hasan022way_wide-88df90283234287e998669b18c7529c9884fc8ac.jpg?width=200In a move that reeks of political motivations, Judge Col. Tara Osborn ruled against the admission of evidence that prosecutors say would show Maj. Nidal Hasan’s jihadist motivations for attacking the Fort Hood military base in 2009. Osborn had been asked to approve several witnesses, along with other key evidence, that would have shown Hasan believed he had a “jihad duty” to perpetrate the atrocity that killed 13 and wounded 32 of his fellow soldiers. Lawyers representing family members killed and wounded by Hasan were rightfully outraged by her refusal to allow the evidence.

The barred evidence included references to Hasan Akbar, a Muslim soldier who was sentenced to death after killing two and wounding 14 of his fellow soldiers in a grenade and rifle attack at Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait, two days after the beginning of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Prosecutors wanted to suggest that Hasan had carried out a “copycat attack.” Osborn disagreed. ”The court believes Sgt. Akbar is not on trial in this case,” Osborn contended, adding that the introduction of such evidence would ”only open the door to a mini-trial” of Akbar and result in a “confusion of issues, unfair prejudice, waste of time and undue delay.”

Osborn also ruled that presentations made by Hasan during his years in medical residency and in fellowship years were too far removed from the atrocity to be entered into evidence. “It is too remote in time and too open to multiple interpretations,” Osborn said of presentations Hasan made when he was at Walter Reed Military Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

It’s an absurd ruling. Hasan gave one presentation to his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members during his senior year as a psych resident in June 2007. If such a presentation, which took place only a year and a half before the Fort Hood killings, is too remote in time, maybe it’s because of the multiple delays in getting this trial underway, one of which included an argument over whether Hasan could keep his beard. (That argument is why Osborn is presiding over the case. The original judge, Col. Gregory Gross, was removed after a military appeals court ruled that his “duel of wills” with Hasan over the beard made him appear biased).

As for the idea that Hasan’s presentation is open to multiple interpretations, so what? A trial itself is the essence of multiple interpretations that are eventually winnowed down by a jury in their effort to determine innocence or guilt. (The jury in this death penalty case consists of 12 officers, all of whom are required to be of Hasan’s rank or higher).

Furthermore, Hasan’s presentation, “The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military,” was a giant red flag. It consisted of 50 slides and information about Islam, suicide bombers, and the potential threats to which the military could be subjected by Muslims conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hasan contended that in order to avoid “adverse events,” the military should consider granting conscientious objector releases to Muslim soldiers rather then making them fight against their fellow Muslims. ”It’s getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims,” he said during the presentation.

There were other equally disturbing parts as well. Under one slide, titled ”Comments,” Hasan wrote, “If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the ‘infidels’; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc.” [sic] The last bullet point on another page stated, ”We love death more then [sic] you love life!” The “Conclusions” page was equally revealing. Hasan stated that ”Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the Islam” and that “Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly–will vary!” [sic]

What makes Osborn’s refusal to allow what would appear to be a substantial piece of evidence regarding Hasan’s motives even more bizarre is the reality that Hasan himself explained his motive and admitted his guilt in his opening statement. ”The evidence will clearly show that I am the shooter,” said Hasan. He also voiced his allegiance to America’s enemies. ”Evidence will show I was on the wrong side of America’s war and I later switched sides. We in the mujahideen are imperfect beings trying to establish a perfect religion … I apologize for any mistakes I have made in this endeavor.”

A “mujahideen” is defined as a Muslim guerrilla engaged in jihad.

That would be the same jihad in which another American-born Muslim named Anwar al-Awlaki was engaged before a U.S. predator drone strike took him out in Yemen in 2011. Al-Awlaki, who had lunch at the Pentagon shortly after 9/11 in an effort to engage in Muslim “outreach,” became a key member of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Yet Osborn ruled that emails between Hasan and al-Awlaki were also inadmissible, because they would have to be “redacted to prevent undue prejudice by association” and the resultant redactions would make them irrelevant.

In other words, despite the reality that Hasan has declared himself an enemy of the United States, it would be prejudicial to associate him with another enemy of the United States with whom he regularly communicated.

Osborn also ruled that prosecutors could not use Hasan’s 2006 inquiry into the possibility of filing conscientious objector status. Considering that this would have tied directly into his lecture on the same topic during his presentation at Walter Reed a year later, Osborn demonstrates an equally foolish, but unsurprising consistency.

Osborn did allow the prosecutors to introduce evidence of Hasan’s Internet searches on jihad and the Taliban, but according to CNN, it was limited to “days and hours before the attack.” FBI Special Agent Charles Cox III, a computer forensics examiner, testified that someone had used Hasan’s computer to pull up an article titled, ”Pakistan Taliban Chief Urges Taliban to Fight Army,” only two hours before the mass murder took place.

It is no secret why Judge Col. Tara Osborn was determined to severely limit the prosecution’s attempt to establish motive. Lead prosecutor Col. Steve Henricks’ opening statements made it clear where their side was going. “He didn’t want to deploy and he came to believe he had a jihad duty to murder soldiers,” said Henricks, who further contended Hasan wanted to “kill as many soldiers as he could.”

Those ideas are completely antithetical to the Obama administration’s determination to remove all references to Islamist jihad from the Fort Hood slaughter. Nothing speaks to this effort more clearly than the reality that the mass murder of American soldiers by a Muslim several witnesses alleged was shouting ”Allahu Akbar!” as he gunned them down was officially labeled “workplace violence.” Moreover that label, in conjunction with Osborn’s rulings, would sharply limit damages in the civil suit brought by the victims’ families, compared to what they might receive if the shootings were an act of terror, including Purple Hearts, combat medals and superior health benefits.

Neal Sher, a lawyer who represents many of the victims and their families, was offended by Osborn’s rulings. ”This is first degree mass murder case and motive is absolutely relevant to prove premeditation,” he explained.

Sher further noted the bizarre nature of the proceedings, in that the government “is talking from both sides of its mouth,” with the military defense maintaining the administration’s see-no-jihadism position, while the military prosecution insists Islamic jihad explains everything Hasan has done.

Unfortunately for the administration, it would seem almost certain that Hasan, who will get the opportunity to present his case after the prosecution rested yesterday, isn’t about to corroborate their insufferably PC version of his rampage. In addition to his opening statement, two clues indicate precisely the opposite.

First, Hasan released three pages from his Sanity Board Report to the New York Times last week. In it he justified killing his fellow soldiers because they were “going against the Islamic Empire.” The report also noted that Hasan would have been honored to die because it meant “God had chosen him as a martyr.” And Hasan himself told the military board that ”I’m paraplegic and could be in jail for the rest of my life. However, if I died by lethal injection I would still be a martyr.”

Second, and perhaps most telling, Hasan and prosecutors have officially agreed on the definition of jihad:

Under Islam, the central doctrine that calls on believers to combat the enemies of their religion. According to the Qur’an and the Hadith, jihad is a duty that may be fulfilled in four ways: by the heart, the tongue, the hand, or the sword. The first way involves an inner hatred for those evils that cannot be overcome by the other 3 [sic] ways. The ways of the tongue and hand call for verbal defense and right actions. The jihad of the sword involves waging war against enemies of Islam. Believers contend that those who die fighting in All-Mighty Allah’s cause are guaranteed a place in paradise as well as a special status.

Osborn’s rulings may be have thwarted the prosecution, but it won’t make any difference. Hasan has his platform, and it seems almost certain that politically correct facade erected by the Obama administration will be completely shattered. Its destruction couldn’t be more well deserved.

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/arnold-ahlert/banished-proof-of-jihad-in-hasan-trial/#.UhTfr4KUARM.facebook

You need to be a member of PatriotsForAmerica to add comments!

Join PatriotsForAmerica

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • A ruling was made this week allowing muslims to turn to shitria law for defense and that Constitutional law would not apply,as ordered by a judge in Oklahoma. My friends and fellow Patriots we are going down a road that i know we have never been down in the history of our country. The division in our White House is the fault of the traitor in chief,the racial tension in our country is directly linked to the idiot in chief. The funding of terrorist was done at the hands of one Barry Soetoroe aka;the idiot in chief. The willful intent to reduce our military strength so our enemies will have the advantage when the time comes to engage in war with the Middle East has been orchestrated by the fraud usurper in our White House.Corruption has found a new home that the entire world has no problem finding because of all the scandals that have been committed by the resident of the White House. I believe the time has come for the American people to start screaming at the top of their lungs,because we are being ignored,and nothing will bring change if we don,t do something now,we can not wait 3 more days or three more years to see the fall of the greatest country in the World. What say you?.

  • The female judge is greatly influenced by her training by the US Army to include her overt allegiance to her Commander in Chief--the President.Her training at metaphysical refinements and test of logical skill inculcated by her Law School would be a lesser factor--and one that from what fruit I have seen law schools produce would probably be "progressive" beyond these I do not know her private agenda or preconceived agenda.I suspect she is under pressure from her boss (the President) who it appears is very deeply influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood more than any Patriots love for these United States and our Laws--to accommodate the Islamic traditions as much as humanly possible.M y bias against any Muslim is rested upon my understanding of this Christian N ation--and the fact that Slam has Never been compatible with our Laws or our Way of Life.

  • I've been stunned by this ever since I read about this.  this just stinks of coercion, unless this judge was already biased.  something has to change.

  • Apparently this female judge appears to have her own agenda. That is advancement by obozo. She needs to be tested for brain activity and the removed from her judgeship. Also she need to be tried for treason. Sorry excuse for a judge.

    • Having spent 14 yrs on active duty in the Air Force, she is no different than those I saw back in the 80s, that were trying to climb up in rank. She wants to be a Brig General so badly, she can taste it.....and that is to do NObama and his PC Generals wishes....including stifle this trial.

      IdahoLaura

    • Just about all fed judges are the same

  • Hasan has said he has renounced his citizenship..Ok then I suggest the US Army schedule a Court Martial charging him with TREASON. He had no beard when he chose to commit Islamic war--so he should not be tried with a beard.As he desires to be thought of as a soldier for Allah--and his "business cards" he passed out as an Army Major suggest he ID himself as such --He is a TRAITOR.I would have his stand a separate trial for TREASON-- and he be sentenced to life in the confine and care of the Christians --and Jews -but allowed no contact with the devils sacred texts the Koran-- N o contact with his fellow Muslim.No Islamic prayer--no accommodation to the enemies cultural beliefs.And he should repay EVERY penny the United States ever paid him when we called him an Officer of the United States Army. For he Never earned even a penny as a Patriot.

This reply was deleted.

Activity

Oldrooster published an article
Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
Note: The following text is a transcription of the Stone Engraving of the parchment Declaration of Independence (the document on display in the Rotunda at the National Archives Museum.) The spelling and punctuation reflects the original.

In Congress, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have…
1 hour ago
Oldrooster published an article
2 hours ago
Tricia Cornwall is now a member of PatriotsForAmerica
2 hours ago
Oldrooster replied to Clois Beckwith's discussion Under General Settings > Keywords
"OK, I see it. That's fine, good.
 "
5 hours ago
Oldrooster replied to Clois Beckwith's discussion Under General Settings > Keywords
"OK, But you've got me. What listing?
 "
5 hours ago
Clois Beckwith posted a discussion
I added "amendments" to the listing, Rooster
5 hours ago
wayne smyly left a comment on Survival ideas
"Thanks  Ole Rooster  very good information"
11 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
11 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
12 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
12 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
"Survival is all about being able to find food, shelter, and how to fight back.Remember Sun ZU said an Army moves on it's stomach. Which means in order to fight when you get there you have to  be able too.And a starving Army wont put up much of a fight.
 "
13 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
13 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
13 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
13 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
13 hours ago
Oldrooster left a comment on Survival ideas
14 hours ago
More…