog's attacks on Palin, where "Gryphen" used vulgar obscene language in reference to Mrs. Palin, including the so-called "Trig Truther" suggestion that the governor was not actually the mother of her fifth child:
"Wherever Trig came from he has proved to be a very valuable asset to Sarah Palin indeed. But just where did Trig Palin come from? As of today, as of this minute, and after over a month of searching I cannot tell you. I simply do not know for certain. I do know however where he did not come from. He did not issue forth from Sarah Palin. He may have been conceived inside her house (The jury is still out on that one), but he was not conceived in her uterus. On that one fact I have absolutely no doubt."
-- June 6, 2009I am currently awaiting confirmation from Alaska sources of the tipster's circumstantial identification of "Gryphen," who has been inadvertantly put in career jeopardy by his friend Zaki's publication of the Van Flein letter.
Media in Alaska will not be able to ignore the news that the state's most notorious anti-Palin blogger is a kindergarten teacher at public school. Having spent part of my early career as a newspaper reporter covering the education beat, I can predict that "Gryphen" will soon at the center of a maelstrom of controversy....
...Police said that Travis was agitated earlier Monday and that Herold had given him the anti-anxiety drug Xanax in some tea. Police said the drug had not been prescribed for the 14-year-old chimp. In humans, Xanax can cause memory loss, lack of coordination, reduced sex drive and other side effects. It can also lead to aggression in people who were unstable to begin with, said Dr. Emil Coccaro, chief of psychiatry at the University of Chicago Medical Center....
Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, reportedly obtained the business cards over the Internet. In addition to listing his profession and contact information, the cards contain a discrete reference to his religion: "SoA(SWT)."
Watchdogs say the first letters are shorthand among militant Muslims to "soldier of Allah." The last letters refer to "Subhanahu Wa Ta'all," which means "glory to God."
The business cards were among numerous discoveries in Hasan's apartment of interest to investigators, who also are looking into whether Hasan wired money to Pakistan before last week's massacre....
Feds seize four mosques, NYC skyscraper belonging to Iran-linked nonprofit organization (Jihad Watch) --- The nonprofit organization, the Alavi Foundation, may be owned by the Iranian government.
(AP) NEW YORK — Federal prosecutors Thursday took steps to seize four U.S. mosques and a Fifth Avenue skyscraper owned by a nonprofit Muslim organization long suspected of being secretly controlled by the Iranian government.
In what could prove to be one of the biggest counter-terrorism seizures in U.S. history, prosecutors filed a civil complaint in federal court seeking the forfeiture of more than $500 million in assets of the Alavi Foundation and an alleged front company.
The assets include Islamic centers in New York City, Maryland, California and Houston, more than 100 acres in Virginia, and a 36-story office tower in New York.
Seizing the properties would be a sharp blow against Iran, which has been accused by the U.S. government of bankrolling terrorism and seeking a nuclear bomb....
Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and President Barack Obama focused on the single subject of Iran when they met in Washington Monday, Nov. 9 - as did Netanyahu and French president Nicolas Sarkozy in Paris, Wednesday, Nov. 11. Iran also occupied the meeting between defense minster Ehud Barak and US defense secretary Robert Gates Monday. DEBKAfile's Washington sources disclose that briefings to the media and joint communiqués were disallowed for the sake of blacking out the content of these conversations.
It’s very fair to send people who disregard the federal mandate to buy health insurance to prison, Nancy Pelosi says, because otherwise they’ll assault citizens … with a bill for medical services … or something. Apparently, the occasionally unhealthy have become such a security risk that we need to imprison them for opting to pay their own way. Infidels Are Cool has the key exchange:
... If nothing else, it reminds us that statism always comes with handcuffs, and those cuffs always get explained by either fairness or patriotism. In this case, Pelosi uses both.
(Amherst, NY) — In response to the recent tragic events at Fort Hood, Texas, the Center for Inquiry, a secularist think tank, has released a statement/editorial from Ibn Warraq, Islamic scholar and leading figure in Quranic criticism.
Warraq is a senior research fellow at the Center for Inquiry and author of five books, including Why I Am Not a Muslim and Defending the West (both published by Prometheus Books). The statement follows below.
....It is time to abandon apologetics, and political correctness. Not all Muslims are terrorists. Not all Muslims are implicated in the horrendous events of September 11, 2001 — or of November 5, 2009. However, to pretend that Islam has nothing to do with 9/11 or the Fort Hood massacre is willfully to ignore the obvious. To leave Islam out of the equation means to forever misinterpret events. Without Islam, the long-term strategy and individual acts of violence by Osama bin Laden and his followers make little sense. Without Islam, the West will go on being incapable of understanding our terrorist enemies, and hence will be incapable to deal with them. Without Islam, neither is it possible to comprehend the barbarism of the Taliban, the position of women and non-Muslims in Islamic countries, or — now– the murders attributed to Major Hasan.
We are confronted, after all, with Islamic terrorists; and we must take the Islamic component seriously. Westerners in general and Americans in particular no longer seem able to grasp the passionate religious convictions of Islamic terrorists. It is this passionate conviction, directed against the West and against non-Muslims in general, that drives them. They are truly, and literally, God-intoxicated fanatics. If we refuse to understand that, we cannot understand them....
Islam like Christianity and Judaism are wrong and are – in large parts – morally repugnant. Unlike, Christianity and Judaism though, fundamentalist Islam is actively trying to kill me and people like me around the world.
Maybe they should start “stepping up security” at churches instead of mosques. The Fort Hood shooting was a perfect opportunity for Islamists to show off their non-existent victimhood. Yet we have heard any stories of hate crimes against Muslims since the Fort Hood shooting.
I love to point this out. The term "Global Warming" has been dropped and in its stead "Climate Change" has been adopted. Who could say "climate change" doesn't happen? In their minds eye once you admit the "climate changes," then you are almost admitting that you support their viewpoint. Again, it is similiar to your evolutionary biology professor -- after you have brought up a point of contention -- asking, "do you beilieve in "change?". One should always add the caveat to you answer: "Why yes, I believe there can be minor "changes" in a species or "kind," however [here's the caveat], I do not believe millimeter changes in the size and thickness of finch beaks prove by any means that a man came from a rock that was once molten." Terms and definitions are very important in this debate/discussion.
Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist from Adelaide University, argues that a recent rise in temperature around the world is caused by solar cycles and other "extra terrestrial" forces.
He said carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, widely blamed for global warming, is a natural phenomenon caused by volcanoes erupting.
"We cannot stop carbon emissions because most of them come from volcanoes," he said. "It is a normal element cycled around in the earth and my science, which is looking back in time, is saying we have had a planet that has been a green, warm wet planet 80 per cent of the time. We have had huge climate change in the past and to think the very slight variations we measure today are the result of our life - we really have to put ice blocks in our drinks."
Most mainstream scientists agree that the recent warming period was caused by an increase in carbon dioxide since the industrial revolution.
However Prof Plimer said the world has experienced three periods of cooling since 1850 and furthermore carbon dioxide was increasing during many of those cooler periods.
"If we had only had warming, then there would be a connect between co2 and temperature, there is not," he added.
Prof Plimer has come under attack as a "denialist poster boy" whose theories are in danger of stopping the world from tackling the grave dangers of climate change.
But he said the scientists "frightening people witless by following the party line" are motivated by politics and research funding.
"They are taking advantage of the current situation. That is understandable. In previous times people got wonderful research grants in a war against cancer and they achieved a lot of money for that. Now we have a war on climate change and we have a huge number of people out there who have their career staked on it and are beneficiaries of this process."
Vicky Pope, Head of Climate Change Advice at the Met Office, said it is widely accepted that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has doubled in the last 200 years and as a result the globe is warming.
She said there are "natural variations" in temperature caused by the weather as well as natural phenomenon like El Nino and human effects like pollution, but overall the climate has been getting hotter and has reached its warmest period in recent years.
"The basic physics is that if carbon dioxide increases then the temperature goes up," she said.
A number of "climate change sceptics" will be giving talks in the run up to a key UN Summit in Copenhagen in December when the world is expected to agree an international deal to stop global warming.
Nine some months out of office, and the miserable job Obama is doing has started to rehabilitate the reputation of George W. Bush.
The times, they are a changin'.
Note - I was a proud Co-Founder of Libertarians for Bush in 2004.If you have been reading us for any length of time, you know that we used to make fun of “Dubya” nearly every day…parroting the same comedic bits we heard in our Democrat circles, where Bush is still, to this day, lampooned as a chimp, a bumbling idiot, and a poor, clumsy public speaker.
Oh, how we RAILED against Bush in 2000…and how we RAILED against the surge in support Bush received post-9/11 when he went to Ground Zero and stood there with his bullhorn in the ruins on that hideous day.
We were convinced that ANYONE who was president would have done what Bush did, and would have set that right tone of leadership in the wake of that disaster. President Gore, President Perot, President Nader, you name it. ANYONE, we assumed, would have filled that role perfectly.
Well, we told you before how much the current president, Dr. Utopia, made us realize just how wrong we were about Bush. We shudder to think what Dr. Utopia would have done post-9/11. He would have not gone there with a bullhorn and struck that right tone. More likely than not, he would have been his usual fey, apologetic self and waxed professorially about how evil America is and how justified Muslims are for attacking us, with a sidebar on how good the attacks were because they would humble us.
Honestly, we don’t think President Gore would have been much better that day. The world needed George W. Bush, his bullhorn, and his indominable spirit that day…and we will forever be grateful to this man for that.
As we will always be grateful for what George and Laura Bush did this week, with no media attention, when they very quietly went to Ft. Hood and met personally with the families of the victims of this terrorist attack.
by Clifford Thies
Isn't it time for Muslims to do something about their Radical Co-Religionists?
A 23-year old American man, a convert to Islam, was charged with statutory rape for his so-called marriage to a 14-year old girl, in a deal arranged between him and the girl's immigrant Muslim stepfather. According to the two men, they did it all according to Muslim tradition, with the prospective husband paying the proper price. The purpose of the marriage was to prevent the girl from becoming sexually-active. The two men consummated the deal at the mosque they attend. The girl was not present. The 23-year old man then repeatedly had sexual relations with the girl.
From the Kansas City Star, Nov. 9:
Vincent Mosby signed a marriage contract and paid a dowry in a religious ceremony in August, police said.
Mosby, 23, of Kansas City didn’t legally wed his 14-year-old bride, however, because Missouri law won’t allow it without a judge’s order. Police said she was pressured into the union because her mother and stepfather thought she was going to be sexually active with a boy her age.
Although the bride’s stepfather arranged the “marriage,” according to court records, other relatives frowned upon the union and told police in late August. The relatives also took the girl to protect her from further sexual abuse, according to court records.
The practice of Muslim men marrying girls as young as 8 or 9 is common place in certain parts of the Middle East. Unfortunately for the two men, this isn't Somalia, Sudan or Gaza; This is the U.S. state of Missouri where a judge has to approve marriages involving 14-year old girls.
Perhaps it may come as news to these two men, but here in America, we don't believe in having sex with children, we don't sell or barter females like cattle, and slavery was outlawed over 150 years ago.
Oh, another thing, the American Muslim-convert denies that it was him who shot three times at the home of some of the girl's maternal relatives who disapproved of the so-called marriage. Why should women think they have any say in a deal brokered by men?
If I were a Muslim, and I am not, I suppose I would think that stories such as this would give a bad impression of my religion; well, unless I were really wacko myself. At some point, loyalty to my co-religionists has to be subordinated to loyalty to the greater good. Such conflicts are never easy to resolve. The use of mosques by radicals, the condoning of the practices of Muslims in backward nations, including in particular the subjugation of women, and not cooperating with law enforcement in the war on terror, these things make Islam look like a primitive, tribal-based animist religion.
Muslim immigrants, and even converts like Mosby need to learn to respect our culture and our long-established traditions and laws. If they don't they've got two choices: Go to jail for a very long time, or get the hell out of our country.
(H/t photo Creeping Sharia)
In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, we discovered that a failure to “connect the dots” left America unable to defend itself against 19 lunatics armed with boxcutters. The Fort Hood massacre had far fewer casualties, but all of them could have been avoided had the FBI informed the Pentagon that one of its high-ranking officers had a new al-Qaeda pen pal in Yemen. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Pentagon never heard from the FBI or other intelligence services that Major Nidal Hasan had begun corresponding with a radical Islamist imam in the hotbed of al-Qaeda terrorism:
The Pentagon said it was never notified by U.S. intelligence agencies that they had intercepted emails between the alleged Fort Hood shooter and an extremist imam until after last week’s bloody assaults, raising new questions about whether the government could have helped prevent the attack.
A top defense official said federal investigators didn’t tell the Pentagon they were looking into months of contacts between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and Anwar al-Awlaki. The imam knew three of the Sept. 11 hijackers and hailed Maj. Hasan as a “hero” after the shooting last week at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead. …
A person familiar with the matter said a Pentagon worker on a terrorism task force overseen by the Federal Bureau of Investigation was told about the intercepted emails several months ago. But members of terror task forces aren’t allowed to share such information with their agencies, unless they get permission from the FBI, which leads the task forces.
In this case, the Pentagon worker, an employee from the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, helped make the assessment that Maj. Hasan wasn’t a threat, and the FBI’s “procedures for sharing the information were never used,” said the person familiar with the matter.
This is absurd. Anwar Aulaqi gets a number of mentions in the 9/11 Commission report for his contacts with at least two of the 9/11 hijackers. Anyone communicating with Aulaqi after the attacks, especially after Aulaqi relocated to Yemen and established his Islamist jihadist website and recruitment efforts, should have been immediately reported to the Army’s chain of command, especially a high-ranking officer.
From the 9/11 Commission report, page 221:
Another potentially significant San Diego contact for Hazmi and Mihdhar was Anwar Aulaqi, an imam at the Rabat mosque. Born in New Mexico and thus a U.S. citizen, Aulaqi grew up in Yemen and studied in the United States on a Yemeni government scholarship. We do not know how or when Hazmi and Mihdhar first met Aulaqi. The operatives may even have met or at least talked to him the same day they first moved to San Diego. Hazmi and Mihdhar reportedly respected Aulaqi as a religious figure and developed a close relationship with him.33
When interviewed after 9/11, Aulaqi said he did not recognize Hazmi’s name but did identify his picture. Although Aulaqi admitted meeting with Hazmi several times, he claimed not to remember any specifics of what they discussed. He described Hazmi as a soft-spoken Saudi student who used to appear at the mosque with a companion but who did not have a large circle of friends.34
Aulaqi left San Diego in mid-2000, and by early 2001 had relocated to Virginia. As we will discuss later, Hazmi eventually showed up at Aulaqi’s mosque in Virginia, an appearance that may not have been coincidental. We have been unable to learn enough about Aulaqi’s relationship with Hazmi and Mihdhar to reach a conclusion.35
In sum, although the evidence is thin as to specific motivations, our overall impression is that soon after arriving in California, Hazmi and Mihdhar sought out and found a group of young and ideologically like-minded Muslims with roots in Yemen and Saudi Arabia, individuals mainly associated with Mohdar Abdullah and the Rabat mosque. The al Qaeda operatives lived openly in San Diego under their true names, listing Hazmi in the telephone directory. They managed to avoid attracting much attention.
And more from page 230:
At the Dar al Hijra mosque, Hazmi and Hanjour met a Jordanian named Eyad al Rababah. Rababah says he had gone to the mosque to speak to the imam, Aulaqi, about finding work. At the conclusion of services, which normally had 400 to 500 attendees, Rababah says he happened to meet Hazmi and Hanjour. They were looking for an apartment; Rababah referred them to a friend who had one to rent. Hazmi and Hanjour moved into the apartment, which was in Alexandria.75
Some FBI investigators doubt Rababah’s story. Some agents suspect that Aulaqi may have tasked Rababah to help Hazmi and Hanjour. We share that suspicion, given the remarkable coincidence of Aulaqi’s prior relationship with Hazmi. As noted above, the Commission was unable to locate and interview Aulaqi. Rababah has been deported to Jordan, having been convicted after 9/11 in a fraudulent driver’s license scheme.76
The Commission was unable to locate and interview Aulaqi, but Hasan found him without too much trouble. The Commission also makes it clear that they themselves suspected Aulaqi of an operational role in 9/11, and that counterterrorism agents shared that suspicion. This was no run-of-the-mill radical imam, but a man suspected of helping to murder almost 3,000 people in the worst terrorist attack in history.
And eight years later, no one thought it was suspicious or worthy of further investigation that a high-ranking officer in the Army was communicating with a man suspected of being one of the architects of 9/11?
There’s a failure to connect dots, and then there’s willful blindness. This appears to be the latter. Something is very, very wrong with our present counterterrorism effort if contacts between a military officer and a known radical imam in Yemen gets shrugged off like this, especially with a figure likely part of the 9/11 attacks.
As if a pen-pal relationship with a suspected 9/11 plotter wasn’t bad enough, ABC News now reports that the suspected shooter in the Fort Hood massacre may have had other ties to jihadists. Those dots should have been connected before 14 people died in a hail of gunfire:
A senior government official tells ABC News that investigators have found that alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan had “more unexplained connections to people being tracked by the FBI” than just radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. The official declined to name the individuals but Congressional sources said their names and countries of origin were likely to emerge soon.
Questions already surround Major Hasan’s contact with Awlaki, a radical cleric based in Yemen whom authorities consider a recruiter for al Qaeda. U.S. officials now confirm Hasan sent as many as 20 e-mails to Awlaki. Authorities intercepted the e-mails but later deemed them innocent or protected by the first amendment.
The FBI said it turned over the information to the Army, but Defense Department officials today denied that. One military investigator on a joint terror task force with the FBI was shown the e-mails, but they were never forwarded in a formal way to more senior officials at the Pentagon, and the Army did not learn of the contacts until after the shootings.
Awlaki (or in the 9/11 Commission report, Aulaqi) was bad enough. And the FBI knew about Aulaqi, unlike the Army, which was kept in the dark about Hasan’s correspondence. If they knew that Hasan had communicated with Aulaqi and other people on their terrorism watch lists, why didn’t they connect the dots? Why didn’t they at least inform Hasan’s chain of command?