In June it was all over the news. The holocaust museum shooting in which James W. Von Brunn killed a security guard. The reports were fast and furious and bold. Von Brunn was a white supremacist domestic terrorist just like in Janet Napalitano’s recent book.
FOX news immediately and obediently reported:
“The elderly man suspected of killing a security guard in Washington’s Holocaust Museum on Wednesday is an anti-Semitic World War II veteran with links to white supremacist groups who tried nearly 30 years ago to take Federal Reserve board members hostage, according to police.”
Other outlets reported it as a right-wing, Christian fanatic with massive assault weapons; or so you would gather from their reports. The liberal media was in a gun-control frenzy blaming the disciple of Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh retorted that it was rehtoric heard from the left to blame. There was so much blame being flung that Jon Stewart took issue with it on The Daily Show on Comedy Central.
The New York Post:
“This is a cowardly attack,” said Ron Halber, executive director of Jewish Community Relations Council of Washington. “Like all acts of terrorism, the point is to install fear in Americans and specifically Jews. We’re not going to let that happen.”
Now, so not to arouse the wrath of the prophet Hussen Obama, the liberal media is tip-toeing around the recent shooting at Fort Hood by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.
Reports the taxpayer funded National Putrid Radio:
“Thursday’s shootings at Fort Hood army base in Texas—which have left at least 11 people dead and 31 others wounded—were of course the “horrific outburst of violence” that President Obama bemoaned and condemned Thursday.
“But, because a soldier identified as the gunman had a name that led to the presumption that he was Muslim, the incident inspired an all-too-predictable outbreak of Islamophobia.”
In fact, in the same report they claim—all of the sudden—that blaming religion is not in vouge.
It should be understood that to assume a follower of Islam who engages in violence is a jihadist is every bit as absurd to assume that every follower of Christianity who attacks others is a crusader. The calculus makes no sense, and is rooted in a bigotry that everyone from George W. Bush to Pope Benedict XVI has condemned.
This even though a “prominent web site” reported, “A person behind counter stood up, and he said, ‘Allah Akbar!’ And just opened up on everybody,” and that the Fort Hood jihad shooter was disciplined for Islamic proselytizing.
(Unlike DHS which does not tell you what “prominent web sites” they use, I will reveal the ones that I use.)
AP further obfuscated the issue with, “Officials says it was not clear what Hasan’s religion was, but investigators are trying to determine if Hasan was his birth name or if he may have changed his name and converted to the Islamic faith at some point.”
NPR dug through the Internet files of the museum shooter for their piece Museum Shooting Suspect Has Long Trail Of Vitriol. FOX news, CNN, and the rest all ran stories of Von Brunn’s rantings on the Internet.
Only the New York Times, careful to comment that the name the name Nidal Hasan is “not uncommon,” is reporting that Maj. Hasan was under investigation for a comment posted in May by the Scribd user NidalHasan
There was a grenade thrown amongs a group of American soldiers. One of the soldiers, feeling that it was to late for everyone to flee jumped on the grave with the intention of saving his comrades. Indeed he saved them. He inentionally took his life (suicide) for a noble cause i.e. saving the lives of his soldier. To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause. Scholars have paralled this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers. If one suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a strategic victory. Their intention is not to die because of some despair. The same can be said for the Kamikazees in Japan. They died (via crashing their planes into ships) to kill the enemies for the homeland. You can call them crazy i you want but their act was not one of suicide that is despised by Islam. So the scholars main point is that “IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOUR INTENTION IS THE MAIN ISSUE” and Allah (SWT) knows best.
The papers are concentrating on the fact that the phyciatrist who did the shooting was horrified about going to war after hearing all of the horror stories from the soldiers he treated for post traumatic stress disorder. Not that he was a jihadist.
In other words, the Department of Homeland Security report that a white American male + any weapon = a domestic terrorist is absolutely mathematical. However, man named hasan + weapons (multiplied by privately owned weapons) – (divided by stress from horrific stories – the fact that he was handing out Korans the day of the shooting) + what Hussen Obama thinks times the number of incidence on military bases sums to the possibility of a domestic terrorist if squared by Pi squared and only if.
As Thomas Lifson of The American Thinker puts it, “AP is now reporting that Lt. Gen. Cone of Ft Hood confirmed on the Today Show that Maj. Hasan shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’ during his attack. Until this point, the American media have studiously refused to report this. As usual, the entire media establishment is devoted to obscuring the real threat that Jihad, the solemn obligation of all pious Muslims constitutes. DL Adams calls it ‘cognitive dissonance’.”