By Emmanuel Goldstein

I’ve sat back long enough.  Fort Hood has me more than angry.  I’m worried.

“We don’t know all the answers yet, and I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts.” is what the President advised us to do.  Ok.  Great.  Fantastic.  Now what?  Did anyone else notice what WASN’T there?  The media with their talking heads were so busy making excuses for this “victim” that they totally ignored any attempt at objectivity.  And don’t forget, this caution was after his insensitive “shout outs” to the Congressional Medal of Honor winner that, in reality, didn’t win it.  He was a civilian and not even in the military.  Obama’s post election campaign speech, which included healthcare points, was more important than recognizing the somber event that had just transpired.

First, let’s go back to May.  President Obama came out and condemned the shooting of the abortionist, George Tiller.  He was immediately “shocked and outraged” by the incident.  He went on to say “However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence” and I agree.  The President came out and attempted to reinforce our beliefs, values and cultural norms.  So why did he do that for Tiller, but stayed in campaign mode for the massacre of brave men adn women in uniform?

Almost immediately after the Tiller killing, there were those within the media calling it a “Hate Crime” as if this murder was somehow special. Are most murders committed out of some sort of love for the victim?  No, of course not.  Hate Crimes = Thought Police, but that’s another issue entirely.  Within a week, The Washington Times headline for their article was “Abortion doctor: Tiller killing a hate crime,  Decries ‘anti-choice domestic terrorists’” clearly showing that a white Christian male can be called many things.

Bear in mind that the Tiller killing, although horrible and very wrong, was before any bills were signed by the President defining the legal definition of “Hate Crime” according to Federal Courts.  But now that such a bill is signed and the “Law of the Land” why are we not hearing the words “Hate Crime” or Terrorist?  Could it be that the reason is that the President called for “caution against jumping to conclusions”?  He does set the tone for the lapdog media.  Or could it be that the angry, frusterated, white Christian male fits a template that the angry, frusterated Arab Muslim male doesn’t?

Tiller was killed for being one of the few doctors in the country that does late term abortions of a specific type.  That sounds rather specific in targetting.  No other abortion doctors were killed for engaging in that behavior.  Scott Roeder could have picked from any number of abortionists in the yellow pages if it were merely a hate crime based on occupation and moral issues.

And yet when Major Hasan kills many anonymous (to him) American Army personnel based soley on the condition of being part of an occupying force of Muslim lands, it’s a simple case of him going nuts.  Both men had histories of “talking up” their points of view.  Hasan was already under investigation.  Was this investigation for waste, fraud and abuse of government money?  Was he being investigated for voter fraud?  Tax evasion?  Ethics violations?  Nope.  He was being investigated for the being a poor soldier, a poorer doctor and possible connections to terrorism.  He was being “investigated” in spite of the paperwork already generated by the U. S. Army spelling out how he was trying to convert patients to Islam.  How he was trying to convince Americna fighting soldiers that their mission was immoral while he was making comparisons of suicide bombers to brave men sacrificing themselves for their fellow soldiers while in battle.  Now the FBI was very quick to say it wasn’t an act of terrorism and yet according to the UK Telegraph, Hasan went to the same Mosque at the same time as 2 of the Sept 11 hijackers.  He was a fan of the extremist Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki.  Did the FBI not know this?  What does it take for an Arab Muslim extremist loving individual killing Americans while yelling Allah Ahkbar to be labelled a terrorist?  I would settle for hate criminal right now.  ANYTHING but the victim of Post Taumatic Stress Disorder that some in the media are making him out to be.  But to some liberals, I guess the fighting has been especially tough on those serving at Fort Livingroom in Washington, D.C.  Did finding those choice parking places endagers one’s life and the lives of those he served with?

With that all encompassing vision of right and wrong and the government supposedly “looking into” Major Hasan, he took at least two pistols and shot indiscriminately into a crowd of soldiers based soley on their religion, or in this case lack of “proper” (Islamic) religion.

Guess what!  The religion angle fits the Hate Crimes Law signed by President Obama.  Now let’s see what happens in the name of Justice and equal protection under the law.  Keep in mind what would happen if a Christian male had those postings, history, connections and had shot into a crowd of non-Christians for not adhering to HIS religion.