There is an undertone of black comedy in Muslim terrorist trials where committed Jihadists are pitted against politically correct judges and lawyers who keep trying to convince them that they really aren’t Muslim terrorists.
The Nidal Hasan case is a high stakes game because Obama Inc. has gone all in on claiming that Hasan isn’t a terrorist, but just a case of workplace violence. They swapped out the skeptical judge for a friendly judge and gave him every bit of leeway. But Hasan has sabotaged the plan by deciding to act as his own attorney and convince everyone that he really is a Muslim terrorist.
Hasan, charged with the massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, said Tuesday he wants jurors to know he is being “forced” to wear a U.S. Army uniform.
Col. Tara Osborn, the judge at Hasan’s court martial, did not rule on his request as jury selection began, the Austin American-Statesman began.
Hasan, a psychiatrist, is acting as his own lawyer. He has said he will be represented by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark if Osborn allows him to use a defense that he was justified in gunning down soldiers at Fort Hood to prevent unlawful violence to the Taliban in Afghanistan.
During Tuesday’s hearing, Hasan said he believes the Army uniform “represents an enemy of Islam.”
“I can’t take any pride in wearing this uniform,” Hasan said. “I want the panel to know that, that I am being forced to wear it.”
So the cover up is hitting a few snags. The murderer is refusing to participate in the cover-up of his motive.
Hasan told one colonel that Abdulhakim Muhammad, sentenced to life in prison for the June 2009 fatal shooting of a soldier outside a Little Rock, Arkansas, military recruiting station, was his “brother and friend.” Muhammad, who converted to Islam in college, has told The Associated Press that the shootings were an act of war on the U.S.
So that makes Hasan a terrorist.
In answering Hasan’s questions based on jury questionnaires they filled out about a year ago, several potential jurors said they had negative views of Muslims, the Qur’an or Shariah, the Islamic legal and religious code. But they said they could put aside those views and only consider evidence in the case – including a colonel asked by Hasan if “the fact that I do believe the Qur’an justifies killing” would prevent him from being a fair juror.
The military judge, Col. Tara Osborn, told Hasan several times to rephrase his questions and avoid mentioning his beliefs.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.