Twisted and Nuts

[kwilliams1130]

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/twisted_and_nuts.html

November 13, 2009

By Jan LaRue

Listening to government leaders and media avoid any connection between Islamist terrorism and the murderous attack at Ft. Hood is, to use their terminology, about as "twisted" and "nuts" as it gets.

Example: President Barack Obama told mourners at Ft. Hood memorial service that we are at "war":

This is a time of war. And yet these Americans did not die on a foreign field of battle. They were killed here, on American soil, in the heart of this great American community. It is this fact that makes the tragedy even more painful and even more incomprehensible.

It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know - no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor. And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice - in this world, and the next.

These are trying times for our country. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America, our allies, and innocent Afghans and Pakistanis. In Iraq, we are working to bring a war to a successful end, as there are still those who would deny the Iraqi people the future that Americans and Iraqis have sacrificed so much for.

Here, at Fort Hood, we pay tribute to thirteen men and women who were not able to escape the horror of war, even in the comfort of home.

When I heard him say "war," I thought it was just another teleprompter glitch, but he said it again. It was kind of like seeing the second plane hit the World Trade Center -- no accident here.

Next, will "Overseas Contingency Operation" be booted and replaced by the unspeakable "T-word"? Don't bet on it.

Okay, our orator in chief at least admits we are at war, but he can't seem to connect the clues between the shooter and the "war":

• Obama admitted twice that we are at "war."
• He implied that religion was a motivating factor of the alleged shooter.
• He conceded that "the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America."

Maybe we need an updated version of Clue. How long does it take to identify the terrorist with the guns in the readiness center?

Obama failed to deduce the whole from the sum of the parts he identified at the memorial and the conclusion he drew in his radio address last Saturday: "This past Thursday, on a clear Texas afternoon, an Army psychiatrist walked into the Soldier Readiness Processing Center and began shooting his fellow soldiers."

The White House must be out of the loop. Apparently Obama didn't hear the part about the psychiatrist being Muslim. Where's Obama's concern about his statement causing a backlash against psychiatrists generally and offending a great profession? 

What is "twisted" is ignoring what Hasan believed and taught from the Quran to his fellow physicians at Walter Reed Hospital. One of them told Fox News: "He was a lightning rod. He made his views known and he was very vocal; he had extremely radical jihadist views." Despite the fact that high-ranking officers heard Hasan, they didn't report him because "they were too concerned about being politically correct."

Then there's the "nut" factor. These are the government and media whiz-bangs who feel competent to diagnose an individual who takes the Quran seriously, but are incompetent to spot terrorism.

Bob Schieffer, chief nut expert and host of CBS's "Sunday's Face the Nation," babbled that "Islam doesn't have a majority -- or the Christian religion has its full, you know, full helping of nuts too."

His guest, Sen. Lindsay Graham, agreed, and after lecturing the rest of us not to overreact, Graham then jumped to this crank conclusion. "It's certainly not about his religion, Islam. It's not about the army; it's not about the war. At the end of the day, I think it's going to be about him."

Yelling "Allahu Akbar" before killing soldiers isn't about his religion? Accusing the army of waging war against Islam isn't about the army? Objecting to the war isn't about the war?

Sen. Dick Durbin from Chicagoland added to the anti-reality frenzy: "How did it happen ... we must remain thoughtful and reserve judgment."

The clueless Durbin is the thoughtless military-basher who had to apologize for comparing our guards at Guantanamo Bay to "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others."

One thing we can conclude from Durbin and the Schieffer/Graham interview is that the media and the Senate have their share of mixed nuts.

Then there's the FBI, which concluded in 2008 that Hasan didn't pose a terrorist threat, despite his contacts with "a Yemen-based militant Islamist prayer leader who had ties to Sept. 11, 2001 hijackers."

Here's the FBI's profile of the lone individual terrorist threat. If Hasan doesn't fit the profile, who does?

One particularly insidious concern that touches all forms of domestic extremism is the lone offender -- a single individual driven to hateful attacks based on a particular set of beliefs without a larger group's knowledge or support. In some cases, these lone offenders may have tried to join a group but were kicked out for being too radical or simply left the group because they felt it wasn't extreme or violent enough. We believe most domestic attacks are carried out by lone offenders to promote their own grievances and agendas.

FBI director Robert Mueller told Congress in 2007 that "[t]he diversity of homegrown extremists and the direct knowledge they have of the United States makes the threat they pose potentially very serious. The radicalization of U.S. Muslim converts is of particular concern."

Nonetheless, the FBI's domestic terrorism web page doesn't mention Islam or Muslim in conjunction with domestic terrorism: "Today's domestic terror threats run the gamut, from hate-filled white supremacists ... to highly destructive eco-terrorists ... to violence-prone anti-government extremists ... to radical separatist groups."

Let's add another clue for Obama, Durbin, the FBI, Graham, Schieffer, and their fellow "nut"-detectors such as Evan Thomas of Newsweek. Check out the 24 photos of the FBI's most wanted terrorists.

Altogether now -- can you say M-U-S-L-I-M T-E-R-R-O-R-I-S-T-S?

[sati769leigh]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 7:54 AM

Being muslim doesnt make you a terrorist.

[kwilliams1130]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 7:57 AM

No one said it does.  But there are extreme muslim that are, can you deny that?

(Original Poster)

[deadheadjen]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 7:59 AM

...and extreme christians that kill in the name of their god as well. Those christians no more represent all christians than this man represent all muslims.

[kwilliams1130]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:03 AM

You are absolutely right, but why does the military, that protects us from such harm, have to be politicially correct in any situation?  Call it what it is and don't tippy toe around exactly what it is.  I agree if it was a Christian Terrorist, then call them a Christian Terrorist, if it is a Muslim Terrorist, call them a Muslim Terrorist.  There shouldn't be any political correctness when it comes to the lives of the American people and our military.  People need to get over that.

(Original Poster)

[sati769leigh]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:04 AM

you have no proof this many was nothing more than a man who HAPPENED to be MUSLIM and SNAPPED. has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with making assumptions.

[kwilliams1130]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:07 AM

Are you denying that there aren't extremeist out there that want to do harm to the US?  I don't have to prove anything, but I happen to care about people that HATE America and want to do everything to bring harm against us.  I don't care who they are, but there are Muslim extremeist that are wanting to do that.

(Original Poster)

[kwilliams1130]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:08 AM

Are we (as a nation) will to ignore those that want to do us harm?  Are we (as a nation) want our military protecting us for no reason?

I don't!!  I wish everyone could live in peace, but that is not going to happen, so we need to be understanding of what the dangers are and not ignore them.

(Original Poster)

[sati769leigh]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:10 AM

YOU are pointing to this example and I am countering that his intent is still not something that is KNOWN. being of any religion does not make anyone a terrorist. and snapping and killing people can be MENTAL ILLNESS and not terrorism.

you are beginning to sound more and more like someone with a tin foil hat on thier head. and less like a thinking, reasoning, woman. drawing conclusions when you dont have enough information to draw them is not safe or healthy.

[sati769leigh]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:11 AM

we should be doing something to counter ALL terrorism. IE anyone of any religion or belief who seeks to harm anyone else based on those beliefs. PETA and Pro-lifers come to mind.

[kwilliams1130]

Nov. 13, 2009 at 8:12 AM

What information do  you have?   I'd like to know.

(Original Poster)