| CMR Sitrep |
 |
|
Monday, November 16, 2009
Dangers of Political Correctness in the Military
As Elaine Donnelly wrote in her article featured in "National Review Online Hot" last week, the Army has been making compromises in apparently small matters, such as uniform standards for religious minorities, in order to advance "diversity" as a primary goal. In larger matters, reported "diversity" groupthink and reluctance to give offense apparently led some Walter Reed officials to "tolerate" the intolerable. According to NPR, their official inaction when Capt. Nidal Hassan displayed jihadist attitudes inadvertently led to the vicious attack at Fort Hood that took fourteen lives. Now the news media and a number of respected commentators are starting to stress the same theme: Officials who are responsible for the dangerous pursuit of "diversity" at all costs must be held accountable. These are recent examples:
1. The Christian Science Monitor quoted CMR on the importance of equal treatment in response to President Barack Obama's comments on Saturday:
Fort Hood Review May Challenge Political Correctness Up the Ranks
"'In the military everybody has to be treated the same, it's what holds everybody together,' says Elaine Donnelly, the president of the Center for Military Readiness, a non-partisan group that focuses primarily on military personnel. 'You have horizontal cohesion among the troops and you have vertical cohesion between the commander in chief and the troops that he leads. The vertical cohesion is now at risk, and the President should restore it, and realize this was not a breach, as he says, but a consequence of skewed priorities.'"
2. With his usual insight and wit, columnist Mark Steyn has noticed that unlike the response to the 9/11 attacks, when the American people quickly recognized and organized to meet the threat, the killings of military personnel at Fort Hood have not been recognized as a jihadist attack that began with the misguided pursuit of "diversity" as a primary goal:
Jihad and the Scandal of "Brain-Dead Diversity"
"The truth is we're not prepared to draw a line even after he's gone ahead and committed mass murder. 'What happened at Fort Hood was a tragedy,' said General Casey, the US Army's Chief of Staff, 'but I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here.' A "greater tragedy" than 14 dead and dozens of wounded? Translating from the original brain-addled multiculit-speak, the Army Chief of Staff is saying that the same fatuous prostration before marshmallow illusions that led to the 'tragedy' must remain in place. If it leads to occasional mass murder, well, hopefully it can be held to what cynical British civil servants used to call, during the Northern Irish 'Troubles', 'an acceptable level of violence.' Fourteen dead is evidently acceptable. A hundred and forty? Fourteen hundred? I guess we'll find out. 'Diversity' is one of those words designed to absolve you of the need to think. Likewise, a belief in 'multiculturalism' doesn't require you to know anything at all about other cultures, just to feel generally warm and fluffy about them."
3. Human Events editor Jed Babbin touches on several indictors of misplaced priorities and fecklessness in the conduct of our foreign policy and war in the Middle East:
Mr. Obama's War
"His [Gen. Casey's] comment on the Fort Hood massacre is well beyond political correctness: it is despicable. He now believes that 'diversity' is more important than protecting the lives of our troops at home and abroad. Anyone who cares more about diversity than protecting the force from internal threats cannot be trusted to lead. Casey should be removed forthwith."
4. Reacting to the stated priorities of Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey, Linda Chavez has zeroed in on the horrors that "diversity at any cost" can lead to:
Fire General Casey
"The biggest question that remains is not Hasan's motivation, but the government's. Why is it that counterterrorism investigators and the Army were so eager to dismiss suspicion of Hasan when his actions clearly warranted a high-priority, full-fledged investigation? Were Hasan's colleagues discouraged from reporting his suspect activities because they feared retaliation from military brass in the name of protecting "diversity"? Surely, Casey's own words are fair warning to anyone in the military that they should tread lightly in ever questioning the activities of any Muslim in uniform. But Casey's outrageous statements are more likely to encourage prejudice than quell it...If we can't be assured that the military is doing its job to ensure that extremists do not infiltrate our armed forces, then every Muslim automatically comes under suspicion."
Additional worthwhile commentaries reflecting growing awareness of this subject have been written by:
-Dorothy Rabinowitz, Wall Street Journal, "Dr. Phil and the Fort Hood Killer"
-Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney, "It's the Jihad, Stupid"
-David Limbaugh, Townhall.com, "Suicidal Political Correctness"
|
|
|
Home
