A tale of two murders
Nutjob kills a doctor who performs abortions. Another nutjob kills a military recruiter. In the press, speculation followed by inundation of the first nutjob’s ties to extremist groups. No speculation about that latter’s potential ties to extremist groups. Note that as of now, the latter may not be tied to such a group but the lack of speculation about it in the press is indicative of, well, you’ll figure it out.
June 3rd, 2009 at 9:11 am
I think there’s no there, there, bud. The first guy was well known and very public about his association with the political groups he kept time with, which were well funded, widely known, and very vocal organizations with a public face.
The other guy so far appears to be an isolated nutjob. I don’t know of any equivalent to Operation Rescue for Muslim converts here in the Great Satan.
June 3rd, 2009 at 9:13 am
As I said, may not be. But where was the speculation, as there was from the onset of the other nut job?
June 3rd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Terrorism by Muslims is not as well know as a abortion doctor, I find that a little hard to believe. There is news out today that he may be part of a larger group and he had been watched by the feds for a trip overseas.
I feel that with the arrest two weeks ago about the men in New York wanting to take down planes and blow up a church and this is a little more news worthy than a man that shoots a abortion doctor.
If the man that shot the doc had been a Muslim it may have been different.
Oh I forgot the war on Terrorism is over, Obama is making nice with the Muslims.
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:30 am
I’m pretty sure that the fact that he is 1. Muslim 2. fired upon our military on our soil 3. killed one of our soldiers on our soil, he is involved with “well funded, widely known, and very vocal organizations with a public face.” otherwise known as Radical Islam, whether he claims to be or not, his actions were influenced by this “well funded, widely known, and very vocal organization with a public face”
June 3rd, 2009 at 12:23 pm
SU..that would mean that for every single murder the press would need to speculate if the perp had ties to an extremist group..where exactly do you draw the line?
June 3rd, 2009 at 12:27 pm
the press clearly has drawn that line.
June 3rd, 2009 at 1:46 pm
So where would YOU draw that line?
I remember when Oklahoma City happened and some news stations were speculating that it was Muslim terrorists. As a brown guy, I was absolutely furious that they would do so without any evidence whatsoever and it ended up not being Muslim terrorists.
How about this idea..if there are connections to a fundamentalist group, the news media should report them. If there is no evidence of a connection, the news media shouldn’t report anything about connections until one surfaces..you know, report the news instead of speculate about the news. How’s that for a concept?
June 3rd, 2009 at 2:16 pm
WHOA! The MSM actually reporting facts…I would totally sign on for that. Actually to balance it out, I would like them to be biased TOWARDS the 2nd Amendment, self determination, and freedom for about 10 years, then they can be fair and balanced (and no fox news is as far from fair and balanced as cnn, msnbc etc…)If that happened I would buy a lifetime subscription to the NYT for my wife and me.
June 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 pm
According to media reports, I assumed Bill O’reilly and every single pro-lifer in the country was responsible for Tiller’s death.
Although, instances of fanatical muslims killing Americans do not happen except for nutjob exceptions like the above.
June 3rd, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Both did what they did BECAUSE of their beliefs in illogical, irrational, un-scientific and anti-common sense Childish Superstitutions known as religion. Most times, religion is not the answer, rather it IS the Problem