Another Muslim attack: Our nation will be screwed before “political correctness” allows the facts to be acknowledged

The excuses for the mass killing given by the media, including FOX and Schlepard Smith include:

• Stressed US troops
• “Upset” about being deployed to Iraq
• Caused by “multiple deployments”
• An act of a “crazy person”
• Delusional

WRONG WRONG WRONG!

In fact, this is another premeditated terrorist attack by at least one Muslim among many who have been encouraged to infiltrate our military to do this very thing.  Whether this is a lone Jihadi acting on what he has been indoctrinated to do, or whether he was an implanted “sleeper”, part of a larger plot, is beside the point.  The results are the same.  The hatred and vile impulse and the religion behind this is all the same. The main point is Muslims indoctrinate themselves to have the beliefs and the mentality to carry out these kinds of acts.

Most of us don’t get it yet. The media gets a Muslim name from multiple sources, yet refuses to utter the name Nadal Malik Hasan for hours after being advised.  That is politically correct suicide – and ignorant.  In fact liberal web sites such as the Huffington Post don’t believe the Muslim religion had anything to do with this – not worth mentioning.  Ignorant Ignorant Ignorant!

Solutions, anyone?  How about keeping Muslims out of the military, just like we kept the Japanese out of the military after their attack on Pearl Harbor.  How about admitting there are few “moderate Muslims” who would not give their life for the Jihadi Muslim cause.  How about acknowledging that “moderate” Muslims are not so moderate and recognize them for what they are: Enemies of the State?

When will we learn?

Here is an update from Robert Spencer.

And doesn’t THIS explain a lot about our neo-Muslim president (from Robert Spencer):

Fort Hood shooter was member of Homeland Security Panel advising Obama

Of course. Why not? He was a "moderate." Until he wasn't.

"Nidal Hasan: Ft. Hood Shooter Participated in Homeland Security Disaster Preparation," from Gawker, November 6 (thanks to Mary Belle):

The gunman who killed 12 people today at Ft. Hood appears, based on current media reports, to be Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan who was listed as a participant in a Homeland Security Policy Institute's presidential transition task force last year.

The task force was not officially affiliated with the White House. It was a project of the Homeland Security Policy Institute, an independent thinktank housed at George Washington University, aimed at drafting policy recommendations for the incoming Obama administration.

According to the task force's May 2009 report [pdf], a "Nidal Hasan" from the Uniformed Services University School of Medicine was a task force event participant. Other participants included Senate and House staffers, Department of Homeland Security officials, Defense Department officials, and reporters for Politico, the Washington Post, and the London Times....

Posted by Robert on November 6, 2009 7:56 AM | 45 Comments
Digg this | del.icio.us | Buzz up!

Technorati Tags: media ignorance,political correctness,Islamic attack on Fort Hood

Extremist Habits of the Media

They act like two-year olds...or psychotic adults who see everything in extremes of black and white - they distort to sensationalize. Many are "drama queens". They do this to increase readership at the expense of reality, truth, and reason. They have their audience, and unfortunately, I am part of it.

I am speaking of the media - both liberal and conservative. Here is a typical example from a site I frequent, though I have to admit its blatant sensationalist exaggerated reporting is getting on my nerves...

The headline reads "Church Damns da Vinci" with a closeup photo of burning books. The reality: The "church" did not "damn" anyone. And the chuch is not burning books. CNN, FOX, CBS - they all do this... Drudge is a somewhat more blatant.

This may be my turning point away from the sensationalizing liars.

We become what we consume...

Are you among those who doubt or deny that what you read, what you watch on TV or at the movies, or the music you listen to has little if any influence on your thoughts, your attitudes, and ultimately, your behavior and character?

I am amazed at people who actually believe that the entertainment they regularly expose themselves to has little or no influence on the person they become. They seem oblivious to an obvious reality.

Doesn't it make sense that those who expose themselves constantly to violence develop violent tendencies? That those who expose themselves constantly to dishonesty tend toward dishonesty?

And conversely, wouldn't it make sense that those who expose themselves constantly to selfless, giving situations tend toward becoming selfless and giving?

I'm not speaking of absolutes here. I'm speaking of human tendencies that result from what we do with our lives, our senses, and our time.

One might then ask, "does that mean if I watch a show featuring terrorists that I'll become a terrorist?" No. But if you spend large amounts of time watching shows depicting terrorism in a positive light, such as from an Islamofacist perspective (or from an America-hating perspective like Newsweek) then you are likely to have a greater tendency to agree with the purposes of terrorism, if not also develop tendencies toward that sociopathic behavior.

Another might suggest that watching anti-social or immoral entertainment is a person's voyeuristic outlet - by having an outlet one could argue a person is less inclined to do such things in real life. This would argue for the thought that billions are spent on advertising so that people will NOT buy the product; that such advertising just serves as an outlet to reduce the desire for the product. Hmmm.

Newsflash: Adverstisers spend billions on advertising because advertising works! People who watch or read advertisements are more likely to buy the product!

Our practice of watching immoral entertainment and denying its effect on us is an addiction just as assuredly as smoking is an addiction. I've spoken with addicted smokers who will actually get defensive and angry at the suggestion that there is a connection between smoking and emphysema as they hack and choke with their smokers' cough.

The addict denies his addiction. In a sense we are all addicted to various things that aren't all that good for us. It is our challenge to identify them and change if we sincerely desire to be a better person, whether the addiction (or strong, controlling habit - take your pick of words) involves the foods we eat, substances we smoke, entertaining we soak in, friends we keep...

It all boils down to life priorities. What do we want to become? Just as "we are what we eat", we become what we consume, intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually. The book of Proverbs proclaims, "As [a man] thinketh in his heart, so is he." (Proverbs 23:7.)

Some don't care what they become, so whatever life makes of them is OK. Others believe they are so much in control of their lives that the negative, destructive, anti-social entertainment they consume doesn't effect them. They are above it all - uh huh, uh huh.

I have some ocean-front property in Arizona you might be interested in.

The Flushing Rumor: Who Are the Sociopaths?

I'm not sure what's worse: the irresponsible, reactionary, anti-American liberal media, or the irresponsible, reactionary, anti-American, Islamofacists. Well, maybe I am sure.

The casual observer of recent news reports and opinion on this topic will note the majority of the blame being heaped on one of our favorite whipping posts, the "liberal media", in this case Newsweek. They, like the crew at CBS, were so caught up in their anti-American predisposition that they took a shread of information and made it into something it wasn't.

The radical, and perhaps even the moderate, Islamists did the same thing. Starting in Afghanistan, thousands (or is it millions) of these otherwise good and kind people are taking an unsubstantiated thread of information and rioting and killing over it. The average shrink in this country would call this behavior extremely psychotic, worthy of one with a diagnosis of an extreme bi-polar disorder. That kind of reactionary behavior would normally get someone put away in prison or a high security mental hospital for a very long time.

So, have we come to expect this severely reactionary behavior from a major portion of the worlds population as "normal" and worthy of tiptoeing around? I think that "norm" is absurd.

As much as I would like to nail liberal media like Newsweek for their sin of bias, the majority of our finger pointing is in the wrong direction. Muslims would like to be known and understood as decent people, yes? Decent people don't riot in the street killing innocent people because an erroneous innuendo ticks them off. That is a sociopathic mental illness. And apparently a lot of them have it.

Click on the heading of this blog for an excellent related article from the National Review.


And from the web site Jihad Watch, here is another observation of the character defect of the "radicals", however many million there happen to be:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/006202.php

And finally, Ann Coulter's pointed comments about Newsweeks' anti-American rot from within:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20050518/cm_ucac/newsweekdissembledmuslimsdismembered/nc:742