It is difficult to describe the rage I feel about the shooting at Ft. Hood last week. I spent 10 years active duty Army, the first 5 of those years as an Arabic linguist, focusing on the counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency missions.  I was immersed in the culture, language, habits and practices and modes of communication of the Middle East and radical Islam for years.  I did not do this so I could value their cultural legacy, appreciate their contributions to society, or learn more diversity in my worldview.  I did this so I could exploit their communications, locate them, and kill them.

And here we have a terrorist working as a psychiatrist in the US Army. His entire education, residency, and board certification paid by the American taxpayer, not to mention his six figure annual salary.  He was under investigation for communicating with a wanted Imam who was known to be one of Al-Qaeda’s most prominent recruiters.  He was known to have posted anti-American and pro-radical comments on line and making those comments in conversation.  He was censured for turning his speech at a military psychiatry seminar into a dissertation on the virtues of Islam and a call for new proselytes.  All this was known and documented before Major Nidal Malik Hasan was even transferred to Ft. Hood, and well before he received his deployment orders to Afghanistan.

Yet this man was allowed to remain in the service.  He was allowed to play a critical role in the mental state of our warrior as they deployed and came home.  He was offered promotion as the standard program for psychiatrists who complete their studies, residency, and certification proceedings.  He was placed in roles of leadership, responsibility, and prestige among our warrior class, by virtue of his education.

How does one reconcile these things? Why was this allowed to happen?  Because he was Muslim. Because of political correctness and fear. It permeates even our own military ranks.  When making promotion and training selections, if there are two competitive and equally qualified candidates, if one of them is Muslim he will be selected. Because within the military, as elsewhere, there is a paranoia about avoiding the appearance of “intolerance,” “suspicion,” or “profiling”. White Christian officers have to be meticulously careful in their choice of words and associations, for fear of claims of equal opportunity policy violations or even the appearance of stepping out of line. Muslim officers apparently are not held to the same standard.

Make no mistake—this man was allowed to be in a position to do what he did because he was Muslim.  If a Christian zealot had been documented for similar behavior, he would have never made rank or even finished training.  Maj. Hasan shot and killed his fellow soldiers because he was Muslim. So many of our media outlets and even our own President are striving so hard to not acknowledge this, but it was this man’s interpretation of his religion that led him to shoot wounded soldiers at point-blank range, unarmed soldiers as they were running for cover or to help those already shot.  One witness’ account describes Hasan as putting the muzzle of his weapon square in the back of a soldier who was trying to shield a wounded comrade and emptying the remainder of the pistol’s magazine into his back. This from the man who sported an “Allah is Love” bumper sticker on his car.

Imams and Islamic clerics all over the world are praising Maj. Hasan as a hero, who they say executed a truly Islamic and honorable act of Jihad against the American military.  And we’re supposed to maintain a sense of political correctness and refusal to pass judgement.  I will pass judgement—it is requisite with my moral responsibilities and my own capacity for rational thought to call evil, evil.  And this act is evil. And pretending that it is anything other than it is—the first successful act of Islamic terror on American soil since 9/11—is evil, and shows dishonor and ingratitude to the members of our warrior class that were slain by this Islamic holy warrior (read: terrorist).

And continuing this blind devotion to suicidal political correctness is evil. The cast majority of the terrorist threats we face come from a very specific and identifiable demographic: Muslims aged 17 to 40. It is a simple thing to focus our counter-terrorism and security forces on this one demographic.  But we don’t. Because that would be racial profiling. I’m sorry—this demographic needs to be profiled.  And it’s high time that the inconvenience of being in this group becomes commensurate with the danger, threat, and destruction caused by this group.  Is it not morally and ethically unconscionable to place millions in danger because you fear to offend or inconvenience a small minority?

Many will think me hateful, intolerant, racist, or over-reactionary. I am a realist. Radical Islam is the existential threat to our civilization and the most imminent threat to our population.  There is nothing racist or intolerant in acknowledging this. It is based on statistics and the experience of history. We need to focus our investigations, our screening, and our other security methods on that group WE KNOW is the source of nearly all the individuals that mean us harm. The episode with Maj. Hasan and the act of domestic terror perpetrated at Ft. Hood last week should be a permanent wake-up call to rational and honest Americans everywhere.