Which Side Is She On?

Janet Napolitano is the Secretary of Homeland Security. From her job title it is reasonable to assume that her primary interest is protecting Americans from threats such as terroristic acts or terrorism per se.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan is a Muslim. He was heard to shout, "Allahu Akbar" prior to opening fire. There are increasing indications that the major breathed deeply of the winds of Islamist jihadism. Taken together these factors give a reasonable grounds to assert that religion played a role--perhaps the greatest role--in his motivational matrix.

It is the very reasonableness of concluding Islam (particularly armed political Islam or, in shorthand form, Islamist jihadism) playing a role which is being employed by assorted Muslim groups and individual Muslims to assume they are now at greater risk for "backlash" from non-Muslims. The mainstream media, particularly the printed sort have raised a mighty alarm concerning this presumed "backlash."

As yet there are no reports of any "backlash." There have been no yarns of hordes of infidels besieging mosques. No stories anywhere of enraged non-Muslims tossing rocks or acid at women wearing traditional Islamic garb. Imams are not being assaulted by frothing-at-the-mouth zanies seeking revenge.

Despite the demonstrable absence of any outbursts of the dreaded "backlash," it is legitimate to wonder what Secretary Napolitano is so wrought up about. She is quoted as saying her department is working with (unnamed) groups around the US to "deflect" any backlash. It might be noted that she made her remarks in Abu Dhabi so her words might have been directed at the expectations of her foreign auditors.

If this surmise is correct, it is necessary to ask, "Why?" Why did the secretary think she needed to play to the prejudices and predilections of the Arab-Muslim world? Why did she conclude it was necessary to stoke the worst expectations of the Arabs, the Muslims generally, regarding the American people?

In the course of her jaunt to Abu Dhabi, Ms Napolitano had occasion to address a women's group at the local pretense of a university. During her talk she violated President Obama's stern strictures against rushing to judgement. Apparently using an informational base which has so far eluded most observers of the Fort Hood massacre, Secretary Napolitano opined, "This was an individual who does not, obviously, represent the Muslim faith."

What the hey?

Whatever else he may be, Major Hasan was an observant Muslim. Numerous reports litter the landscape of the media both new and old as to the major's observant nature. His efforts to proselytize and defend the faith have been well documented. The psychiatrist is seen on a convenience store security video wearing the traditional clothing of a Muslim. He handed out Korans shortly before heading off to make his place in history and (he most likely thought) martyrdom.

The Geek does not disparage Major Hasan as a Muslim. It was as a good, dedicated, observant Muslim well acquainted with the requirements laid upon Muslims by the Koran and other sacred writings that he pulled the triggers on his two pistols. The positions he took in his internet postings last summer as he was in the process of convincing himself as to the rightness of his already contemplated action show him to be a thoughtful, intelligent Muslim who was coming to see and understand fully his obligations under the faith.

Secretary Napolitano's comment on Major Hasan as being "obviously" not representative of Muslims is flatly wrong. It is contradicted completely by the Major's actions, by his stated beliefs, and by numerous verses in the Koran as well as many, many entries in the record of the words and deeds of the Prophet which ranks only slightly below the Koran as the guide to righteous conduct by a Muslim man.

Worse, the Secretary's comment is both condescending and patronizing. It rips from the Major his core of belief, his spine of self-identification, his worth as a Muslim man acting according to the requirements of his religion. Her stated stance may comport well with justifications offered by the Major's relatives, particularly those still living in the West Bank, and the majority of the American print media. It serves to reduce the Major to the status of a mentally ill person driven by inner demons or "snapping" under the alleged but not proven or even documented stresses of ethnic taunts and discrimination.

It is undoubtedly true that the vast majority of Muslims in the US, in the US armed forces, around the world are not inclined to take the requirements of Islam as seriously as did the Major. The Major is no more a member of the majority of observant Muslims than is Osama bin Laden, Sheik Omar, or other leading figures of the global Islamist jihadist movement. Major Hasan is no more representative of the vast majority of observant Muslims than are the suicide bombers, the suicide commandos, or the rocket firers of Gaza.

This reality does not mean that Major Hasan did not act in a way totally in accord with the most demanding strictures of the Prophet. Or the Companions. Or many, many adherents of Islam who died willingly, even joyously, for the sake of the faith.

By marginalizing, by trivializing Major Hasan's dedication to and roots in Islam, the Secretary of Homeland Security is also placing the nation at greater risk. By deprecating the role of Islam in Major Hasan's action, she is desensitizing the American public to the fundamental reality that Islamic beliefs can and do propel people to take actions which are terroristic in both nature and effect.

The probability that non-Muslims in the US will seek vengeance, retribution against Muslims, is diminishingly small. Much smaller than the probability that there are Muslims in the US who have or will travel the same mental road as the Major.

To deny the role of religion in the personal traversing of the route from Islam per se to political Islam or Islamism and thence to its armed expression, jihad, is to weaken the ability of Americans to protect themselves against future events resembling the gore ridden action of Major Hasan.

It is not paranoid, nor is it prejudiced to see the probability that Islamic beliefs can be taken by an individual believer to the extent of a "martyrdom" operation. It is not being culturally insensitive to understand the linkage between Islamic strictures and indiscriminate violence. The recent spate of arrests of "homegrown" Islamist jihadists as well as Major Hasan's one man mass murder campaign make that abundantly clear.

A clear minded approach requires that Secretary Napolitano as well as the Obama administration generally accept and acknowledge the relationship between aspects of Islam and terrorism or terroristic acts. It does the religion no disrespect to do so. And, it serves to help protect the nation better.

It does the religion no respect to denigrate its nature and character to an Arab audience--or the international press. It does the nation no service to genuflect before the prejudices and propensities of Arabs or Muslims generally.

Ms Napolitano had best remember that her job is to help protect the US and its people, people of all faiths, of no faith, against threats from both natural and human causes. The same advice pertains to the never-judgemental, ever willing to take more time weighing all the factors President of the United States.

It is time these worthies do their job--even at the cost of multi-culti political correctness.