(Analyst's note: Absolutely, one must continue to ask, why was this major was not charged at the time and at the very least discharged immediately from the U.S. Army. We can see that senior Army leadership did NOT act to protect us. They have sworn to protect us from all enemies both foreign and domestic -- as a U.S. citizen, the major is a domestic enemy, and if he lives, should be treated as such. This audio is evidence of unacceptable leadership within our U.S. Army. Although I can assure you that not everyone is buying it, this kind of inaction is being "built-into" our fighting forces by the Muslim Brotherhood (aka CAIR) -- from the Pentagon on down through political correctness principles.
As further evidence, I reported (search this site on "jihad pentagon")in October & September 2008 the following: "Defense Secretary Robert Gates last week referred to Islamist terrorism by the politically-correct term “violent extremism” during a speech to the U.S. Institute of Peace. The use of the non-Islamist terminology highlights the ongoing debate in government over the use of terms like jihad and Islamic extremism in public discussions of terrorism. ....
....The State Department and Department of Homeland Security recently issued guidelines for U.S. government officials that said American Muslim groups had recommended not using “jihad” or Islamic extremism in labeling Muslim extremist violence in order not to offend Muslims.
....A U.S. Central Command Red Team of experts however, stated in a recent report that honest reports require labeling the terrorists as Islamic and jihadist since the roots of the violence lie in Islamic law. The controversial report called for “freedom of speech in jihad analysis” and sought to debunk the State and DHS reports claiming that the use of Islamic terms in describing terrorists was offensive speech and was opposed by some U.S. Muslim group.
....The advocates of this ruse recommend that the United States and its allies stop calling the jihadists by that name and identifying the concept of Jihadism as the problem. In short, they argue that 'jihad is good, but the Mufsidoon, the bad guys and the terrorists, spoiled the original legitimate sense.....'")
