Ft. Hood Assassin - A Conflict of Allegiance that Needs Resolve.

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Jan 4, 2010 at 17:22

Only in the extreme mentality comparable to that of the Ft. Hood assassin would there be any attempt to associate Dr. Pipes as ( dare one say it ) a co-conspirator to the execution of the deeds perpetrated upon legitimate defenders of the American way of life. What we are determining are the motives of a sworn member of the United States military breaking an oath falsely sworn in order to commit the crimes against other members of the military who trusted him to be true to that oath. It points to the conflict of the sworn oath, that of state of mind and heart as the oath is sworn, and the defense of that oath upon pain, blood and death.

To those who are sworn blood enemies of the American way of life, one can only wonder at the mirth of the Ft. Hood assassin's like-minded fellows as they contemplate their own actions against the United States military. To those of a more moderate temperament than that of the Ft. Hood assassin, are we to still wonder about the allegiances similarly held, but currently restrained, yet which may prompt concerns considering the stated difference of ideologies to which one must swear to when becoming an American military member?

To be sure, we now know that the extremist mentality of the Ft. Hood assassin exceeded the norms typically imposed upon American military, and we are sure that there are other incidents where a member of the military went ballistic with complete indifference to a religious cause, yet that brings us to the more practical aspect of this situation. In the specific instance where one individual did rise above the radar of the typical norm and warning bells were ringing, the greater responsibility of those who knew there was a problem did not adequately act, in the same vein as the nonsense of stating how the homeland security 'system worked.' And now we are left wondering when it will happen again.

In this debate of how the system failed and trying to fix a cause to be dealt with, the argument of not trying to identify a potential enemy by who has similar beliefs to others (dare we say profiling, just like the same situation with the Delta attacker) thereby trying to separate them from the others as required, needs actions of courage from those with whom that responsibility exists. Otherwise, excuses embolden the planners, who need only cast a hand amongst the myriad recruits ready to die for allah.

This time it took a hero from Amsterdam to avert a worse situation than it could have been. He needed no knowledge of who the Delta attacker was to react. To the point, which is, had the system worked in correctly dealing with the attacker when his profile screamed for somebody to do the right thing, the man from Amsterdam should have been allowed to enjoy his visit to the United States, instead of needing to read the Middle East Forum while wondering if it will ever be safe to come here again.

As for the Ft. Hood assassin, do we still need to wonder if there are companions of a like-minded ideology that are in the verge as we being to step up efforts over there? That's a good question….one that the American military needs to determine before any more are lost to unfriendly fire.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".