Posted by
John Caile on Friday, November 06, 2009 11:15:10 AM
Let the whitewash begin. You knew it the moment you heard the name of the Fort Hood killer: Nidal Malik Hasan. Gee, now what do we suppose we're going to find out about his, ahem, religious affiliation? And, as more and more becomes known about this mass murderer, are any of us going to be surprised by his political views?
This is going to be a tough one for the mainstream press to ignore, yet they can't even summon the courage to call the attacker what he is - a terrorist. Unfortunately for them, there is a clear history of the assailant's radical anti-Iraq war views beginning to emerge, not to mention the videos of him stopping in at the local convenience store for coffee, dressed in traditional Muslim garb. Kind of makes it difficult for the press to hide his Muslim religion. And oh, how they would desperately like to avoid bringing the killer's religion into the discussion.
We will instead hear news types talk about being "puzzled" over his motivation, despite beginning his attack by shouting "Alah u Akbar" ("God is Great") the preferred battle cry of suicide bombers (and the last words of the 9/11 hijackers just before they hit the World Trade Center). These politically correct media nitwits act as if Nidal Malik Hasan were no different than Seung-Hui Cho, the student who shot up Virginia Tech in 2007.
Even worse, some in the media are even tying to evoke sympathy for Hasan, portraying him as a victim of "harassment" who just needs to be "understood" and who "didn't get the [psychological] help that he needed." Got it - it's the Army's fault he went on a rampage. Get ready for "sensitivity training" for soldiers who deal with Muslim recruits.
But just imagine if the Ft. Hood shooter had been a garden variety soldier who just happened to attend Christian church a couple of times a year - aaah, then the flood gates would have opened. There would be "investigations" into Evangelical churches, attempts to connect the shooter with some "white-supremacist" or "right-wing militia" group. And, no doubt, comparisons with the media's holy grail of "home grown" terrorists, Timothy McVeigh - they do love him so.
Now, this double standard in the media is nothing new. Look at how the they handled the recent case of Faleh Hassan Almaleki, the Muslim father who ran down his on daughter in yet another "honor killing" - she finally died in the hospital just days ago. The press did everything possible to hide the primary motivation for his act: her violation, in his twisted mind, of Sharia law. Check out the initial stories - only now does the phrase "honor killing" even appear, and only in a few reports from independent news organizations.
And remember the "D.C. Sniper" rampage? John Alan Muhammad and his young apprentice killed 13 people, yet no one in the press dared make the obvious link between his (newly adopted) Muslim faith and his violent, dare I say, anti-American, shooting spree. Nope, he was just a "disturbed" individual.
But why is the press so adamant about denying the reality of Muslim extremism? After all, it isn't exactly news that most of the world's terrorism is being perpetrated in the name of Islam. The press, however, would like you to believe that "most Muslims" are nice, law-abiding people who would never think of engaging in the kind of slaughter we saw at Ft. Hood.
And that is probably true, at least technically. Indeed, most Muslims, especially those who are American born and bred, are not likely to be terrorists. But as one astute reader pointed out, "most Germans didn't participate in the Holocaust either" - they just looked the other way. So the larger question is, while they may not actually engage in terrorist acts themselves, how many American Muslims, just like Nidal Malik Hasan, secretly support the actions of the jihadists? Since surveys of Muslims indicate that more than 30% of them feel suicide bombings are "justified in the defense of Islam" the number today who privately condone what Hasan did is likely to be disturbingly high.
So I just can't help wondering: if they were to overhear a conversation in which other Muslims were clearly discussing an upcoming terrorist attack on their fellow Americans, what percentage of these so-called "good Muslims" would actually pick up the phone and call the FBI?
Or are they, as Nidal Malik Hasan declared, "Muslims first, and Americans second."
Yes, I do wonder....