The Fruits of Political Correctness

20 Years Later....



President Obama today called the Ft. Hood massacre "a tragedy that is incomprehensible..." Despite all his other fine words at the memorial, in this he is dead wrong. And precisely because of that kind of wrongness, many are dead. We DO understand already Maj. Hasan's motivations -- he'd been speaking them loud and clear for years, as it's coming out now, and shouted them loud and clear as he began shooting -- "Allah akbar!" His loyalties were long in question.

The US media has been tripping over itself to ignore the obvious, and blame it on everything but the obvious -- even coining new terms like "pre-traumatic stress," or blaming hazing, or our involvement in a war the Left is anxious to blame, and that as Rev. Wright said, "our chickens have come home to roost." As Occam's razor goes, the simplest solution is usually the correct one. The British press is the only press with integrity to report his Al Qaida links, etc. We cannot solve a problem we cannot truthfully and openly describe.

It was precisely this unwillingness to deal with what many already understood was a problem, that allowed this to happen. The blood of these soldiers should be on their hands. And this sort of thing will continue to happen in the future, unless we begin to shrug off this politically correct straight jacket we've outfitted for ourselves, prescribed by the Leftist "psychiatrists" who are as ideologically inclined and morally confused as the psychiatrist Maj. Hasan. How many more clear warnings must be ignored, and lives lost, until we learn this lesson?

But this is symptomatic of the liberal hypersensitivity to victimhood and justice. To those who feel victimized, or that an injustice is done to them or their minority group, it justifies or excuses them (not only in their own eyes) in taking extreme measures to right the perceived wrong. Those excusing this latest attack are already justifying the next perpetrator in his mind.

And the apologists would have us endlessly not rush to judgment -- just like after 12 years of sanctions against Saddam, we "rushed" to war. And they would have us never reach a clarity or moral judgment that might actually necessitate some kind of action that might offend someone or appear intolerant or narrow-minded in the eyes of some (hypocritical liberals who abandon all judgment -- except...). They say we must always learn more before we can really judge. I'm reminded of 2 Timothy 3:1,7: "in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be ... Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." This pseudo-intellectualism is devoid of morality, responsibility and action, or even any real critical thinking. Christ taught, "by their fruits ye shall know them," (Matth. 7:20) and "judge righteous judgment." (John 7:24).

They say we must give the benefit of doubt and sympathize with this poor, victimized mass murderer more than the many innocent, noble and selfless dead and maimed soldiers and their bereft families. This is just typical of those who never really appreciate or support the military, or the freedoms they have long fought for, that we may enjoy. Rather than supporting those who are fighting abroad for us, we have just added another burden to their already heavy load.

The great shortcoming bemoaned after 9/11 was that we had all the pieces of information, but were unable to connect the dots. And great organizational upheavals and efforts were made to remedy that, and thereby avoid a repeat. But here we see the very same pattern again -- have we learned nothing in 8 years? We need to shake up and break down this PC mindset just as thoroughly as we did the organizational and communicational firewalls in and between our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Apparently it has permeated the military, as well, and those who are responsible for their mental health. We must not only connect the dots, but have the courage and will to take appropriate action when they're connected.

And regarding concerns over offending the Muslims among us, yes, some may be offended -- especially those who have no concern for non-Muslim lives, and whose feelings deserve no special attention. But the intent is not to offend, but save lives. And as any liberal knows, intentions are everything, and lives must be saved at all cost. And it is a fool who takes offense when none is intended. Even so, any unintended offense should be considered a small price to pay. Those who should be most offended by the actions of this terrorist are those whose religion is maligned (and whose civil liberties and societal acceptance are threatened) by his invoking their religion and god in perpetrating ungodly acts. They should be the most forthcoming in rejecting and reporting his ilk, and the most understanding of our need to identify and deal with it to avoid further such incidents. And for those who are not, they should be considered accomplices to the perpetrators, plain and simple, undeserving of any deference.

The motto on our coins is "E pluribus unum," not "E pluribus plurum," and in the war on terrorism, we must be more united than ever. A classical tactic is to divide and conquer. There is more diversity and tolerance in this country than any other in the world -- those who believe otherwise are not very well traveled or informed. But diversity has less cause for concern when terrorists are stopped. How often must we repeat that this is a war on terrorism, not Islam? Only the ignorant or jihadi propagandist would contradict this.

If we are forever impotent, unable to be truthful or make judgments, walking on eggs to avoid offense, or burying our heads in the sand rather than drawing a line in it, we have already lost the will and ability to win the war on terror. If so, we are living, as President Sarkozy of France has indicated, in a virtual world, not reality. And the real world will overtake us. Perhaps this is the transformation they had in mind with Obama's election.