David Kupelian writes for World Net Daily, and in this piece asks a very interesting question: "What's behind America's politically correct 'love' of Islam?"
For a gentler rebuke of the approach taken to this, read what Jennifer Hartline has to say in her blog My Chocolate Heart, in a piece titled Rest In Peace, as a wife of a service man.
As Mr. Kupelian notes in the start of his article:
The second they heard about the Fort Hood massacre, millions of thinking Americans wondered in their gut: "Oh God, is this another crazy Muslim terrorist carrying out a one-man jihad, as has happened so many times before?"
Then, when the alleged perpetrator's name and religion were made public (Nidal Malik Hasan, a lifelong Muslim) along with eyewitness reports he had shouted the obligatory pre-terror-attack proclamation, "Allahu akbar" ("Allah is greatest") before commencing his orgy of slaughter, their suspicions were confirmed: This was surely a major attack on the American homeland by a Muslim terrorist.
Further evidence quickly rolled in: Hasan had reportedly refused to fight fellow Muslims, called the war on terror a "war on Islam," told a co-worker Muslims had a right to rise up and attack Americans, and reportedly had posted online his astoundingly twisted belief that an Islamic suicide bomber was morally equivalent to a soldier throwing himself on a grenade to save the lives of his comrades.
In other words, although the Army had many warnings Hasan was a certifiable, America-hating, jihadist "ticking time bomb" waiting to go off, it did nothing to avert last week's terror attack. Why?
Not to take umbrage with him, but in light of what has happened since the incident, I am not sure there are "millions of thinking Americans", or hundred's of thousands of thinking Canadians either for that matter. Having politically correct thoughts and speaking politically correct words is not thinking, it is the antithesis of thinking.
But, I have gotten ahead of Mr. Kupelian here for he says the following about political correctness:
And why, after the truth about Hasan became undeniable following his mass slaughter, does the government, as well as its mouthpiece the establishment press, agonize in their usual pathetic manner over what could possibly have motivated the Army psychiatrist to coldly, methodically murder 13 and wound 38 others?
- Shortly after the attack, right on schedule, the FBI announced it wasn't terror-related.
- Time magazine moronically blamed posttraumatic stress disorder – even though Hasan has never been deployed in a war zone.
- The shooter's relatives insisted he had been the victim of religious harassment because of his faith, which must have made him snap.
- According to the Washington Post, the problem was that Hasan was lonely. That's right, the newspaper's report, titled "The lonely life of alleged Fort Hood shooter," was subtitled: "'He was mistreated. He didn't have nobody. He was all alone,' says neighbor."
- Meanwhile, President Obama warned Americans against "jumping to conclusions" about what might have motivated the shooter.
Why, after a Muslim commits a terrorist act, do authorities always announce almost instantaneously – before they could possibly know – that the attack was not terror-related?
Interesting question, isn't it? Anyway, there is more in the article, and you can either brand Mr. Kupelian as a conspiracy theorist kind of guy, or a prophet, and maybe a bit of both. You judge for yourself.