Showing posts with label Fort Hood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fort Hood. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

Members of the Military Have a Right to Effective Self-Defense

(Photo: Army Sergeant First Class Michael Sauret) Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421983/guns-military-bases-soldiers-armed - Google Search

Since 2008, at least 34 service-members and civilians have died in multiple-casualty shootings at military facilities. Dozens more have been injured. Fort Hood, Little Rock, the Washington Navy Yard, Fort Hood again, and Chattanooga — the names are sadly familiar, with at least three attackers apparently sharing jihadist motivations.


 Reading the accounts of these attacks, they tend to share the same, terrible storylines. In each case there’s a deadly lag between the time of the attack and the first police response; in each case trained (but unarmed) warriors either desperately try to scramble to safety or throw themselves at attackers in suicidal, hopeless charges. In only one instance — at Chattanooga — is there evidence that a service-member fired shots in self-defense, and in that case he may have actually defied Department of Defense directives to attempt to save his own life and the lives of others.

It has never made much sense to mandate that America’s military bases and recruiting centers become, in essence, gun-free zones, where our most well-trained men and women live largely under the protection of civilian police. In 1992, when President George H. W. Bush’s administration implemented the policy, American soldiers were under threat from Islamic terrorists as they are now. Today, the nonsensical nature of the policy is just even more obvious, when we know that ISIS, al-Qaeda, and so-called “lone wolf” jihadists are actively seeking to kill American soldiers here at home. 



Thankfully, years overdue, the Department of Defense is taking steps to increase security and may at long last allow at least some of our warriors to defend themselves. Last Wednesday, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter issued a two-page memorandum in response to the “ongoing threat” from the deadly euphemism of the month, “Homegrown Violent Extremists.” In the memo, he noted that existing Pentagon policy includes the “option of additional armed personnel” for “security, law enforcement, and counterintelligence duties.” In other words, there is already some leeway to implement basic security measures (which raises a separate question as to why “additional armed personnel” hadn’t already been deployed). But he went further, directing “all Components to consider any additional protection measures including changes to policies and procedures that protect our force against the evolving threat.” He gave a short timeline, indicating that he wants to review proposals by August 21, in less than three weeks.



Saturday, August 1, 2015

HOMELAND SECURITY CHIEF: WE WON’T CALL CHATTANOOGA ‘ISLAMIC TERRORISM’ OUT OF RESPECT FOR MUSLIMS

THEY HAVE NO RESPECT FOR US, WHY SHOULD WE HAVE ANY FORM THEM??
Why won’t the Obama administration call Fort Hood Islamic Terrorism? Why aren’t they calling Chattanooga Islamic Terrorism? Because it’s disrespect to Muslims and Islam is about peace:
ARUTZ SHEVA – Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson announced the policy this past Friday at Aspen Institute’s annual security forum in Washington, D.C. He explained that though it was a Muslim terrorist who shot to death four unarmed Marines in Tennessee two weeks ago, the government will call the attack, and other similar ones, “violent extremism” and not “Islamic terrorism” – out of respect for the Muslim community.
Johnson said it is “critical” to refrain from the “Islamic” label in order to “build trust” among Muslims.
The Tennessee murderer, Mohammad Abdulazeez, is officially a “homegrown violent extremist,” according to the government – even though he blogged about his Islamic religious motivations for the attack. He and his family also attended a local mosque controlled by a terror-tied Islamic trust.
Johnson explained that if officials called Islamic terrorism “Islamic,” they’d “get nowhere” in gaining the “cooperation” of the Muslim community.
The moderator of the panel tried to protest: “Isn’t [the] government denying the fundamental religious component of this kind of extremism by not using the word Islamic?”
“I could not disagree more,” Johnson responded, and explained that Islam “is about peace.”
So if we say we want Muslims to stand up against Islamic extremism but we won’t call it Islamic extremism, how will they know it’s Islamic extremism if we won’t even tell the truth about it?
Heck, it’s not even extremism, really. It is simply Muslims taking their religion very, very seriously and trying to walk in the footsteps of Muhammad. Now there is an extreme component to it, as some believe the time is now to wage Jihad and others believe that time will come when their Mahdi returns. But that’s just a matter of ‘when’, not ‘what’.
But hey, let’s not offend Muslims here by telling the truth about Islam. Let’s just pretend Jihadis are just a bunch of angry poor people who can’t get jobs in their countries. And let’s send them money to see if that fixes the problem.
Good plan.




Saturday, July 25, 2015

Obama Pledges to Use Last 18 Months in Office Pushing Gun Control

(CNSNews.com) – President Obama on Thursday pledged to use his last 18 months in office to work on gun control, calling it “the one area where I feel that I’ve been most frustrated and most stymied.”
“If you ask me where has been the one area where I feel that I’ve been most frustrated and most stymied, it is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not have sufficient, common-sense gun safety laws – even in the face of repeated mass killings,” he told the BBC in an interview.
“And if you look at the number of Americans killed since 9/11 by terrorism, it’s less than 100. If you look at the number that have been killed by gun violence, it’s in the tens of thousands," Obama continued.
“For us not to be able to resolve that issue has been something that is distressing, but it is not something that I intend to stop working on in the remaining 18 months.”
In the U.S., at least 34 Americans have been killed in terror attacks since 9/11. Those attacks include the 2009 killing of 13 people at Fort Hood, Texas, the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, and the Chattanooga, Tennessee shootings last week which cost the lives of four U.S. Marines and a sailor.
Abroad, another 363 U.S. citizens have been killed in terror attacks since 9/11, according to data accumulated from State Department country reports on terrorism – or in years where data is incomplete, from the department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs’ record of citizens killed due to “terrorist action.”
The annual breakdown of terrorist fatalities abroad is 24 in 2014, 16 in 2013, 10 in 2012, 17 in 2011, 15 in 2010, 9 in 2009, 33 in 2008, 19 in 2007, 28 in 2006, 56 in 2005, 74 in 2004, 35 in 2003 and 27 in 2002.

Monday, October 14, 2013

[MUST READ] Obama's military contempt: The outrageous treatment of Clint Lorance By Allen West

A recent case against a young Army soldier shows once again how our military is under fire from all sides here at home.WASHINGTON, October 14, 2013 – If the fact that the Obama Administration has blocked aging veterans from visiting the World War II memorial and denied death gratuity benefits for fallen warriors doesn’t seem to indicate contempt for our military, how about this most recent story?

Army First Lieutenant Clint Lorance, a 28-year-old combat leader in the 82d Airborne Division from Celeste, Texas was recently found guilty of two counts of murder in Afghanistan and sentenced to 20 years in Ft. Leavenworth.



The story of First Lieutenant Lorance has not been covered by a single major media source.

In July 2012, Lorance was ordered to take command of a platoon in the southern Afghanistan province of Kandahar, a region where I also spent two and a half years training and advising the Afghan National Army. The platoon Lorance now commanded had lost its previous leader to enemy attack.

During a patrol in enemy territory, Lorance ordered a marksman to engage two unarmed Taliban fighters on a motorcycle operating as scout spotters.

In Afghanistan and Iraq, a common enemy tactic is for unarmed fighters on motorcycles with cell phones to track unit movements. In fact, enemy combatants had previously used the tactics against this same platoon.

Via: The Washington Times Community


Continue Reading.....

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Lesson of Navy Yard shooting echoes lessons of Camp Liberty, Fort Hood

Spree shooters at military installations prey on Americans serving America, disarmed by America—but, not in the heavily armed neighborhoods of Washington


Yesterday’s shooting spree at Washington’s Navy Yard reminds us that disarmed military personnel are made-to-order victims for spree shooters.

When Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire Nov. 5, 2009, on soldiers preparing to deploy overseas, I was at Camp Basra, Iraq, a combat historian mobilized with the Army Reserve.

To the soldiers in my circle, it was similar to the May 5, 2009 shooting spree at Camp Liberty, Iraq, when a joe burst into that camp’s combat stress center (!) and fatally shot five other soldiers
.
Understand: All military personnel in Iraq were armed, with either a rifle or a handgun, and sometimes both. Living in a universally armed society created an unspoken atmosphere of respect and caution in personal relationships. It also meant any spree shooter inside-the-wire was instantly surrounded by equally armed personnel.

Unless you went to a combat stress center, where the soldiers turned in their “pole” for their visit. There were other places one left their weapon at the door, such as the gym or chapel. But at the combat stress center, there was also a good chance that the guns belonging to the clients had their firing pins removed—a precaution that allowed the a soldier to go about his day as if he could be trusted with his weapon, as he sought help.

The Fort Hood victims were absolutely unarmed. This is normal for garrison life, even for soldiers deploying, who may have a weapon, but no rounds. It was also a certainty for Hasan, who would have known that Clinton-era rules severely restricted military personal carrying firearms on duty.




Monday, September 16, 2013

Jay Carney on Navy Yard, other shootings: 'This is why we should take action' on gun control

Photo - White House press secretary Jay Carney reiterated President Obama's desire to pass gun control legislation, though he sounded cautious about appearing to use the Navy Yard shooting to political advantage. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
White House press secretary Jay Carney reiterated President Obama's desire to pass gun control legislation, though he sounded cautious about appearing to use the Navy Yard shooting to political advantage.
"[I]t is far too early to say anything about who did this and the broader meaning of it," Carney told reporters, per a live transcription. "When it comes to common sense legislation to reduce gun violence, the president has been very clear," Carney added, recalling Obama's frustration with congressional leaders who voted down a gun proposal in March.
The comments came under repeated questioning from American Urban Radio's April Ryan.
"That was a shame and we will continue to work to take action to improve gun safety, to reduce gun violence in this country through executive action and, hopefully, Congress will work to reduce gun violence as well," he said.
Ryan pressed him about gun control in a follow-up. "Jay, you say it's far too early, and I understand that, but we do know for a fact that these were shooting deaths, and going down that seven: Fort Hood, Binghamton, Tuscon, Aurora, Oak Creek, Newtown, and the Navy Yard now."
"And countless other deaths, as you know April, countless other deaths, and this is why we should take action to reduce gun violence, we should take common sense action supported by Americans from every part of the country," Carney replied.

Popular Posts