Questions about Fort Hood shooter you won't hear from 'mainstream' press

November 6, 8:20 AMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

27 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

(AP Photo/ Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences )

In the wake of yesterday's carnage at Fort Hood, the media is scrambling to find answers about the reported shooter, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, and his motives. While they're all asking basically the same questions, here are some they're not asking.

From Lt. Gen. Robert Cone:

Cone said in a press conference Thursday night that "there was no indication" that the weapons used in the shootings were military weapons. Soldiers at the post do not carry weapons unless they are doing training exercises or something of that nature, he said.

"This is our home," Cone said. "So we do have security guards that are here -- the MPs and the Department of the Army civilian police, but soldiers on Fort Hood do not carry weapons."

So didn't the shooter take full advantage of what is essentially a "gun free zone"?

One phenomenon the "mainstream" press is prominently highlighting is "anti-Muslim backlash." Mike Vanderboegh at Sipsey Street Irregulars notes an inconsistency:

If the attackers had been "Christian Identity" types, does anyone reading this doubt that their religious beliefs, no matter how sick and twisted, would not have been trumpeted by the state-run media?

For that matter, what do you think the Southern Poverty Law Center or the Anti-Defamation League would be saying, and do you think Chris Matthews would be giving them a forum to take full advantage of their agendas?

And here's one more question I'd really like to see people with investigative journalism team resources explore: In his position as a medical professional treating and diagnosing soldiers with mental health issues, both at Walter Reed and at Fort Hood, did Dr. Hasan report any veterans to the federal government for entry into the NICS "prohibited persons" database? In other words, have "gun control" laws enabled a mass shooter to cause the government to disarm others?

I could come up with a laundry list of other questions, but for now, these will serve to illustrate a larger point. We'll be getting answers to a lot of questions about this incident in the coming days from "Authorized Journalist" outlets. I don't expect we'll be seeing answers to these. Let's hope my cynicism proves unfounded.

Also see: "Lessons from Fort Hood shooting" by Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner Daniel White.

Update: Also see commentary from Kurt Hofmann, Dave Workman and Howard Nemerov.