The first terrorist attack on U.S. soil has occurred on President Obama's watch. It is fascinating to watch the media pussyfoot around the issue. They are taking extraordinary measures to avoid calling Major Nidal Hasan a Muslim terrorist, despite the fact that we now know that President Obama's CIA had specific knowledge about Hasan's attempts to contact Al Qaeda, his anti-American sentiment, and his sympathy for suicide bombers.

The media has chosen to portray Hasan as the victim because he was allegedly teased at the playground. This is a grown man who volunteered for the armed forces and rose in the ranks to become a major. The media has gone so far as to claim he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, a mental condition typically experienced after a traumatic event, not before. Apparently, Hasan caught this second-hand, contagious disorder at the office while listening to soldiers talk about their actual combat trauma.

What has President Obama's reaction been to these revelations? He warned us not to jump to conclusions, a bizarre response from the person who hastily denounced the Cambridge police as having "acted stupidly" when they arrested Professor Gates for disorderly conduct earlier this summer. Obama admitted he did not have all the facts, but instead of not "jumping to conclusions" he decreed that it was yet another regular instance of racial profiling.

Unlike with the Gates incident, the president is in the best position to learn all the facts about the man who murdered 13 and hurt dozens more at a military installation over which he is the Commander in Chief. But since the attack his CIA chief has sealed all documents that would shed light on Hasan's history and possible ties to other terrorists.

The day of the attack the president made a few vague public remarks about the incident, but only after three minutes of inappropriately lighthearted introductory remarks at an event he was attending, including a "shout out" to a friend in the audience.

This president, touted as supremely "eloquent" by his adoring media, chose to stick to the script prepared for the event rather than assume a more reassuring and somber tone. It's as if the killings were simply a rude interruption to his scheduled activities. He didn't even bother to recite the death toll saying the details were a "mystery" to him even though the details were scrolling along the bottom of the screen.

An ad by Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign questioned Obama's ability to lead in the face of a crisis. Was she right? If this the kind of effort and leadership we can expect from the president in the face of a minor terrorist attack, let us pray he is not tested with an event of greater magnitude.

John Rigg, USAF (ret.)

Marietta