Posted on 11/11/2009 2:34:08 PM PST by neverdem
Nearly a week after the Fort Hood massacre, the anti- Muslim backlash that our leaders and some in the media feared remains a no-show.
No mobs of braying bigots marching on mosques; no calls for banning Muslims from the military; no anti-Muslim legislation being drafted in Congress or state capitals; no spate of attacks on Muslim students, shop owners, or neighborhoods.
What happened? What's holding the angry, red-blooded vigilantes in check?
Why, if this keeps up, we might have to conclude that the United States is a remarkably fair-minded society as opposed to the cauldron of seething prejudice that many enlightened persons apparently perceive.
Perhaps their view explains why, after a jihadist incident of this kind, some feel compelled to treat Americans like youngsters who cannot be trusted to react appropriately to the truth — and so must be told a clipped or shaded version of it.
"We cannot fully know what leads a man to do such a thing," the president cautioned the nation last weekend, while mentioning Islam only in the context of praising the diversity of the armed forces. In fact, we cannot fully know what spurs any evil man into action, but we often have an excellent fix on his principal motives. And such is certainly true of an Army major who shouts "Allahu akbar" before a murderous rampage.
On Sunday, the Army chief of staff, Gen. George Casey Jr., not only offered the obligatory warning that "we have to be careful, because we can't jump to conclusions now based on little snippets of information that come out," he also proceeded to question the maturity and self-control of his own troops.
"Frankly," he told CNN, "I am worried — not worried, but I'm concerned that this increased speculation could cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers. And I've asked our Army leaders to be on the lookout for that. It would be a shame — as great a tragedy as this was — it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well."
On ABC, Casey escalated this baseless rhetoric, claiming "it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here" — as if there were any chance of that happening. Indeed, according to The Associated Press, the military culture is so far removed from the aggressive scapegoating feared by Casey that even after Hasan's anti-American views became apparent to classmates at a graduate military medical program, "a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal complaint."
Not to be outdone by Casey, Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano pledged to devote resources from her department to "prevent everybody being painted with a broad brush."
Shouldn't this country's experience after 9/11 reassure those who fear a backlash against Muslims? While hate crimes targeting Muslims have indeed been more plentiful this decade than in the 1990s, even in 2001 they were less than half as numerous as reported incidents against Jews, according to the FBI.
The most recent data, from 2007, is typical of most years: Of 1,477 offenses motivated by religious bias, only 9 percent were directed at Muslims. By comparison, even Catholics and Protestants were the targets of 8.4 percent of the offenses. In a nation of 300 million citizens, such paltry totals are hardly cause for panic.
Meanwhile, 68.4 percent of the incidents in 2007 were anti-Jewish — yet no one seriously imagines this nation has suddenly become inhospitable to Jews.
Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan "complained bitterly to people at his mosque about the oppression of Muslims in the Army," reports The New York Times. But what is the definition of "oppression" to an Islamist creep like Hasan — that he had to fraternize on an equal basis with non-Muslims?
His alleged victimhood, like the phantom backlash to the Fort Hood rampage, is a diversion from what really matters in the aftermath of this shooting: the dead, the injured, and those whose dreams were shattered with them.
E-mail Vincent Carroll at vcarroll@denverpost.com.
Common Sense Says Major Hasan Was a Terrorist
By Ed Koch
Who didn't think that Hasan was a terrorist once they heard his Arabic name? Everthing else was just more confirmation.
Ed Koch is going to be persona non grata in rat circles.
At this point, I’m guessing that they would probably love to have this backlash that will never happen.
It would be a perfect excuse for martial law.
It would fit their MO too.
They do these kinds of things in the most offensive manner possible in order to pour salt on the wound and fan our flames of outrage.
Dang, should we start organizing? Hate to see a crisis go unexploited...
A muslim tore a crucifix from a shopper’s neck while shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ in a SoCA mall yesterday... does that count as “backlash”?
Reading some of the posts around here you’d expect to see some of that “backlash.” I guess there are lot of FReepers who type a lot bigger than they act. Which is a good thing.
Diversity? Whatever happened to E Pluribus Unum, you dolt?
Unfortunately, that’s the very reason we are losing.
And no need to imagine what the backlash would have been in Islamic countries if one of ours had infiltrated and then murdered 14 - yes i included the unborn - of theirs. These sick SOBs in charge need to get their respective heads out of their 4th point of contact, but then that too will never happen like this non-existent backlash.
Excellent. I’m with you, but then i’m a veteran who might be an extremist - did you catch that Holer?
When there is a "backlash", everyone will know it.
“Excellent. I’m with you, but then i’m a veteran who might be an extremist - did you catch that Holer?”
Extremist alert...get me Eric the Red...
The Baraqqis and SCM have taken the strawman argument to the next level.
I’m so sick of hearing “some people say”
Fortunately, most of us are still Americans, and we can recognize and dismiss loser comments like yours.
Just to let you know dipsh!t, backlash doesn’t have to be in a physical form. You go ahead and keep your head in the sand, sewer, or where ever you put it.
Well, lah dee dah.... little fella got upset, did he?
Every time a fanatical Muslim extremist kills a bunch of innocent Americans, the Blame America First industry goes into high dudgeon, denying the obvious motivations of the perpetrator and warning darkly against "reaction" or "backlash" on the part of the victims, who (let us be honest) they don't truly view as victims at all.
Denial is their modus operandi. The real enemy is (take your pick): racism, harassment, pre(!)-traumatic stress disorder, emotional problems, stress; whatever most perfectly deflects blame from the killer and reassigns it to the victims.
Say what you will about Radical Islam - no one hates America more than "Progressive" Americans, and none are more responsible for our vulnerability to terror, including that to which we have already been subject, and that to which we almost certainly will be.
Every time I hear a possible “anti-Muslim backlash” discussed, I see a whole bunch of dead Christians and not a single Muslim being treated differently from the rest of us except perhaps for receiving more deference.
The money quote. Americans are not his people. Islam is not a religion.
I can't get Casey's words out of my head. He sets a value on the lives of those under his command, that can somehow be measured in units of diversity.
Casey must have thought the world of Hasan, and probably still does: Hasan is just as diverse today as he ever was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.