Is anyone really surprised
Protecting America against acts of terrorism is the highest priority of the Department. The Department is constantly striving to improve its ability to identify, penetrate, and dismantle terrorist plots as a result of a series of structural reforms, the development of new intelligence and law enforcement tools, and a new mindset that values information sharing, communication and prevention.Apparently, the Hasan case is a tremendous failure. What tools were needed to take a look at Hasan's business cards, for instance? Why is comminicating with al Qaida not considered suspicious enough for an Army officer to be put under a microscope?

This wasn't clue enough? The motherfucker gave out business cards that identified his twisted ass as a "SoA" (Soldier / Servant of Allah), he was in contact with terrorists, and actually gave a Powerpoint presentation explaining the "Koranic World View" and nothing was done about it. We need more tools? Is that code for "we need more taxpayer funding for worthless programs that we claim will help us track terrorists, but will, in fact, serve to mollify terrorist-loving organizations such as CAIR as we do our very best to never, ever profile Muslims?"
I am committed to continuing to build our capacity to deter, detect and disrupt terrorist plots and to identify those who would seek to do us harm; and I am committed to doing so consistent with the rule of law and American values. We will continue to develop intelligence, identify new and emerging threats, and use the full range of tools and capabilities the Department possesses in its intelligence and law enforcement components.
We had the tools already. We had SCREAMING warning signs that Hasan was a terrorist piece of festering shit. Neither you, nor your DOJ, nor your "tools" did anything to stop this shitbag. But NOW, you promise to do something about it? What is it that you're going to do, Mr. Holder?
Well, apparently one of Holder's priorities is to repeal the Tiahrt Amendment and begin de facto gun registration in the United States. (h/t David Codrea)
Senator Schumer:
"There are restrictions on even notification, so for instance the people in one end of the justice system, the Joint Terrorism Task force, were not notified when Major Hasan bought a gun. That's not talking about whether the law should allow it or not, but clearly there should be notification. Now the Tiahrt amendment, the 24 background check requirement gets in the way of that. My question is: Will the Justice Department remove the Tiahrt 24 hour background check destruction requirement from its 2011 budget to allow the FBI to keep records of guns purchased by subjects of terrorist inquiries? I am just limiting it to that issue, like Major Hasan."
AG Holder:
"The position of the Administration is that there should be a basis for law enforcement to share information about gun purchases. Fully respect the Second Amendment, fully respect the Heller decision. It does not seem to us that this is inconsistent to allow law enforcement agencies to share that kind of information, for that information to be retained and then to be shared by law enforcement."
Senator Schumer:
"I would encourage you to write that into the budget that you are going to bring to us."
AG Holder:
"I believe it is. But I will have to check."
How would establishing a de facto registration of those who legally purchase firearms in America have helped stop Hasan?
Given the administration more "tools?"
I think we have enough tools in this administration already, thanks.













"A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie."
- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Reply to this
We need more tools? Is that code for "we need more taxpayer funding for worthless programs that we claim will help us track terrorists, but will, in fact, serve to mollify terrorist-loving organizations such as CAIR as we do our very best to never, ever profile Muslims?"
No
no,no, no. It's code for we need more control over every American citizen.
He is using terrorists the same way law enforcement (not necessarily the street cop, but not many decline to enforce unjust law,either) uses criminals, to justify taking more liberty from the ordinary citizen.
Reply to this