Fish Wrap Proclaims Ft. Hood Not A Terrorist Attack, Move Along

Good thing we have the New York Times to tell us these things

After two days of inquiry into the mass shooting at Fort Hood, investigators have tentatively concluded that it was not part of a terrorist plot.

Rather, they have come to believe that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused in the shootings, acted out under a welter of emotional, ideological and religious pressures, according to interviews with federal officials who have been briefed on the inquiry.

OK, so, what do we call it, Fish Wrap? Obviously, it wasn’t a well planned attack by a large group of Islamists (that we know of, considering Hasan’s ties to the mosque that several 9/11 hijackers attended.) So, let’s just say it was a typical day for a Muslim. That’s fair, right, considering so many on the Left and in the liberal media find that every minor killing by someone on the right is indicative of the entire Right, such as the murder of abortionist George Tiller.

Anyhow, it’s great that the NY Times is there to tell us it couldn’t possibly have anything to do with Islamic terrorism, right? RIGHT?

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the gunman who killed 13 at America’s Fort Hood military base, once gave a lecture to other doctors in which he said non-believers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats.

He also told colleagues at America’s top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The outburst came during an hour-long talk Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, gave on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, where he worked for six years before arriving at Fort Hood in July.

One of Hasan’s neighbours described how on the day of the massacre, about 9am, he gave her a Koran and told her: “I’m going to do good work for God” before leaving for the base.

A civilian police officer who shot him, bringing the rampage to an end, said Hasan appeared “calm” during the massacre, hiding behind a telephone pole and shooting fellow soldiers in the back as they tried to get away.

“He was firing at people as they were trying to run and hide, said Sgt Mark Todd. “Then he turned and fired a couple of rounds at me. I didn’t hear him say a word, he just turned and fired.”

If it acts like an Islamic terrorist and talks like an Islamic terrorist, it must be an Islamic terrorist. Or, in Grey Lady World, a long man who had mental problems, and it is all America’s and the Army’s fault. Why do we have to find this stuff out from the foreign media?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

20 Responses to “Fish Wrap Proclaims Ft. Hood Not A Terrorist Attack, Move Along”

  1. Reasic says:

    Why such a rush to call it “terrorism”? Is it because of his religion? Would you call the Columbine shootings terrorism? How about the Virginia Tech shootings?

    Our apparently flaming liberal, muslim extremist-loving, Army Chief of Staff has cautioned against making this assumption just yet. He hasn’t ruled it out, but he doesn’t want to see a backlash against the many Muslims who currently proudly serve in our armed forces, based on the actions of one man.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/us/politics/09casey.html

    The army is investigating the matter. I’m not sure how your jumping to conclusions, and making assumptions, is going to help anything. Why not let the army’s investigation run its course, rather than undermine their efforts?

  2. John Ryan says:

    “Fish wrap” is reporting what investigators from the military and the FBI are concluding. Teach why do you hate the FBI and the US Army ?

  3. Otter says:

    ‘why do you hate the FBI and the US Army ?’

    Why is johnny a lying jackass?

  4. John Ryan says:

    Otter I am 62 and live in New York City Want to come here and meet me ? I have made that offer in the past, but no one seems to come here I think that maybe the big city is a scary place for them

  5. Why such a rush to avoid calling it terrorism? You folks on the left sure were quick to condemn anyone who is pro-life as an extremist, even calling it terrorism, when late term abortionist George Tiller was murdered (and his killer should be give the death sentence, IMO)

  6. Reasic says:

    “You folks on the left sure were quick to condemn anyone who is pro-life as an extremist, even calling it terrorism”

    Wow, way to (A) not answer my question, (B) bring up something completely unrelated, and (C) attribute an argument I never made to me.

  7. Trish says:

    I’d love to meet you Johnny. I can’t believe what a butthead you can be sometimes, and how you love to visit this blog just to be a critic, or to give Teach a hard time.
    We live just outside of Phila, and I am willing to travel to the big Apple, matter of fact, have a brother-in-law who lives there and we do actually get to the big city occasionally, for hick right wing extremists, we’re THAT progressive!

    Meanwhile, this act of terrorism, which is exactly what occurred at Fort Hood, should not be underreported, should not be swept under the cover of political correctness, and should yank open the eyes of all of the pacifists who think that we can just all get along, that no one particular group means us any harm. There is a war against us by Islamic fascism, and it is not going anywhere, and as long as Americans ignore it, they are in danger even here on our soil.

    Why do John and Reasic hate Americans?

  8. Reasic says:

    Trish,

    After 9/11, many Americans made the mistake of following a backlash against Muslims in general. Now, we’ve finally gotten to a place where we generally understand that extremists are few and far between.

    Now, you people are trying to undo all of that again, and head back down the road to bigotry and hatred. Some have even begun to question whether Muslims should be allowed to serve in the military.

    The concern that Gen. Casey and others in the miliary have expressed with jumping to conclusions in this case, is that we would have a backlash against our many brave soldiers who happen to be Muslim. The fact is that there are thousands of AMERICAN Muslims who serve bravely in our military, and many who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

    So, why do YOU hate Americans? Why are you trying to jump to conclusions about this, undermining on going investigations into the matter, just so you can denigrate people of another faith? Freedom of religion isn’t only for Christians. You can’t kick people out of the military because of their faith. Nor should we do so, based on the acts of one bad apple.

    For the record, I’m not ruling out any options in this. I’m simply waiting to see what the investigators find out, as I believe you should.

  9. TFMo says:

    Bully for you. Meanwhile, those of us who HAVE learned quite a bit about Islam will continue pushing our so-called leaders to stop turning their PC-blinded eyes from the elephant in the middle of the room.

  10. Trish says:

    What backlash after 9/11 did you see? There was none, or very little if any. People I knew who were of that faith were treated with respect, and none felt a minutes worth of hatred, in fact several told me they were ashamed thatthese Al Qaueda acted in the name of Islam. And, then president Bush was right on that, imploring Americans to give good honest muslims the benefit of the doubt, and keep the revenge for the terrorists in the proper place.
    I am not jumping ot conclusions here, they are jumping to me.

  11. Reasic says:

    TFMo,

    Those of you who have “learned quite a bit about Islam”? Right… Nothing like an outsider with an agenda “studying” religious texts, and taking them out of context to prove a predetermined point about the religion as a whole.

  12. Reasic says:

    Trish,

    What backlash did I see? Oh, I don’t know, every conservative I talked to complaining about evil Muslims. You see, I live in Alabama. Are you really telling me that you’ve never heard anyone try to blame all of Islam for terrorist attacks? Where have you been?

    If you respect Muslims on the whole, why are you trying to call this a terrorist attack? What does that accomplish for you? Why is it so important that we draw that conclusion before any investigation into the matter is complete?

  13. TFMo says:

    Yeah, that whole “convert/enslave/kill” order Muhammed gave his faithful when dealing with anyone outside of Islam was really, really vague. Lot of grey area when Muhammed married that NINE YEAR OLD and consummated with her when she turned TWELVE. And the Taqiyya, that little-known (outside of Islam) snippet that allows a Muslim to lie through his teeth, even to the point of denouncing Islam if it furthers the cause, boy, that’s a real head-scratcher. Heavens to Betsy, why WOULDN’T we trust them?

  14. Trish says:

    ISLAMIC JIHADISTS, not just your average American Muslims, are responsible for more than 9/11, and all of the attacks on this country, Spain, UK, among all of the other attacks that for years have been perpetrated by extremist ISLAMISTS. Why you claim Alabama to be so anti-Mulsim is beyond me, truly because I don’t live there so don’t know if it is stronghold of Muslims or not. But if a group of white Quakers had done the same acts, I suspect my local town of West Chester PA would be a greatly disturbed by a large population, and rightfully so. And polital correctness would not likey be applied to that group.
    If Islam wants to prevent reactions like that, they could, yet still have not, come out in strong defiance of such behaviors. When they do, there will be deep respect for them in this country, as opposed to suspicion, that is justifed.

  15. TFMo says:

    That’s kind of the problem, Trish. At its core, Islam is an extremist religion. These terrorists are not some kook fringe; they ARE the mainstream Muslims. It’s the non-extremist Muslims who really don’t seek the deaths of all infidels that are the “kook fringe.”

    Any religion that holds murder and genocide as a form of prayer MUST be viewed as dangerous. To do otherwise is the height of irresponsibility and, frankly, blatant stupidity. If a poisonous snake gets into my house, I’m not going to question its motives or attempt to negotiate with it or wait for PETA to come and mau-mau about it. I’m gonna kill the damn thing before it bites me or my wife or one of my kids.

    I’m not suggesting the wholesale extermination of all who follow Islam, but neither will I allow myself to trust them. Trust must be EARNED, and as yet, I’ve seen nothing from the so-called Religion of Peace that has done so.

  16. Trish says:

    TFMo, I agree entirely. The problem is, that Moslems do not denounce the behaviors in the most part, that we all know to be against ALL of our beliefs. I hear more discussion from Liberlas about the freakin Crusades, than I do about the last 40 years of Islamist terrorism. At the same time I am aware of perfectly peaceful Moslems who live here and want no harm done. However, I also have personal knowledge of those in this country who promote Islam in PRISONS, and it isn’t of the perfectly peaceful sort! Their intent is to become an Army, against us infidels. And they prey upon young (mostly) black men.
    You and I can agree that if we continue to ignore that we have become a nation of wimps, we will be the few left standing in the after effects of political correctness!

  17. TFMo says:

    Precisely, Trish.

    And for those morons who toss around the “Christian Atrocities” argument, simply remind them of this:

    The atrocities committed by Christians were NOT following Christ’s teachings. By what bizarre stretch of the imagination does one go from “Love thy neighbor” to “torture people to death”? No, the atrocities committed by man in Christ’s name were decidedly NOT acting as Christians.

    Alternately, Islam condones (and in many instances encourages) murder, genocide, torture, dismemberment, rape, child molestation, genital mutilation of women, oppression, spousal abuse, theft, and deceit. Numerous books have been published with translations from the Quran outlining these horrific “holy” edicts.

    I have yet to see a single book that points to anything in the New Testament that even HINTS that any of these things are tolerated.

    And then there’s the fun little argument I like to give the libtards: Well, if you’re okay with Islam, you must hate homosexuals! (Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam, punishable by DEATH. Any gay person or supporter that isn’t appalled by Islam is either ignorant, delusional, or suicidal.)

    Your non-homicidal Muslim friends should be encouraged to join Christianity. I hear they have COOKIES!

  18. Reasic says:

    Okay, Trish. So you’ve now gone from “what backlash did you see”, to openly supporting suspicion of all Muslims, because of the actions of a few. That makes sense. Listen, folks. You think the Muslims haven’t spoken out against terrorism? That’s only because you HAVEN’T LOOKED FOR IT! What do you expect them to do, pay for a superbowl commercial? Should they advertise on your lunatic right wing radio shows or websites? Since you can’t seem to find any, I’ll give you several that popped up on the FIRST PAGE of my Google search for “muslims against extremism” (which took all of 0.26 seconds):

    http://www.islamfortoday.com/fundamnetalism.htm

    http://www.freemuslims.org/

    http://www.againstterrorism.org/index.php/about/

    http://www.islamagainstextremism.com/

    http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/selective_hearing_of_muslim_voices_against_extremism_and_terrorism/

    Google, by the way, found over 1 million results for that search. Look through all of those and then try telling me Muslims aren’t speaking out against terrorism and extremism.

    The only reason I’ve ever seen the Crusades or Deuteronomy mentioned, is to demonstrate how easily one can misinterpret a religious text. It is meant to show you that your “interpretation” of the Quran could be wrong.

    The fact of the matter is that terrorists only make up a very small percent of the Muslim population. Look it up, and not in a kook right wing book.

  19. Reasic says:

    Okay, Trish. So you’ve now gone from “what backlash did you see”, to openly supporting suspicion of all Muslims, because of the actions of a few. That makes sense. Listen, folks. You think the Muslims haven’t spoken out against terrorism? That’s only because you HAVEN’T LOOKED FOR IT! What do you expect them to do, pay for a superbowl commercial? Should they advertise on your lunatic right wing radio shows or websites? Since you can’t seem to find any, I’ll give you several that popped up on the FIRST PAGE of my Google search for “muslims against extremism” (which took all of 0.26 seconds):

    http://www.islamfortoday.com/fundamnetalism.htm

    http://www.freemuslims.org/

    Google, by the way, found over 1 million results for that search. Look through all of those and then try telling me Muslims aren’t speaking out against terrorism and extremism.

    The only reason I’ve ever seen the Crusades or Deuteronomy mentioned, is to demonstrate how easily one can misinterpret a religious text. It is meant to show you that your “interpretation” of the Quran could be wrong.

    The fact of the matter is that terrorists only make up a very small percent of the Muslim population. Look it up, and not in a kook right wing book.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10064 access attempts in the last 7 days.