denying the problem wont make it go away

Denying the problem won’t make it go away

November 6th, 2009 | By: Michael van der Galien


Leave a comment

Before I start, let me repeat Michael Merritt’s words of yesterday: We here at Poligazette would like to send out our thoughts and prayers to all the families of the men and women who died today at Fort Hood. And we wish all the injured a full recovery.

What happened yesterday was, rather obviously, horrible.  As Michelle Malkin documents, yet another muslim extremist went on a shooting spree. The attack should serve as a reminder that the war on terrorism continues unabated. The U.S. may have gotten a new president, but that doesn’t mean it can just ignore the extremist-muslim problem that exists in America and in the rest of the world.

Sadly, that’s exactly what MSNBC and European media are trying to do. The leftist American news channel spent some time to yesterday’s terrorist attack on Ft. Hood, but forgot to mention the fact that shooter Major Malik Nadal Hasan was an extremist. The army discovered recently that the major has posted comments on several websites, comparing suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on grenades to protect their comrades.

Hasan was about to be employed to Iraq, which upset him a great deal, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann did say. But here too he forgot to mention one inconvenient fact: one of the reasons Hasan was so upset about being deployed to Iraq, was because he believed that muslims should “stand up” to U.S. forces in the Middle East. You’d think this was important enough to be mentioned, no? Chris Matthews did the same:

Matthews kept going on sympathetically about PTSD, and the “horrendous things” that Hasan must had heard as an Army psychiatrist. But in a fairly long career as an Army shrink, Hasan had never been deployed overseas.

But that fits the liberal media template. Military service can drive you nuts.

The problem with the approach of MSNBC and the European media is that ignoring a problem doesn’t make it go away. Extremists have to be fought on several levels: ideological, spiritual, physical, etc. To do so, we have to admit that a problem exists. Muslim extremism exists. It’s even a gigantic problem, especially in the Middle East (but also in the West). Islamism is an ideology of hatred, intolerance and violence. We can’t compromise with it, we have to defeat it. Whitewashing the acts of extremists thinking they may just leave us alone if we stick our heads in the sand, won’t work.

You would think that the MSM have awakened to this fact by now, but no. Their political correctness prevents them from waking up and doing what they are supposed to do.

This post was cross posted at Hot Air.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine

  1. Doomed

    November 6th, 2009 at 15:58

    Reply |
    Quote |

    Let me hold reservations about him being a Muslim Extremist. Time will give us the truth.

    In the meantime let me turn to the thing that I think is telling beyond these deeds.

    Thats the deployment of our young men and women…..OVER AND OVER AND OVER again.

    We can expect nothing less from a nation who has been at war for 8 years and whose society is touched almost insignificantly by its effects….until events like this happen.

    The real strange coincidence………This guy was educated at Virginia Tech. Now that is strange.

  2. Tully

    November 6th, 2009 at 16:46

    Reply |
    Quote |

    He’s a pshrink, which means he’s likely crazy to begin with. But also able by training to pass the psych tests, even if actively nuts.

  3. CFN

    November 6th, 2009 at 18:19

    Reply |
    Quote |

    A few thoughts.

    Having served in the military I can tell you that especially under Democrat administrations the fear for everyone because of political correctness is very real. When under a Democrat Administration getting reported to “social actions” can be a career ending experience. The simple truth is that there is more tolerance at the top of the chain of command during Republican Administrations.

    In my opinion if Hasan were not a muslim and had similar problems he would have been gone.

    If the govt or the chain of command went in to do something about Hasan he would have screamed “profiling” and muslim racial discrimination (in spite of the fact that islam is a set of ideas, not a race). The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a well connected radical islamic apologist group who are experts at exploiting political correctness, would have been all over the leftist news outlets screaming about it.

    One other thing.

    People ask how someone can go on a shooting rampage on a military post.

    Military posts are like gun free school zones. Unless you have to use a gun in your official duties all guns must be stored in the armory or locked in your apartment if you have the rank to get base housing instead of being stuck in the dorm.

    Like gun free school zones the rules are easy to subvert if you have criminal intent, but if your otherwise a law abiding good citizen getting caught with a firearm in the gun free school zone means trouble and it is exactly the same way on most military bases. The simple truth is that the rules they have on base make them soft, easy targets.

    Another thing that is not well known, is that there are many young officers and enlisted men in the military who have no business being around a firearm and their role in the military doesn’t require it. This is the main reason why the rules for guns on base are as strict as they are. One way to get around this problem is to allow military personnel of the rank of E6 and O5 and higher the option of always having a personal side arm.

    Hasan knew it would be a while before Post Police could respond to him and likely believed that he would be the only armed man in the immediate area.

  4. Jay_C

    November 6th, 2009 at 19:35

    Reply |
    Quote |

    Under the circumstances, I was heartened to hear:

    “Officials from the Islamic Society of North America, the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council and Imam Mohamed Magid of the large Northern Virginia mosque ADAMS (All Dulles Area Muslim Society) among others held a news conference Friday, urging Americans to view the shooter as a criminal individual, not a representative of Islam.”

  5. Jay_C

    November 6th, 2009 at 19:45

    Reply |
    Quote |

    Thank You Kim Munley!

    “The hero cop who ended the bloody rampage at Fort Hood had been directing traffic moments before she confronted the gunman and pumped four bullets into him despite being shot herself.

    Civilian police Sgt. Kimberly Munley and her partner responded within three minutes of reported gunfire Thursday afternoon, Lt. Gen. Bob Cone said Friday.

    Munley, who had been trained in active-response tactics, rushed into the building and confronted the shooter as he was turning a corner, Cone said.”

  6. CFN

    November 6th, 2009 at 20:01

    Reply |
    Quote |

    Jay C,

    I am glad that they said that. Now I am waiting for the big Pro-America, Anti-terror, Pro-Women’s rights, Anti-radicalism rally by these groups in DC. Where are the Muslim groups standing up to these radicals and getting in their face?

    Two abortionists have been shot and the elite media often equates Christians with the Taliban. But after a long, long , long list of just these kinds of terrorist attacks around the world… nope it is just another individual.

    The FBI says that this is not terrorist related, well if this is not a textbook definition of domestic terrorism what is? How many times did Hasan have to yell “Alluah Ackbar” before it qualifies as domestic terror?

    Don’t worry Jay C I am not critiquing you in the least, but I would like to see such groups do more than issue a statement. I know that peaceful Muslims are out there, but the truth is that a majority of the ones I have encountered are radicalized.

    Mark Stein is reporting that even though Hasan’s views were known to the Army, he was promoted to the rank of Major last may. Why?

  7. CFN

    November 6th, 2009 at 20:27

    Reply |
    Quote |

    Stein now reports that for doctors increases in rank are automatic. You start at captain and when you end your residency you get major.

  8. Jay_C

    November 6th, 2009 at 20:33

    Reply |
    Quote |

    Good point, I was going to “go there”, but I figured I’d let somone else take that tack, lest I somehow be viewed as contradicting myself. (strange that I now think defensively as a progressive does, just to avoid confrontation) But I digress.. I 100% agree with you, these groups actions were good, and noble, and were just plain old the right thing to do, but what about the media?!

    The FBI, before having any facts, just says “not terrorist related, nothing to see here, move along”

    That’s like a reporter saying “This just in…Local teens die in Saturday night 2am fatal car crash…alcohol is not considered to be a factor” without anyone yet being on the scene to collect evidence, etc..

    THe Muslim groups above basically said, “He is not one of us” and they are right! When is this “teachable moment” going to be covered by MSM?

  9. Rachel

    November 6th, 2009 at 21:38

    What do y’all believe should have or should be done?

  10. CFN

    November 7th, 2009 at 00:29

    Rachel, if not for the fear of politically correct retribution, those around him could have used come common sense.

    Political Correctness kills.

  11. Michael Merritt

    November 7th, 2009 at 06:29

    Two abortionists have been shot and the elite media often equates Christians with the Taliban.

    If it makes you feel better, the far right is conflating terrorism and Islam yet again.

    Of course, we must match the left’s tactics. I thereby propose we set up surveillance on anyone who is a Muslim. Muslims are more likely to be Democrats, so we’ll just keep tabs on every registered Democrat. You know, just to be safe.

    Don’t fret, liberals. You released the guidebook for this sort of thing, remember?

    Seriously, though, while I think she makes some good points about people like Hasan not being investigated closely enough, Michelle Malkin is probably the last person I want to hear from right now about what “all of this means.” Particularly after re-posting her article from 2003 that shows how she apparently really feels about Islam.

    Apparently her solution seems to be, “If only they would just drop the Islam, we wouldn’t have this problem.”

  12. CFN

    November 7th, 2009 at 09:23

    Michael Merritt,

    You are drawing an equivalence where there is none so what you presented here is not a very good argument.

    I do not conflate terrorism with Islam. I said that I know there at here are peaceful muslims. With that said I am very aware that not all muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are muslims. That is just a simple academic fact.

    Also I did not equate Hasan with terror just because he is a muslim, I equate Hasan with terror because there are multiple credible reports that he equated his own views with terrorism with theirs on multiple occasions.

    So with all due respect, it seems that you are inventing arguments and attributing them to me and that is not a nice thing to do.

    As far as Michelle Malkin, I am less interested in how she feels about Islam and more interested on what she thinks about it. I am even more interested in the quality of her arguments and whether or not I can verify them on my own. I really don’t care for broad swipes at someone, so if you have a problem with one of Malkin’s arguments, then please, post them one at a time and demonstrate how she has her facts wrong.

    As far as trying to get people to drop Islam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Brigitte Gabriele take that view and they are well respected writers and authorities on the issue. Perhaps it is time to castigate their motives too?

  13. MDW

    November 7th, 2009 at 18:17

    Alejandro, I’d like to refer to you as a “knucklehead” but that wouldn’t be nice, oops guess I did anyway. My friends Alejandro is the classic example of today’s modern liberal that believes morality and right vs wrong is all in the eye of the beholder. These morale relativists consistently make the moral equivalency between the US Military and terrorism, or Israel defending itself and hezbollah. It is truly a disease of sorts as the moral equivalency has more to do with Alejandro disbelief that American truly is exceptional and should protect it’s interests just as any other person or country on earth should do. You see Alejandro lives his life solely concerned with his own self-interests all the while pretending to be “liberal” and caring of others. He has grown up being taught and to this day believes that it isn’t fair that whether it be sports, school, higher paying jobs, or the like that one person is the “winner” and someone else is the “loser”. It isn’t fair that Johnny makes $120,000/year and Suzie only makes $24,000. It can’t just be that Johnny worked harder, had more discipline, motivation, and is all around and exceptional person. It also can’t be that Suzie, fooled around in science class, made some bad decisions, and ultimately wound up making less money than Johnny. Alejandro will always claim that “it wasn’t Suzie’s fault, there were outside forces that caused her to fail and not have everything she ever wanted.” On the flip side, “Johnny only succeeded because he got lucky, was more fortunate, or stepped on people the entire way up the ladder.” It is this flawed belief system that causes Alejandro to make the moral equivalency between muslim terrorists across the globe that regularly blow themselves up and hurt or kill innocent people with that of a standing organized army that is in place to protect, YES PROTECT, democracy and freedom of the very people that want to hurt us. You see in Alejandro’s eyes everybody is allowed to protect their liberty and self interest except the United States. Why? Because the United States is Johnny. We are exceptional and the greatest nation on earth, where is the debate in that? So rather than just calling a spade a spade and saying that America is in fact exceptional, Alejandro will come up with countless reasons why our country is to blame. Do you see where I’m coming from Alejandro? Are you man enough and disciplined enough at this point in your life to consider that your flawed conspiratorial thinking might possibly be incorrect?

  14. Jason Arvak

    November 7th, 2009 at 19:34

    I was in the military during the Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II administrations. In my experience, the partisan variances that CFN talks about have no basis in reality. The day-to-day military does not change with partisan shifts in the White House. IMHO, it is an insult to the professionalism of the military to claim as CFN does, especially for partisan purposes.

    For example, problems with political correctness and the “social actions” office existed during the Reagan and Bush and Bush II administrations as well as during the Clinton administration. Hypersensitivity on the issue of race, for example, can be traced back to the stresses of the immediate post-Vietnam era, if not much further back. Perceiving military culture through the prism of current partisan control of the White House is an error usually associated with left-wing academics, in my experience. But CFN has shown us that a far-right version of the same basic error is also possible.

  15. Bengt Larsson

    November 7th, 2009 at 22:02

    Most Americans, including liberal Americans on blogs, seem remarkably calm discussing killing a lot of people in other countries, like in Afghanistan. I don’t think Hasan’s problem was that he was disloyal to the US, but that he had a problem with empathy: he couldn’t stop thinking of Muslims as people.

  16. Michael Merritt

    November 7th, 2009 at 22:28


    Sorry, I meant at other sites. I was hoping it was clear by my use of “far-right,” but maybe you consider yourself as part of that segment of the population? Perhaps “bigots at other sites” is a better phrase?

    It was domestic terrorism. The same as John Muhammad, Timothy McVeigh, or Scott Roeder. But, until evidence tells us otherwise, this was an attack by an individual, not associated with any group. So, it is both terrorism and an individual.

    On Malkin’s arguments, people who uses the term “religion of peace” in the negative context she does usually do not think much of Islam.

    @Bengt Larsson

    he couldn’t stop thinking of Muslims as people.

    You want to clarify that statement a little better?

  17. Bengt Larsson

    November 7th, 2009 at 22:38

    @Michael Merritt: Yes I expressed that badly. I think the real problem is that most Americans don’t seem to have empathy with the innocent people killed (Muslims) in Afghanistan.

  18. Michael Merritt

    November 7th, 2009 at 22:55

    @Bengt Larsson

    That’s not an excuse to go around killing soldiers. I don’t care what religion you are or what your ethnic background is.

    The thing with war is that there will always be some civilian death. Do we want any civilian death? Of course not, but it happens. We can feel for their pain, and try to minimize innocent losses, but we can’t always stop it.

    From what I read, Hasan’s problem wasn’t with killing innocents. He was in the military since 1988, so surely he knew it could happen. His problem was that we were over in the Middle East. How he came to his views, I’m not sure. I don’t buy the “he was infiltrating us” conspiracy theory that some are espousing. So I’m currently writing an article on another view.

  19. Bengt Larsson

    November 7th, 2009 at 23:05

    @Michael Merritt: I don’t mean to excuse his killing. I wanted to clarify his motive.

    Do you think it’s absurd killing many more innocents fighting terrorism than the terrorists do?

  20. Bengt Larsson

    November 7th, 2009 at 23:26

    @Michael Merritt: There was something wrong on the web here and I only responded to the first paragraph of your previous message because that is all I saw.

    Anyway, the point still stands: isn’t it absurd to kill more innocents hunting terrorists than the terrorists do?

  21. Rachel

    November 7th, 2009 at 23:36


    That is so not answer. Give me details.

  22. Michael Merritt

    November 9th, 2009 at 10:07

    Anyway, the point still stands: isn’t it absurd to kill more innocents hunting terrorists than the terrorists do?

    It’s a hard thing to answer. It depends on how you handle the response, I suppose. Countries like Israel have recently been hounded on their response to attacks from the Palestinians.

    I don’t actually know how many innocents have been killed. I’ve seen many numbers over the years, and they’re almost always from people with an agenda. So I have to take everything with a grain of salt.

  23. MDW

    November 9th, 2009 at 17:38

    @Michael Merritt


    How do you suggest we handle it? Ignore it? Maybe that way it’ll just go away on its own like a wart? Talk to them? Maybe if we just sit down with them over a cup of tea we can reason with them? There is nothing “YEE HAH” about taking the attitude that it is either us or them. I don’t paint all muslims with a broad brush, and yes it is extremely difficult that the entire media system in most of the Middle Eastern world is controlled by the government, many if not most are extreme to begin with. They are aiding and abetting terrorists sometimes out of fear, other times out of agreement, but I believe they have the wrong story. So despite all of that, we are left with the same problem which is that muslim extremists want Judeo-Christian peoples to either become muslim or die. Yes, Obama and Pelosi included. It is my contention that we do whatever we need to do to protect our belief system, way of life, and liberty. For goodness sake, we have muslim radicals that are US citizens today, right now that wholeheartedly agree and openly congratulate Major Hassan for his killing of innocent people. Freedom of speech is guaranteed and should be honored in the U.S. right up until it crosses the line. Do you think muslim extremists are worried EVER about “offending” anyone in the process of trying to push their agenda. It is the same tired double standard, you can offend all you want unless of course you are a conservative or an American, and we are fools for going along with it. All in the name of political correctness.

  24. Michael Merritt

    November 11th, 2009 at 05:31

    I’m not sure exactly where we disagree. I’ve said elsewhere that the government ignored signs starting with that lecture he gave a couple years ago (though I don’t doubt portions of it are being emphasized by the anti-Muslim crowd for partisan reasons).

Comments are closed.