Sunday, January 09, 2011

Dwelling on double standards: Tucson vs. Fort Hood

The implied guiltiness of mainstream celebrity conservatives like Sarah Palin for their 'incendiary' political rhetoric (ie, use of the verb "reload") in the Arizona shooting exposes a glaring double standard. I realize pointing out media double standards is about as novel and exciting as pointing out leftist SWPL bias on NPR, but this particular instance is so egregious that it's worth dwelling on for a moment.

The shooter's writings are inane, bordering on insane:
The population of dreamers in the United States of America is less than 5%!

If B.C.E. years are unable to start then A.D.E. years are unable to begin.

B.C.E. years are unable to start.

Thus, A.D.E. years are unable to begin. ...

You're a treasurer for a new currency, listener?

You create and distribute your new currency, listener?

You don't allow the government to control your grammar structure, listener? ...

All conscience dreaming at this moment is asleep. ...

If you call me a terrorist, then the argument to call me a terrorist is Ad hominem.

You call me a terrorist.

Thus, the argument to call me a terrorist is Ad hominem. ...

Read the United States of America's Constitution to apprehend all of the current treasonous laws. ...

I can't trust the current government because of the ratifications: The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar.

No, I won't pay debt in currency that's not backed by gold and silver!

No, I won't trust in God!
Everything else on his youtube page is similarly rambling and incoherent. If anything, he appears to be an anarchist. FBI director Robert Mueller has stated that the motives for the shooting are unknown as the investigation is barely a day old.

For the sake of argument, ignore all that uncertainty and assume Jared Loughner (the shooter) is exactly who the media establishment wants him to be. MSNBC, CNN (Wolf Blitzer), and FNC (Geraldo Rivera), all ran segments last night focusing on the putative anger against Democrats for Obamacare and opposition to Arizona's immigration bill as possible impetuses for the shooting, with guys like Blitzer and Al Sharpton suggesting that the criticism being directed at Democrats is inherently dangerous and should be toned down and oh by the way, if you share the critics' sentiments, you're probably a loose cannon with a trigger-happy finger.

Compare that to the shooting at Ft. Hood a little over a year ago. Were the same media figures questioning the inherent danger in political Islam, the cultural incompatibility of Islam and the secular West, or the prudence of allowing immigration into the US from majority Muslim countries (Hassan's parents were from Jordan)? Ha!

What we did get from the Ft. Hood shooting, though, is the argument that if we had not been in Afghanistan for a decade and Iraq nearly as long, if we hadn't had a military presence in Saudi Arabia up until the launching of the Iraq war, if weren't Israel's best friend, etc, perhaps Hassan would not have lit the place up. I think there's a good deal of truth to that.

So does the same line of thinking get consideration in the Arizona shooting--that if the 111th Congress had not passed a healthcare bill that the majority of the population didn't want, or if the federal government would enforce the nation's immigration laws, maybe random citizens wouldn't feel the need to gun down government officials? Ha!

Terrorist attacks and attempted terrorist attacks by guys like Hassan are far more frequent than similar actions by guys like Loughton, even though there are a lot more guys in the US who are like Loughton than are like Hassan. So it would seem logical for more thought to be put into what needs to be done to prevent future Ft. Hood shootings than what needs to be done to prevent future Tucson shootings, the former being one instance in a perennial pattern, the latter being an anomalous freak occurence. So it would seem, indeed.

Finally, another Jared, this one a man of upmost probity, and the New Century Foundation that he founded, are fingered for potentially having links to Loughner! If you want a refresher on what we're up against, read the whole article. If not, at least take note of Ingsoc's new field of academic study:
"When you look at Loughner's web posts, he puts himself out as half fantasy seeker and dreamer and half political philosopher, and American Renaissance, while a hate group, markets itself as a political philosophy organization," says Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, at San Bernardino.


B Lode said...

Yes, I thought it was weird that a goldbug would like The Communist Manifesto. Not surprising that a weed-addled paranoid would have incongruous thoughts (or shoot somebody), and not surprising that the mainstream (white-hating, man-hating) media would try to blame this on the right.

Anonymous said...

He appears to be suffering from schizophrenia and the reports about his deteriorating behavior over the last three years certainly matches the age at which this disease really gets rolling.

Audacious Epigone said...

Right, there is an utter lack of coherence in his sporadic ramblings, putting aside the absurdity of delegitimizing a host of political viewpoints because of the destructive actions of one person who shares them. This story doesn't even take us that far, try as the left may to push it there.