Opinion> Bill Oreilly> Terrorism Or Tragedy

	14 Feb 2012 Why Whitney Died The media have no bleepin' clue how to cover the death of Whitney Houston. That's because she was slowly … Read More.
	11 Feb 2012 A Gay Time at JCPenney Every Halloween, New York City residents are greeted by homosexual parade marchers dressed to impress … Read More.
	4 Feb 2012 Political Correctness and Muslims The story is grisly: a husband and wife murdering their three young daughters, ages 19, 17 and 13, by … Read More.

Terrorism or Tragedy?

It's somewhat disconcerting, but the Obama administration continues to dance around the terrorism question. While a new Rasmussen poll shows 60 percent of Americans want the Fort Hood massacre investigated as a terrorist act, the president sees the mass murder as a "tragedy" and a violent crime. He told ABC News: "In a country of 300 million people, there are going to be acts of violence that are inexplicable."

But Fort Hood is not one of them.

When a man e-mails an al-Qaida recruiter in Yemen 20 times, and then yells "Allahu Akbar" (God is greatest) while gunning down innocent people, the math is on the blackboard: Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is a terrorist. And he is now charged with murdering 13 people.

So why does President Obama have a problem accepting that?

The answer was given last February when Obama told CNN: "I think it is very important for us to recognize that we have a battle or a war against some terrorist organizations, but that those organizations aren't representative of a broader Arab community, Muslim community.

"I believe we can win over moderate Muslims to recognize that that kind of destruction and nihilism ultimately leads to a dead end."

And so the president has dictated that the phrase "war on terror" be replaced with "overseas contingency operations," whatever that means. But what if the terrorist activity is not overseas? What if it happens in Texas? Well, then Obama says it is "a crime against our nation."

Notice the word "crime."

I'm not one to nitpick, but this is important.

Technically speaking, the slaughter of human beings at Fort Hood was a crime. But the motive was born out of jihad, the Muslim holy war. So if you want to be honest about it, the Fort Hood massacre was an act of terrorism to further a war goal: the destruction of infidels.

Fort Hood is not a "tragedy." That word signals an individual flaw that leads to great sadness. Give me a break. Hasan is a hater driven by a fanatical Islamic point of view. He isn't some morose guy contemplating why life dealt him a bad hand.

Obama often says that words matter, and that is certainly true. Americans are at risk because Muslim terrorists want to kill us. That doesn't mean most Muslims subscribe to jihad, but it does mean the problem is exclusively Muslim.

It is good that Obama wants to win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world. But he'll never do it by avoiding reality. He should be appealing to decent Muslims to help the West defeat the terrorists in our midst. Calling the obvious act of terrorism at Fort Hood a tragic crime is naive at best.

The folks are not dunderheads; they understand that not all Muslims are terrorists. They also know that the failing of politically correct politicians to accurately define murderous acts is unacceptable in this very dangerous world.

Veteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of the book "Who's Looking Out For You?" To find out more about Bill O'Reilly, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. This column originates on the Web site www.billoreilly.com.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment

There have been plenty of terrorist acts in the past in this country and all over the world, for that matter. There is no more reason to treat them as war crimes now any more than there was in the past. The big bridge you were sold after 9/11 O'Reilly, which you turned around and pawned off on those idiots who like to fill their heads with your hallucinatory visions of the Universe, was the notion that that horrible tragedy was anything more than a massive failure of our fat and lazy police forces. Those bozos were too busy fighting turf wars and trying to outdo each other in petty one-upmanship to share the information needed to protect the public, which was their duty first and foremost. You see that kind of game playing at the expense of the public in government all the time. But instead of confronting that ugly truth directly, our "leaders" conjured up, with your cynical assistance, a "war on terror" (think about how effective our "war on drugs" has been) and created yet another new massive government agency, the Department of Homeland Security, in typical Republican hyperhypocritical style. Then, of course, we proceeded to inflict massive casualties on innocent Iraqis. And yes, there were Iraqis who weren't so innocent, but those who were just stuck in the crossfire between Bush and his revenge target made up the vast majority of victims. I wonder how they would define "terrorism". It's all about crime, O'Reilly, how you prevent it and how you redress it when you fail to prevent it. The rest is just hot air that brings in the bucks for worthless purveyors of snake oil like you.

Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:09 AM