Yesterday I read a New York Times article about the tragic shooting in a Wisconsin Sikh temple. Part of the article stated, “The police did not release any details about the gunman or a possible motive for the shooting, beyond raising the prospect of terrorism. Thomas Ahern, a spokesman for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said the killer was a 40-year-old white man.”
I don’t understand.
There was little hesitancy to almost immediately brand this an act of terrorism and, quite frankly, given our normal knee jerk, liberal media hysteria, I’m not surprised that some have already leapt to the conclusion that the 40-year-old white man is a white supremacist or “skinhead” of some kind and that this was a “hate crime” as well. And all of that may be proven to in fact be true in due time. But, while the killing of any number of unarmed, innocent people by anyone is a tragedy, isn’t the “body count” of dead and wounded much less here than that of the Fort Hood shooting in November 2009? Seven have been reported as killed in the Wisconsin incident, whereas at Fort Hood it was almost double that, with 13 killed and 29 wounded. Both incidents are horrific, but isn’t the Fort Hood incident even more horrific?
Yet, then, the Obama White House, DHS and its sycophantic, liberal lamestream media all fell all over themselves to avoid calling Fort Hood an act of terrorism and are not prosecuting it as such to this day, going on three years later. And, as an aside, I have never seen a military court martial take so long, especially when there are so many witnesses to what happened. Maybe authorities are delaying, hoping that we “forget” and when the verdict is finally posted, it will not be front page news any more. Maybe late on a Friday afternoon, just as everyone is more focused on their weekend, as is typical when someone has to publish a story but to which they don’t want much attention paid. The White House plays this game all the time.
Perhaps it’s because the shooter at Fort Hood was not a white man but a militant Muslim jihadist and an active duty major in our Army, whom Army authorities should have already dealt with for his militancy, if they had not been paralyzed by the same political correctness which seems to have pervaded all of our military nowadays. To me, as a 25 year veteran, it seems our military upper brass have learned how to put on their pants without including their “manhood” these last few years. Then too, the Fort Hood incident happened on a military post, where the victims were service members and their families, who Obama, other politicians and even almost everyone in the liberal media universally say they admire and support, not in a civilian community, to members of a peaceful, minority, religious sect.
It’s quite certain that the Sikh shooter fits Homeland Security Janet “Big Sis” Napolitano’s profile of a terrorist, uh, man-made “disasterer,” better than the Fort Hood shooter does. Sikh shooter: white male, 40s, former military, tattoos, shaved head, didn’t say anything. Fort Hood shooter: Pakistani descent, male, late 30s, Muslim, active duty Army, prior contact with a militant Muslim iman, had among his possessions a “business card” with SOA (Soldier of Allah) on it, and repeatedly shouted “Allah Akbar,” as other jihadist terrorists have, while on his shooting spree.
Oh yeah, now I can see how one is a terrorist and the other is not, can’t you?