Tuesday, November 10, 2009
The media is spending way too much time trying to examine whether the attack at Fort Hood, by Maj Nidal Hasan, was an act of terrorism or an act derangement due to any of a hundred contributing factors. Why? Even if he was completely insane and thought god a had spoke to him or if he thought Osama Bin Laden was sending him subliminal orders, it's still an act of terrorism. He thought he was doing it for Jihad. Does anybody believe that the suicide bombers operating 'in theatre' in Iraq and Afghanistan are of sound mind and body when they carry out their missions? Blowing your self up is an unnatural act. So why the agonizing over the terrorism v.s. insanity question?
Well, first we have the state run media who are ultra politically correct. It is part of their make up to shun the American culture at large and embrace minority views or minority cultures. So they are bending over backwards to put the idea out there that this guy was just a crazy person who happens to be a muslim, lest we make other Muslims in the country feel ashamed or feel bad about themselves. I do not know why they do not show the same type of sensitivity when a pro-life christian, who happens to be crazy, goes and kills an abortion doctor, other than to point out that we are a largely christian country and they hate that (see above).
Secondly, It is politically important for the Obama administration not to have a terrorist attack on American soil. The idea that poor old, dumb old George W Bush could keep us safe for the eight years after 9/11, and that Obama could not even get through 11 months is horrifying to the administration; and to the media.
a=a. Terrorism is insanity.