Can We Call It Terrorism Now?

As I mentioned in this post about the recent London attacks, we still have those in the US (including the President) who refuse to admit that we are being attacked by terrorists. The Obama Administration still considers the Fort Hood attack to be an instance of workplace violence, but Nidal Hasan is not cooperating with them.

The admission by Army Maj. Nidal Hasan on Tuesday that he attacked Fort Hood in 2009 in defense of “the leadership of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban” has suddenly undermined the Obama administration’s previous contention that the murders of 13 soldiers at the Texas base constituted an act of “workplace violence.”

By ignoring Fort Hood, of course, the President can claim, and he does, that there have been no major terrorist attacks in the US during his administration (I’m not sure where the Boston Marathon bombings fit in that narrative).

Hasan’s legal argument, which is being considered by the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, may reignite the political furor over how the Obama administration has classified the shootings, as well as arguments about whether the mass shootings constituted the first major Islamic jihadist attack on the US after 9/11. As recently as May 23, President Obama said no "large-scale" terrorism attacks on the homeland have occurred on his watch.

While Obama’s cynicism is annoying, the more serious problem, in my opinion, is the refusal to face the fact that the West, and western values and traditions, are under attack from Islamic extremists. It is fair to say, I think that we are not at war with Islamists – but they are at war with us.