The writer is saying the CIA attack and the Fort Hood shooting are simply quid pro quo in a time of war and he makes it seem as if we are not justified to be outraged or even upset since "the victims weren't civilians" - as if they deserved it.
I could understand if the writer was coming from the viewpoint that referring to these attacks as separate "terrorist attacks" leads the public to believe that the islamic extremist are lone wolves and not just small parts of a large scale "war" effort.
He can call it whatever he wants, whatever lets him sleep well at night.
