by Ann Coulter
11/11/09
The massacre at Fort Hood last week is the perfect apotheosis of the liberal victimology described in my book "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America." According to witnesses, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan entered a medical facility at Fort Hood, prayed briefly, then shouted "Allahu akbar" before he began gunning down American troops. Now I don't know which to be more afraid of: Muslims or government-run health care systems.
President Obama honored the victims by immediately warning Americans not to "jump to conclusions" -- namely, the obvious conclusion that the attack was an act of Islamic terrorism. As conclusions go, it wasn't much of a jump.
But the mainstream media waited for no information -- indeed actively avoided learning any information -- before leaping to the far less obvious conclusion that the suspect's mass murder was set off by "stress." The day after the slaughter, The New York Times ran one editorial and two of three op-eds asserting as much -- which was at least one more than the Times usually runs about psycho-killer soldiers going on rampages.
Two days after the mass shooting, the Times' laughably predictable headlines about the Fort Hood bloodbath were: -- "Preliminary Inquiry Finds No Link to Terror Plot" -- "Painful Stories Take a Toll on Military Therapists" -- "When Soldiers' Minds Snap"
The Los Angeles Times jumped to the exact same conclusion, running an article on the massacre titled: "Fort Hood Tragedy Rocks Military as It Grapples With Mental Health Issues." Time magazine followed suit, posting an article titled: "Stresses at Fort Hood Were Likely Intense for Hasan." Inasmuch as Maj. Hasan had never been deployed overseas, much less seen combat, liberals seem to have discovered the first recorded case of "pre-traumatic stress syndrome."
Their point was: The real victim of was Maj. Hasan. Indeed, all Muslims were the victims that day.
The media quickly set to work assembling lachrymose accounts of taunts Hasan had been subjected to in the military for being a Muslim, the most harrowing of which seems to have been his car being keyed at his off-base apartment complex. I suppose we should be relieved that liberals weren't claiming Hasan snapped because of the dimming prospects for a health care bill by the end of the year.
The evidence for the manifestly obvious conclusion we were supposed to avoid jumping to is rather more extensive.
According to numerous eyewitness accounts, Hasan denounced the "war on terror" as a war against Islam, said Muslims should attack Americans in retaliation for the war in defended suicide bombers and said he was "happy" when a Muslim murdered a soldier at a military recruiting center in earlier this year. Stranger still, he wasn't auditioning for his own show on MSNBC when he made these statements.
Hasan shared a "spiritual adviser" with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, whose unseemly enthusiasm for jihad got him banned from speaking in Britain , even by video link. A few years ago, Hasan delivered an hour-long PowerPoint lecture to an audience of doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, arguing that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have burning oil poured down their throats. He had tried to contact al-Qaida, and at least one U.S. intelligence official says the Army knew it.
Despite being well aware of Hasan's disturbing views and conduct, the Army did nothing. Far less offensive speech has been grounds for discipline or even removal from duties in the military. In the aftermath of the Tailhook scandal, for example, two Navy officers were reprimanded and reassigned after putting up a sign with the words of a nursery rhyme altered to include a vulgar sexual reference to liberal congresswoman Patricia Schroeder. But a Muslim Army doctor can go around a military installation somberly advocating the beheading of infidels, and the girls running the military treat him like he's Nicole Kidman and they're press junket reporters.
The Army's top brass, Gen. George Casey, responded to the military's shocking decision to keep a terrorist-sympathizing Muslim in the Army by announcing: "Our diversity ... is a strength." And I thought gays couldn't openly serve in the military. On
Sept. 11, 2001, Muslims moved to the top of liberals' victim pantheon on the basis of having slaughtered 3,000 Americans. Muslims were "victims" of Americans' displeasure with them for the biggest terrorist attack in world history. The only American deserving of more coddling than a Muslim is the first African-American president.
So, now any dyspeptic expression toward a Muslim is grounds for calling in a diversity coordinator. And when the "victim" attacks, as at Fort Hood, the rest of us are supposed to feel guilty because Hasan's car got keyed once. As with all liberal "victims," it is the victim who is massively guilty.
Lola Rose
Ann certainly said it how it really is regarding the media. I'm so glad someone has the courage to do so and without any apologies either. Thanks for posting, Ele.
1OMG...I think I'd pay to see this posted in 4.0 or liberal sugar...but then I'd have to go there to watch the debacle which would then follow.
Yes...I said "debacle" and not "debate" and I meant it. At what point are these people going to realize that truth has no place in their agenda?
The raw truth here is that we KNEW this guy was a powder keg and our intelligence people were probably more concerned with Obama's next party with celeb's begging for more donations.
2Ann Coulter and Truth in the same sentence...really?
How can you guys attack the ridiculous things in the Huffington Post while touting Ann Coulter as truth. Pot...kettle..ugh.
3zeze, if Ann Coulter is right though what happened is beyond tragic it is borders on criminal neglect in the name of political correctness, and diversity.
4Seriously...we all connected the dots on the day it happened. Facts? We had facts. They were ignored.
Sure as a citizen he has rights...but being military those rights are interpreted much differently.
In my opinion this article really shows how polarized the media is....and when I mean "polarized" I am thinking they are all wearing shades....shades which prevent them from actually reporting news objectively.
Ann Coulter? Even she saw through the ridiculous chain of events. I have to give her kudos because she will catch a lot of cr@p for this---even though it is largely true...which is the point!
Truth has nothing to do with media coverage.
5I did a bit of editing El to try and take out the weird breaks.
6zeze, do you disagree that there are reasons to be concerned that Hasan has links to terrorists? I'm not asking if you think he is one, only if you agree or disagree that there is evidence that he could possibly be one.
7Yes, I think it's possible he was mentally ill as well as exhibited possibly terrorist behaviors.
I see him as this unstable person who wanted to hurt people b/c of bullying/not fitting in (like every other shooting that's taken place in the past) but I also believe that unlike those other shooters, his was not just a personal decision, he was pushed into it by others who are more traditionally "terrorists". I kind of compare it to those Al Qaeda people who had mentally retarded kids blow themselves up in the middle of town markets.
...but I will not sign on to Ann Coulter for truth. That is just an absurd comment, IMHO.
8zeze, while I have listened to your complaints about most things conservative with respect and continue to do so, I would appreciate it if you would point out from the present article one issue on which Ann Coulter is lying.
9Eleuthera, I wasn't commenting on the article, my comment was about the comments that stated Ann Coulter was the epitome of truthful journalism. My opinion of her comes from her collective work, to me she is exactly the same as the leftist crazies who have a way of distorting facts in most of their work (Bill Maher comes to mind).
As for my complaints on most things conservative, thank you for indulging me, I consider my self a moderate-conservative, so I tend to disagree with a lot of hard-line conservative points because I don't fully agree with them.
10Does a truth become less meaningful if it is delivered by an unpopular voice?
When we quit looking for truth we live an aberration, all nodding our heads in unison, and allowing others to make decisions.
Who do we decide to believe? Anita Dunn perhaps? She was the media consultant that bragged openly about how Obama's camp controlled the media and the information given it...so when someone disagrees with Obama's information network they are suddenly spewing lies?
11"people were probably more concerned with Obama's next party with celeb's begging for more donations."
That's TOTALLY why this happened. I agree 100%. I mean, Ryan Reynolds totally called me the night before the election and bribed me with a date in exchange for an Obama vote. Then he told me to not tell anyone about this crazy dude at Ft. Hood who would be murdering people in November. I knew there was a reason I loved Canadians so much.
12Well the Obama camp "Move On" group routinely emails my personal account begging for money all the time.
Based on my personal experiences and the misinformation they send DAILY to my personal email account....that is not so unimaginable.
I have posted a couple of their more ridiculous emails in my Brain Phart and Political Refuse Forum.
13Post A Comment
To post comments, please log in or register.