Fox is fighting a lonely battle against political correctness--the kind of p.c. that could kill America. Since the Fort Hood shooting, the MSM has bent over backwards to draw any conclusions about the alleged shooter (why I am bothering with the "alleged" business--Bill O'Reilly didn't bother on Friday; he forthrightly called Nidal Hasan the killer !). That's why Martha Raddatz, on ABC News, echoed the hope that the killer's name was "Smith." As in, it's OK if a white person does it, but not OK if a "third world" person does it--because we all must bow down to the orthodoxy that white people are bad, and third-world people are good. Which is why Diane Sawyer was so impressed with Raddatz's comment that she repeated it and endorsed it the next morning.
But on Fox, suggestions come in for defending America. Brian Kilmeade, on Fox & Friends, suggested "special screenings" for Muslims in the US military. His fellow Foxman, Geraldo Rivera, was horrified--a reminder that Fox has plenty of debate within its own ranks--and liberals clobbered Kilmeade, but yes, that's exactly what we should do. And we'll do it eventually, although at the rate things are going, not until the next terrorist incident.
But for the MSM, there's vastly more concern about "backlash" as there is about justice, or about defending America.
And for the Obama administration, too. General George Casey, the Army chief of staff, was much more interested in defending the status quo. "The speculation could potentially heighten the backlash agains some of our Muslim soldiers," he told ABC's "This Week."
And for its part, the Washington Post will insist on an actual memo from Al Qaeda to Nidal Hasan before it admits that there was any sort of conspiracy. Until then, the Post will insist on paralyzing p.c., as it did in its front-page story this morning. It's worth remembering, this is allegedly a news story, but the reporters feel obligated to avoid doing anything that could be "misinterpreted" or "provoke an overreaction." But here it is, decide for yourself:
A challenge for investigators is sorting out a potential thicket of psychological, ideological or religious motivations behind Hasan's alleged actions. Hasan's possible contact with extremists such as Aulaqi would complicate matters, suggesting that U.S. authorities may have missed chances to prevent the cleric from instigating this incident and others. But if it turns out that Hasan acted in the throes of an emotional breakdown, his questionable ties could be misinterpreted in ways that damage U.S. outreach to the Muslim world or provoke an overreaction that divides Americans.
"There's a massive effort here to look at the Web sites he visited," the law enforcement official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing probe. "That's part of what's ongoing: what you learn from it, then you've got to figure out what it means." He added: "The important thing is, the jury's still out on motivation."
Note that last phrase: "The important thing is, the jury's still out on motivation." You see, what's important to liberals, and to sources who talk to liberals, is that we not reach any firm conclusions.
