Comment of the Day, 2007-02-15
by tgirschFebruary 15th, 2007
Commenter persimmon, here:
It’s not my delicate sensibilities that were offended. It’s the delicate sensibilities of the right-wing bedwetters desperate to justify the thousands of dead soldiers and trillion dollars sacrificed pacifying their irrational fears. Since the “war on terror” has been one miserable failure after another, they’re eager to glom onto any slim justification for their diapers.
The notion that every newspaper and TV station in Utah is in cahoots with the national media is so monstrously stupid it is literal proof of the irrationality of which I speak. Is the local media in possibly the most conservative state in the union part of the vast left-wing media cabal? Did they all get the PC memos about how to coddle Muslims? Is every reporter in America trained ahead of time to not say “Muslim” so the entire media can snap into conspiracy mode at a moment’s notice?
Or was the media merely focused on the immediacy of victims and events and witnesses before turning its attention to the dead shooter’s motivations? Were they a bit distracted by all the people and officials on the scene when they should have been hunting down the shooter’s family on the odd chance they could turn a crime bearing all the markings of an adolescent freak out into a battle scene in a global religious war?
Shouldn’t the media be coddling halfwits desperate to not be Left Behind instead of halfwits desperate to cash in on their 72 virgins? This is America after all, and if we let 9/11 change us, the terrorists will have already, um, um. I forget, how did that go? My delicate sensibilities seem to have blocked it from my mind.
Categories: Bloggin |
The so-called Islamic terrorists, a very broad term that encompasses a wide range of groups, whether they’re Sunni insurgents, Shiite militias, World Trade Center plane hijackers etc, seem to work in groups, and advertise the ideological nature of their acts through videos and other means. This was not the MO of the gunman in the Utah mall. He more closely resembled the solitary gunmen in Nickel Mines, Columbine etc.
To call him a “Muslim” terrorist gives a false impression, implies he had an ideological modivation, and is an attempt to sensationalize the incident.
Columbine, solitary gunman?
Ted:
Leaving no nit unpicked, eh?
I think it’s clear that he meant they were acting alone as opposed to as part of some larger movement.
Ted wrote: “Columbine, solitary gunman?”
Ooooops! My bad.
But as Tgirsch pointed out, they were not part of a larger movement, and seemed to have no real ideological motivation (to my knowledge). I do need to work on my fact-checking skills…