Poll: Only 44% think Fort Hood murders were an act of terrorism
posted at 9:10 pm on November 20, 2009 by Allahpundit
It’s tempting to blame this on the media for shoving the dopey PTSD narrative down people’s throats initially, but the hard fact of the matter is that there’s been plenty of reporting on the terrorism angle by now. Search our archives for the keyword “Hasan” and see for yourself how much. And it keeps coming. Just today, we’ve had a new bombshell at ABC about Hasan telling his jihadbot cleric pal that he couldn’t wait to join him in the afterlife; a report at the Wash Times on testimony by a retired general about detecting jihadis in the ranks; a story from CNN about a security expert angry at the military’s protracted foot-dragging in rooting out extremists; and, just within the last hour or so, a scoop from the AP about Carl Levin being briefed by the Army and finding out that there may be still more e-mails from Hasan that investigators overlooked. Levin himself now says he considers the murders an act of terrorism.
The public’s had plenty of opportunity to educate itself. And yet:
A Fox News poll released Friday finds nearly half of the public — 49 percent — think the shooting is most accurately described as “a killing spree.” Almost as many — 44 percent — say the incident should be called an “act of terrorism.”
Among groups, young people under age 35 see it as a killing spree (61 percent), but seniors 65 and over are more likely to describe it as terrorism (57 percent). Democrats are more likely to call it a killing spree (63 percent), while Republicans tend to call it terrorism (58 percent). Men divide evenly between the two descriptions, while a majority of women say the shooting was a killing spree (53 percent) rather than terrorism (41 percent)…
Asked about Hasan’s possible motive for the shooting, 45 percent think he is someone who just went nuts one day and opened fire, while 38 percent think he is a Muslim extremist protesting U.S. foreign policy. One in 10 thinks it was some of both.
Here’s the most depressing data point. Questions about his motive are at least nominally debatable until Hasan himself speaks. This question isn’t debatable. There are people who knew him who are on record as saying that he was potentially dangerous and that it was political correctness that let him slip through the cracks. And yet:
The Democratic split speaks for itself. Exit question: 61 percent of people under 35 — people who’ve come of age in a post-9/11 world — can’t see any evidence of jihadism here? Good lord.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I’ll say it again, the only change to win in 2010, 2012 and beyond is if these dolts stay home on election day.
reaganaut on November 20, 2009 at 9:13 PM
GIGO
CWforFreedom on November 20, 2009 at 9:13 PM
So…you still wondering how we wound up with Obama as President?
AUINSC on November 20, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Yeah, that’s not good.
myrenovations on November 20, 2009 at 9:14 PM
chance, must be Hopeandchange fever…
reaganaut on November 20, 2009 at 9:14 PM
People watch way too much TV to form sane independent opinions, would be my guess.
Most of TV news has been doing backflips and triple-salchows to keep a lid on the Hasan-jihadism connection.
Edouard on November 20, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Wait till he grows a long beard in prison
phillypolitics on November 20, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Sept. 10
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Well, hey, don’t count me among them. For what it’s worth.
Hawkins1701 on November 20, 2009 at 9:16 PM
Was “Treason” even an option?
Didn’t see it listed….
notropis on November 20, 2009 at 9:16 PM
To many kids are marinated in PC mentality.
the_nile on November 20, 2009 at 9:16 PM
To admit this is terrorism flies in the face of DHS’s effort to paint Constitutionalists as the new “white AQ”…
Ozprey on November 20, 2009 at 9:17 PM
Of the public? Who exactly answers these surveys?
publiuspen on November 20, 2009 at 9:18 PM
From all the blogs I haunt and all the psoting I can do, people just don;t want to beleive in the whole jihad angle. Most people want to beleive that if we pack up all the troops pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq, and just come home, that the whole Islamo-terrorism thing will go away. They have convinced themselves to ignore what Bin Laden and Al Zawhiri have been telling them in their many videos and audios about how this won’t stop until all of the infodels have been subjugated or decimated.
It as if the American public has grown so weary of the Islamo-terrorism thing, that they have decided to ignore it, and so they have found some other reason to blame the Fort Hood shootings, something less unPC.
paulsur on November 20, 2009 at 9:18 PM
W T H
MES401067 on November 20, 2009 at 9:18 PM
Gosh….what a surprise. Apparently it is only terrorism if the victim is an abortion doctor who became rich by killing tens of thousands of babies and the shooter believes in God.
NeoKong on November 20, 2009 at 9:18 PM
The nation sleeps again.
Saltysam on November 20, 2009 at 9:18 PM
The Wisdom of Life Experience.
The stupidity of political correctness.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:19 PM
When does the political violence begin?
radioboyatl on November 20, 2009 at 9:19 PM
This poor sick country is in full rectal defilade.
rplat on November 20, 2009 at 9:20 PM
I suppose the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 was just a killing spree too. See what that got us.
Saltysam on November 20, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Young people are stupid?
txag92 on November 20, 2009 at 9:21 PM
I blame it on the MSM. Sure, you tell the truth to a million people a day, but most of the dolts out there only get what’s most easily available, MSM.
jaime on November 20, 2009 at 9:21 PM
What this poll prooves is that democrats are in denial and they are stupid, idealogical twits.
Vince on November 20, 2009 at 9:22 PM
Hey, YOU try watching Mtv all day and then try to think clearly!
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:22 PM
proves!!!!
Vince on November 20, 2009 at 9:22 PM
People have become complaciant in thinking we are safe from terror attacks. It’s something people want to forget and think that it won’t happen again. If they don’t think it’s a terrorist attack all will be ok.
I think Zero and the Lamestream media have a lot to do with this too. Find something else to blame instead of him being a muslim jihadist terrorist. Blame it on PTSD, blame it on his fellow officers, but don’t blame Hasan for what he really is. It’s sickning.
Brat4life on November 20, 2009 at 9:23 PM
I blame Geraldo…
d1carter on November 20, 2009 at 9:24 PM
My neighbor said it was PTSD, he’s didnt hear of all the Jihad connections and what was shouted during the shootings. He voted for Obama too. Seems they tune out anything that doesn’t suit them.
Static on November 20, 2009 at 9:24 PM
Removing the question mark, you can see how obvious it is. These youngin’s have been brain washed by left wing “teachers”, left wing Hollyweird, left wing “musicians” and left wing media. Hence, the election of a left wing president. Mission complete.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:26 PM
I can see a disconnect in most peoples minds of a natural born citizen being a fanatical Muslin. In my own mind any person adhering to a fundamentalist religion of any stripe is tempered by the general acceptance of their fellow man.
Cindy Munford on November 20, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Define “Terror” , would be the next question.
the_nile on November 20, 2009 at 9:26 PM
People under 35 are morons. I know, I used to be one. The world looks a lot different when you hit your 40′s.
daveinguelph on November 20, 2009 at 9:27 PM
I would imgaine that many people might be influenced by the FBI and impressed by that organisation’s authority. They insist it wasn’t terrorism.
Here is a useful and interesting article on the Islamic doctrinal connection:
Nidal Hasan and Fort Hood: A Study in Muslim Doctrine (Part 1)
aengus on November 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Poll it here AP.
I’m under 35 and I know full well it was an act of geehad.
AlreadyKnownAs on November 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM
This survey is at least 40 questions long. To answer the question of “who are these people”….they are people who sit on the phone and answer 40 questions from a complete stranger.
So in other words…the unemployed, the welfare recipients, the bored housewives, the clinically insane. In other words, Obama’s peeps.
angryed on November 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM
The ones I’ve encountered lately sure as hell are.
Tim Zank on November 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM
They probably took the poll in front of a mosque. I’d believe anything of these guys
trigon on November 20, 2009 at 9:29 PM
I know we’re a forgiving country, but good grief.
SouthernGent on November 20, 2009 at 9:29 PM
I think Hasan is a terrorist wanna-be.
mad saint jack on November 20, 2009 at 9:29 PM
Color me surprised. (If that’s not racist, of course)
Spirit of 1776 on November 20, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Hasan could confess to being a jihadi and the idiots would still say he isnt a terrorist.
canditaylor68 on November 20, 2009 at 9:33 PM
So does hasan’s “terrorists wanna-be” act make him a terrorist, or are you saying that what he did does not?
AlreadyKnownAs on November 20, 2009 at 9:33 PM
It would be interesting to show these 44% the number of “killing sprees” that occur around the world since 9/11 that are jihad related[approx 14400 per “religion of peace” site. One of their problems is that their world view extends as far as their wide screen TV.
retiredeagle on November 20, 2009 at 9:33 PM
No buts about it. Any honest coverage admitting he was a Jihadist came too little and too late.
The “hes just disturbed” wall-to-wall coverage dominated the media til well after Americans had already made up their minds and stopped paying attention.
You have now learned why liberals push their version of the truth right away and push it hard.
American Elephant on November 20, 2009 at 9:33 PM
– Dave
So true, but there are many exceptions to that rule, most of them are wearing military uniforms, they understand the world better than most people in their 40s.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:34 PM
Most people don’t follow the news, they read headlines.
Conservative Voice on November 20, 2009 at 9:34 PM
If Hasan had been wearing a towel on his head…then maybe some more might think it was terrorism. Or if Hasan and a few buddies wearing black kaffiyas covering their faces, wearing dirty flowing robes….then maybe it would have been terrorism.
Therein lies a major problem, a major disconnect.
The stereotypical terrorist is seen as a fanatical grubby, dirty towel-wearing swarthy sort…brandishing AK-47′s and yelling “Lack a lock block…” or some funny language.
But, one guy, killing a dozen, wounding dozens, and trying to kill a lot more whilst in uniform, a US Army uniform, shouting “Alahu Akbar” is merely someone who needs to be understood and sympathized with.
Were hundreds on Fort Hood, and within the processing complex, in fear of their lives, terrorized, unable to do anything against a gunman shooting anyone who moved or merely appeared in his range of vision? Damn right they were…terrorized.
Jump to a conclusion? Yep. Hasan was a fundamentalist Islamist jihadi hell-bound to kill American soldiers.
Children…that’d be a terrorist.
coldwarrior on November 20, 2009 at 9:36 PM
Poll them again when the state of New York is no longer inhabitable.
Rovin on November 20, 2009 at 9:37 PM
– Candi
Yup, Al Gore could admit that he was lying about global warming too and they’d still believe it. Buzz Aldrin could thump ‘em upside the head with a Moon rock and they still would think Apollo was filmed in a Hollywood sound stage. You just can’t get through to these right-brain-dominate morons.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:37 PM
There problem here is that aren’t all religious extremists nuts? One generally doesn’t find otherwise happy, healthy, productive people who become extremists; they typically have a lot of mental health problems to begin with.
This Hasan guy was in his 40s and had never had a girlfriend, other than the girls at the strip club he frequented. He had no friends. He rarely saw his family. He had a terrible work record. Mentally, he was a complete mess, and Muslim extremism was a perfect place to act out all that wackiness, because it’s a world peppered with lunatics.
This really is a chicken and egg argument. It may be a stretch to say Muslim extremism had nothing to do with it, but it’s also a stretch to say he was a normal guy until his descent into religious extremism.
Now, as to why the Army let it go on for so long? That was PC fear, pure and simple. They should be washing out fanatics of every stripe, because fanaticism is a mental illness.
Rational Thought on November 20, 2009 at 9:37 PM
I believe the proper term is “Derka derka!”
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:38 PM
Now THIS is exactly what it was. A sworn officer of the US Army attacked his own troops in the name of their enemy. Yes, Jihadist islam is the enemy, and anyone who can’t acknowledge that is delusional. Terrorism is a tactic used by the enemy, but too many people confuse the two.
Fighton03 on November 20, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Sort of semantic isn’t it? Horrific, yes. But “terrorism”? Don’t think so. Extreme jihadist rampage? Definitely. Treason? Ummm, yeah. Guerilla warfare? probably.
All the definitions I see say that terrorism involves, “Deliberate targeting of non-combatants.” I didn’t see that here. (James Taranto agrees with me.)
Semantics though. The whole argument is sort of pointless.
Hope they read him his miranda rights when they arrested him. And did they get his permission before they shot him? That might be assault! And probably a hate crime.
This country has gone so far beyond the realm of sanity it’s just sickening.
To me the important point is: has our political correctness gone so far that we’re not even allowed to protect ourselves? So many red flags. Clearly not fit for the armed services. All ignored. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
When is it enough?
Pablo Snooze on November 20, 2009 at 9:40 PM
You know it is funny that after we get these jihadists in custody, the libs no longer fear them. Or at least that is what they keep telling us.
d1carter on November 20, 2009 at 9:40 PM
Pass the kool-aid.
DougDavis on November 20, 2009 at 9:40 PM
What matters is that people live amongst those that they don’t need suffer such counter-culture attacks. It’s a big world where people can enjoy their lives amongst people they can trust and live with within their particular cultures. Much of the word is Muslim, it’s okay if some regions of the planet don’t want Islam to permeate their little corner of society. It’s even okay to proudly purge that threatening element from their society.
Buddahpundit on November 20, 2009 at 9:40 PM
I guess this poll explains why a president has to be at least 35 years old.
iceman1960 on November 20, 2009 at 9:41 PM
They can tell you anything you want to know about AI,or Dancing with the Stars though. I asked a reporter one time if they just showed the idiots in Man on the street interviews, and was assured that they were not cherry picking the bottom dwellers.
Southernblogger on November 20, 2009 at 9:44 PM
– Pablo
His victims were unarmed. He not only wanted to kill as many of them as possible, but being a shrink, he knows that this attack would demoralize the survivors headed into battle. They couldn’t shoot back, hence he terrorized them. But like you said, semantics.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Oh for Pete’s sake Allah. That’s like saying that you can’t blame the MSM for getting Obama elected because the truth about his past was reported widely (e.g. Pastor Wright etc). It’s not just the information the media makes available, it’s the way they present it, the spin they put on it and the way they weight one angle in relation to another. Sure, the pieces of the puzzle were all out there, but when you have the liberal talking heads of the MSM telling the masses that it was post traumatic whatever and not jihad, it’s not surprising that so many have this meme planted in their heads. Let’s face it, if our media had any objectivity and common sense they would be calling this jihad with no ifs or buts and the pubic would have no reason to believe otherwise.
The troube is there is far too much trust placed on the media. Far too many people think that if someone’s in a news studio wearing a shirt and tie, they must know what they’re talking about.
Sharke on November 20, 2009 at 9:48 PM
This poll doesn’t surprise me. I think it was a mass murder with an obsession about religion, but I don’t think he was directed by outsiders to do it.
The evidence doesn’t support that yet. The e-mails suggest an obsession, for sure, but not direction from outside.
AnninCA on November 20, 2009 at 9:49 PM
+100
HAnthonyWayne on November 20, 2009 at 9:50 PM
– SouthBlog
Funny you should say that. I offer free drinks on my plane to anybody who can name a Medal of Honor recepient from either Iraq or Afghanistan, push the dinger light button and most times nobody can do it. Then I say “Ok, now ring your call button if you can name an American Idol winner … Dancing with the Stars? Next Top Model?” And they light up the plane like a Christmas tree.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 9:51 PM
No direction from outside?
He was merely reading the Koran and corresponding with the AQ nut job in Yemen.
Inspiration is direction.
coldwarrior on November 20, 2009 at 9:52 PM
I think his act is like many other work place shootings, with a side order of jihad.
mad saint jack on November 20, 2009 at 9:52 PM
“One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn’t belong ….”
The Democrat responders skew the poll – their views are out of line with the “indies” … we’re all supposed to be slobbering all over the indies, right?
The question we should ask is “Why are they out of line?”
If Dems admit it’s terrorism, then they’re stuck with a terrorist attack happening on “their guy’s” watch. Lowest common denominator politics argues against that.
Then you get reason #2 – Dems don’t want to fight a war on terror …. I’m sorry, “man made disasters” (is that the euphemism?). Admit it’s terror and you have to justify doing nothing in response to terror. It is so much easier to justify doing nothing if you label this “one nut job whose motives simply cannot be ascertained.”
BD57 on November 20, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Actually I think there is another dynamic at work. The target was the military. If he had gunned down mostly or only civilians then the poll results might be different. For some reason when the attack involves the military people are reluctant to call it terrorism.
Think of all the previous attacks such as the Khobar Towers, the Marine barracks in Beirut or the USS Cole. I don’t think you would find many of them classified as terrorist attacks either.
Just A Grunt on November 20, 2009 at 9:53 PM
I was about to jump all over you here RT, but on second thought, yes most “religious extremists” are nuts. The problem may also be who defines/measures the term. My faith in God,–while it may be extreme to one person and “normal” to most others—doesn’t empel me to want to take a life if others disagree with my faith. Therefore, your assumtion that we may be all nuts is subjective.
The point here is, while I am “extremely” devoted to my faith, by no means do I wish harm or death upon any who chose not to accept my faith.
Rovin on November 20, 2009 at 9:56 PM
If someone has already mentioned this I apologize.
Maybe they should asked if could be considered a “Man-Made Disaster?”
Remember when the Homeland Secretary changed an act of terrorism into a “Man-Made Disaster.”
Americannodash on November 20, 2009 at 9:57 PM
Annie,
Tim McVeigh wasn’t instructed by any outsiders. So does he not meet the definition of terrorist?
angryed on November 20, 2009 at 9:57 PM
I wish AP would get that psychos’ picture off the frontpage and highlight one of the victims instead.
tessa on November 20, 2009 at 9:57 PM
Your exit question said “jihadism”, the poll referenced “terrorism”. Two different things. I have no doubt he was a jihadist carrying out a despicable act of war against unarmed members of his enemy’s forces (murder, or at least summary execution, since they were unarmed). But he did not attack a soft civilian target for the specific reason of inspiring terror in the civil population that must have high morale in order maintain an effective military effort. But, once those semantics are straightened out, he committed treason – pump him for information until he has none left, then hang him.
TubbyHubby on November 20, 2009 at 9:58 PM
Tony737,
Maybe. But, not being armed doesn’t make somebody a non-combatant.
If, during a war, you sneak into an enemy camp while they’re sleeping and kill your adversaries, they might not technically be armed either. That doesn’t make them non-combatants.
If you’re in the army, you’re a combatant.
Again, semantics. Jerk off killed 14 people. Doesn’t matter what we call it.
Pablo Snooze on November 20, 2009 at 10:01 PM
America, along with the rest of Western civilization, is now much too stoopid to prevail in the GWOT.
Hell, we couldn’t even get our fat asses of the couch and demand the defeat of TARP and Porkulus, and will probably be too busy tomorrow watching football to try and stop HarryCare from passing to the Senate floor, from where it will probably pass, and thus seal our fate as yet another “democracy” that voted itself out of existence.
Besides, most Americans just didn’t get it when Obama said rather plainly that he wasn’t interested in victory in Afghanistan, either.
Dave R. on November 20, 2009 at 10:03 PM
What the hell is wrong with people?!?!?! It is a sad day when the senate is more right than the population.
sammypants on November 20, 2009 at 10:03 PM
This poll, and comments here and at a few other sites, seem to indicate by the lack of cohesiveness in what is terrorism and what is not, once KSM is put on trial in New York, he will be acquitted. Or, at the very least, there will be a hung jury.
Man-made disaster? A very acute disagreement with our way of life? But, terrorism? Oh, merciful heavens, it just can’t be terrorism. Not with Obama in the White House.
coldwarrior on November 20, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Fail to see the difference. I understand what you are saying, but anyone educated in Jihad or the stealth jihad would know that these two words mean the same thing.
sammypants on November 20, 2009 at 10:05 PM
America Are You Awake? If not, then wake the hell up!! Are we back to a pre-9/11 mentality or what? Is it going to take a bigger attack than Sept. 11th? I am very afraid for our country. I was 32 years old when we were attacked by those Islamist Extremists.Yes, that is what they were. No PC here. That changed me forever. I was never interested in politics or the world view. Now, it means everything. My daughter was in kindergarten when it happened. I can remember it so clearly. A bright, sunny, beautiful day. America, can you remember???
sweet92169 on November 20, 2009 at 10:07 PM
That is very depressing, but I am not surprised at all.
Southernblogger on November 20, 2009 at 10:11 PM
Could just be that it is not terrorism. I think he is in league with terrorists, and he may have done it to cause terror. But, he attacked a military target. He did not do so in suicide form, he used a very open and direct style of attack. Basically, terrorism has to have a definition, and apparently 56% of respondents did not feel the attack made the definition. When enemy combatants, even unlawful ones, attack military targets, the attack is generally not going to be viewed as terrorism, it is going to be viewed as an act of war and thus an attack, exceptions can be made when when the attacker uses a suicide form of attack. If he had attacked a civilian target, Americans would be more worried that they are the specific target, and that would terrify them, and they they would see it as an act of terrorism. Honestly, I would think that a conservative person would want that words have meaning and not try to make something into something it is not.
He is a terrorist, his friends are terrorists, but his actions do not fit the definition of terrorism.
astonerii on November 20, 2009 at 10:17 PM
I can understand this poll. I honestly don’t think the word “terrorism” fits, either. This was a religiously-motivated killing spree. The word “terrorism” connotes an attempt to frighten someone into changing a policy, but I think we’ve reached the point where we can acknowledge that jihadism is far more evil than mere terrorism. It is murder for the love of murder.
joe_doufu on November 20, 2009 at 10:17 PM
This really doesn’t bother me.We have 44% of the public who believes this was terrorism despite the best efforts of the MSM and the Obama administration to suggest otherwise.That’s about the same percentage who have a negative view of Islam despite eight years of jihad and the MSM best efforts to say every religion does it.If after the MSM best efforts, almost half of the American public knows what Islam is all about that is a huge problem for both the Obama administration and Islamic apologists.
Hera on November 20, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Statistically I think 50% of the people in this country are morons.
Look at the person next to you. If they don’t have that deer in the headlights expression on their face, that means you’re the dope. This works with spouses, news anchors, cabinet members, even your pet. Unless you have a pet deer.
fogw on November 20, 2009 at 10:24 PM
Awesome post
Southernblogger on November 20, 2009 at 10:29 PM
Well said!
Johan Klaus on November 20, 2009 at 10:31 PM
The word “terrorism” connotes an attempt to frighten someone into changing a policy – Joe
A small tactical attack to frighten soldiers out of a job maybe? But then again … —>
If you’re in the army, you’re a combatant. – Pablo
True dat.
… the Khobar Towers, the Marine barracks in Beirut or the USS Cole. I don’t think you would find many of them classified as terrorist attacks … – Grunt
Dude, I would.
Tony737 on November 20, 2009 at 10:33 PM
The argument whether Hasans act was terrorism is somewhat subjective at this time. Further information may change this one way or the other. In the mean time here is one definition of a terrorism.
docdave on November 20, 2009 at 10:34 PM
If America were a person, it would have been kidnapped and be undergoing a test from Jigsaw by now. Our survival instinct is dead as the dinosaurs.
Dark-Star on November 20, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Political correctness pervades contemporary culture. Doesn’t it? Just as the opposite bigotries dominated our culture in previous eras. Most people don’t have to examine any evidence, to draw the “correct” conclusion. And people will find explanations and excuses for any evidence they are forced to consider that doesn’t fit into this view of how the world and people are supposed to be.
As the people in prior days failed to see their own bigotry and always found “reasonable explanations” to defend it, today there are “reasonable explanations” to evade facts that might result in charges of racism, sexism, religious bigotry, etc. It’s reverse bias. It’s terribly unfair, wrong, and even deadly at times. Yet, how shall we overcome it? A march on Washington?
Loxodonta on November 20, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Edward Peck, former U.S. Chief of Mission in Iraq (under Jimmy Carter) and ambassador to Mauritania:
Food for thought…
ReaganRoxx on November 20, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I just wonder why nobody has mentioned the fact that this murderer was on the I WON transition team.
It has been mentioned many times here on Hotair sice the shootings with the link, so if us ordinary people know about it how come nobody in the media has picked it up. Just wondering??????
concernedsenior on November 20, 2009 at 10:53 PM
The people who have come of age under 9/11 are also people who have come of age in which every aspect of terrorism has been questioned as part of a conspiracy of the Bush administration. Its not a surprising split at all.
Young people just aren’t hawks.
jimmy the notable on November 20, 2009 at 11:07 PM
Do you get more naive by the day? How could that surprise you?
RightWinged on November 20, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Both movies and TV have pounded it into us that terrorism involves grand plots and lots of people, time and resources so I can see why some people wouldn’t classify it as terrorism.
RagTag on November 20, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Some people are so naive to the world, and the evil in it. Beware the future, and these people that take charge of our lives. The outcome doesn’t look promising.
capejasmine on November 20, 2009 at 11:25 PM
I believe and stated many times discussing this that if you simply switch the method of killing Hasan used from guns to a bomb (or suicide vest) that the overwhelming majority would have viewed it as an act of terrorism(which it obviously is).
A lot of people in this country are still “5 minute news clips” and “read only headlines” types of information gatherers.
Even though a lot of the jihadist angle is being reported on,it still comes out of Katie Couric’s and Brian William’s mouth as the “shooting” or “mass killing” at Ft. Hood.
I can’t recall any of the MSM referring to it as the “terrorist attack at Ft. Hood”.
Guns are used in so many other types of crimes that many people simply chalk it up to “someone going postal”,whereas a bomb going off somewhere immediately sends a red flag up of “terrorism”.
This may sound simplistic but I think it makes a difference in how people view the massacre at Ft. Hood.
Baxter Greene on November 20, 2009 at 11:28 PM
I think you have hit the nail on the head. The reason for the distinction, IMO, is the indiscriminate nature of bombs in general, and thus the association with scumbags who randomly light off explosives wherever.
Dark-Star on November 20, 2009 at 11:32 PM
I’d guess that if a follow up question was asked, like..”What separates it from an act of terror?, you would get a fumbling answer.
Relativism has blurred the line between reality and “Could be..maybe not though”
Good grief.
Itchee Dryback on November 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM
If the attack had been carried out by two islamic extremists, both of whom were enlisted men/women, would it then be considered a terrorist attack? How about if 4 participated?…6? What’s the magic number?
What if Hasan had made access easy for a group of civilian islamic extremists (Known to those that believe that islam is a religion of peace as “misunderstanders of islam”…) to gain entry and they participated in the carnage? Would it THEN be a terrorist attack?
Terrorists do not wear uniforms. They follow no rules. They come in any number down to 1. It is up to us to view the evidence and decide for ourselves what has occurred and what the perpetrator should be called.
There can be no doubt that Hasan is an islamic extremist. And THAT is the defining term for a terrorist instead of the actual word “terrorist” that is in vogue at the moment in the world of the PC idiots that make policy and endanger lives on a daily basis at home and abroad.
It’s too bad that no one with any authority within our present administration has the guts to call the terrorist attack what, thus helping the people to understand what the war on freedom that is being waged by brainwashed muslims is really all about. Read the freakin’ koran. get a clue. Unlike the majority..(I didn’t say vast… ) of those that preach Christianity, a significant number of imams and ayatoilets preach the Blood and Death that abounds in the koran, the hadiths and surrahs. There are endless websites exalting the muslim over all others, endless videos of islamic scholars giving the OK to suicide bombings, killing civilians if it advances the religion. muslim supremacism is one of the biggest attractants to that odious religion.
Show me one such video from a representative of any Christian organization of any kind. Just one. And I don’t mean a lone nutcake with a serious hatred problem.
Army Brat on November 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »