In the wake of the Fort Hood massacre in November 2009, the editorial board of the New York Times urged:
In the aftermath of this unforgivable attack, it will be important to avoid drawing prejudicial conclusions from the fact that Major Hasan is an American Muslim whose parents came from the Middle East.
President Obama was right when he told Americans, “we don’t know all the answers yet” and cautioned everyone against “jumping to conclusions.”
Unverified reports, some from his family members, suggest that Major Hasan complained of harassment by fellow soldiers for being a Muslim, that he hoped to get out of a deployment to Afghanistan, that he sought a discharge from the Army and that he opposed the American military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. There were reports that some soldiers said they had heard him shout “God is Great” in Arabic before he started firing. But until investigations are complete, no one can begin to imagine what could possibly have motivated this latest appalling rampage.
There may never be an explanation. And, certainly, there can never be a justification.
For now, all that can be said is that our hearts go out to the families of the 12 soldiers and one civilian killed. And we are hoping for the fast recovery of all those who were wounded, including Kimberly Munley, a civilian police officer stationed at the base, who shot Major Hasan and ended the killing.
Yet for some reason, that sense of caution was strangely absent in today’s editorial on the tragic shooting in Arizona:
It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people.
Read More: By Philip Klein, American Spectator
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
The news media has spent several days of nearly uninterrupted coverage of the Tucson killings but hardly a peep out of the Ft. Hood massacre. Why? Is this not another victory for the cover-up of radical Islamic beliefs well identified in the Koran: kill the infidels (non-Muslims) The Muslims are well on the
way to a take over of the USA through complacency and indifference to the impending danger or outrageous political correctness.
There is the story out there that the woman stopped Hasan,but, I have heard that a man stopped the rampage, and that the woman got the credit due to P.C.
Pravda hasn't been cleared to cover the retired colnel. He may be a conservative and lord knows the left and especially Obama will not praise a conservative. What if the man said the C word while being interviewed or stood up for second amendment rights and immigration control? No, Pravda will let that story fade. No hay to be made there, too much risk.
Not much to comment on.
Story makes it's point
The result of having allowed Obama to dictate when a name could be assigned to a murderer for the purposes of identity as a nation has been that this time there is an obvious conflict of interest and Obama can not satisfy his brood so they go off without a leader. It is like a semi truck rolling down a steep grade after the driver got out and purposely didn't set the brakes. What a feat to mourn whom you are about to make a martyr. It is coming. He's done this before. Think Odinga.
It is a bit hard to miss the double standard in this rhetoric coming/not coming from the Left. This, more than anything else makes me question the possibility of outside agitation that set Loughner on his course. He would definitely have been vulnerable to such agitation and it would tend to make the senseless more sensible. This type of agitation has been done before and it is quite effective.
You can even appear to be against any such action while subtly agitating your mark for the job. As I said, it has been done before by focusing the hothead's attention on the violence and letting him build up his own head of steam.
There has been far too much rhetoric blaming the tea party, radio talkers, Rush and Palin while neglecting Hassan, 9/11, Oklahoma City Bombing and many other such like incidents. Taking note of who does the rejoicing it makes a pattern.
loughner's emerging history tells me he would not be listening to or hanging on the words of Rush or Palin and probably can't tell you anything about the tea party. He is far more compatible with sites such as La Voz de Aztlan, Loughner pulled the trigger but did he do the planning? There is some question here brought about by the rhetoric coming from the Left. He would definitely have been vulnerable to outside agitation and there is precedent for that. Demetrius, the silversmith, recorded in Acts plus many other manifestations of third party agitation. Then there is the story of David when he used the sword of the philistines to take Uriah's life.
It is the rhetoric coming from Dupnik and the Left that raises this red flag of a third party pulling that trigger by Loughner. That does not make Loughner less guilty but I fail to see sufficient reason for Loughner to do the shooting. There is evidence that this was premeditated so it didn't just happen. There needs to be a triggering cause. That is why we have primers on ammunition. What was the primer in this case?
I am quite confident that is was not Rush or Palin and would have a question of how much or little Loughner knows about them. He was not subject to hang on their every word. I would expect him to be much more drawn to La Voz de Aztlan, http://www.aztlan.net/ than to say WorldNetDaily. This possibility/probability should be thoroughly investigated. It is a tool often used by the Left.