Friday, November 06, 2009
Media, President Shout-Out On Fort Hood Terror Attack: It Isn't What It Is
Glenn Reynolds posts this nugget:
Boundless energy is being poured into the effort to pre-empt anyone from reaching the obvious conclusion that Nidal Hasan was on a jihadist mission to kill as many infidels as possible.
Take Newsweak's Andrew Bast, who would have us believe Hasan's attack was symptomatic of an overstressed military. This of course suggests, as Tim Graham writes at Newsbusters, that it's all the Pentagon's fault (and therefore Bush's fault, since he started all this after a similarly inexplicable hissy fit coincidentally also thrown by Muslims some years ago in New York City) and therefore more such slaughters can be expected in the future, hopefully by a lone crazed non-Muslim because it's just getting so difficult to keep this narrative going without help from, you know, crazed non-Muslims.
Ace posts this bit from NPR:
More from Ace:
In point of fact, Nidal Hasan was a one-man carnival of alarm bells that everyone ignored in blind fealty to political correctness. This is radical Islam's most potent weapon against its American targets, and it afforded Nidal Hasan both the means and the opportunity to murder the targets of his Islamist hatred.
That's not jumping to a conclusion; that's pointing out the obvious.
ASKING THE TOUGH QUESTIONS, getting the squishy answers.ME: Obviously, it came long before the point when Nidal Hasan screamed "Allahu Akhbar" and opened fire on the fellow soldiers he demonstrably hated as infidels.
TAPPER: Kind of a — a theoretical question, but what — at what point does an attack become considered a terrorist attack, even — even if it’s a domestic terrorist attack?
GIBBS: I don’t know that I would have the theoretical background to — to answer that. I would pose that to somebody at — at the FBI. But, again, I don’t know that we’re at a point yet where we fully understand motive.
Boundless energy is being poured into the effort to pre-empt anyone from reaching the obvious conclusion that Nidal Hasan was on a jihadist mission to kill as many infidels as possible.
Take Newsweak's Andrew Bast, who would have us believe Hasan's attack was symptomatic of an overstressed military. This of course suggests, as Tim Graham writes at Newsbusters, that it's all the Pentagon's fault (and therefore Bush's fault, since he started all this after a similarly inexplicable hissy fit coincidentally also thrown by Muslims some years ago in New York City) and therefore more such slaughters can be expected in the future, hopefully by a lone crazed non-Muslim because it's just getting so difficult to keep this narrative going without help from, you know, crazed non-Muslims.
Ace posts this bit from NPR:
Here’s the NPR segment. Key bit:Prompting Glenn Reynolds to observe with typical wryness:
He gave a Grand Rounds presentation. . . You take turns giving a lecture on, you know, the correct treatment of schizophrenia, the right drugs to prescribe for personality disorder, you know, that sort of thing. But instead of giving an academic paper, he gave a lecture on the Koran, and they said it didn’t seem to be just an informational lecture, but it seemed to be his own beliefs. That’s what a lot of people thought.
He talked about how if you’re a nonbeliever the Koran says you should have your head cut off, you should have oil poured down your throat, you should be set on fire. And I said well couldn’t this just be his educating you? And the psychiatrist said yes, but one of the Muslims in the audience, another psychiatrist, raised his hand and was quite disturbed and he said you know, a lot of us don’t believe these things you’re saying, and that there was no place where Hasan couched it as this is what the Koran teaches but you know I don’t believe it. And people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about ‘is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?’
Kind of reminds me of that old Saturday Night Live skit on “The Shooting of Buckwheat.” You know: “What was he like?” “Nice guy, quiet, kept to himself.” “Are you surprised he shot Buckwheat?” “Oh, no — it’s all he ever talked about.”Even on Fox they're talking about how the thought of being deployed to the theater is a source of enormous stress that the armed forces is not resourced to handle properly. Even granting this premise, that doesn't explain why the vast majority of, if not all attacks plotted against American bases are clearly acts of jihad. Certainly the only attacks on American soil since 9/11, both on Obama's watch, are the work of Islamofascist terrorists.
More from Ace:
Today President Shout-Out said we shouldn't jump to conclusions.Let us also remember that President Shout-Out had no problem "jumping to a conclusion" when a "stupid" white police officer arrested His pal Professor Gates for disturbing the peace, ie. being a race-baitin' whitey-hatin' asshole who jumped to his own conclusion about a good cop doing his job.
"We don't know all the answers yet. And I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts," Obama said in a Rose Garden statement otherwise devoted to the economy.
Funny but he was willing to reach conclusions within hours of the murder of abortionist George Tiller. Interestingly, it took Him 2 days to issue a statement when a Muslim terrorist killed a soldier at an Army recruitment office in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Seems some incidents call for restraint and others call for immediate conclusions.
In point of fact, Nidal Hasan was a one-man carnival of alarm bells that everyone ignored in blind fealty to political correctness. This is radical Islam's most potent weapon against its American targets, and it afforded Nidal Hasan both the means and the opportunity to murder the targets of his Islamist hatred.
That's not jumping to a conclusion; that's pointing out the obvious.
