Watch The Change From Soldier Of Allah To Mentally Ill

    Do not think about, write about or deal with  human behavior without determining the effects of incentives. It’s not their money, of course they’ll waste it.

   I had chosen this column shortly before the Paris attacks. The “lone-wolf” crazy attack is not applicable because the cameras show two gunmen, busy with the work of Allah, killing unarmed people in the true way of faith, eliminating the non-believers.

    Seems like the “religion of peace” folks were at in Paris, attacking a magazine with shouts of Allah U Akbar–probably just a coincidence. The killers were probably from some group the media doesn’t like such as Christians or other right-wingers.

National Post
    Barbara Kay

Ditch the ‘narrative,’ report the truth

‘Liberals produced a counter-narrative cut from whole cloth in order to shift the blame to the right.’ We’re in a hot war with Islamism. The media needs to accept that

In his Jan. 5 column, “ISIS is watching us,” University of Calgary terror researcher Michael Zekulin offers welcome pushback to the notion, popular amongst liberal commentators, that lone-wolf terrorism is more the product of mental disease than it is of ideology.


   The media, firm in their belief that history started at the time of twerking, are happily ignorant that radical groups attract the marginal members of society and blame the activity on the marginals, not the ideology. The Nazis, for example, made a martyr of Horst Wessel, a prime example of a marginal person.

Writing of the October attacks in which Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent and Corporal Nathan Cirillo were killed in separate incidents, Zekulin says that the “predominant narrative” of mental illness and criminal histories “is an oversimplification and misrepresentation.” His analysis of larger samples of terrorists shows that “the majority are remarkably normal and do not demonstrate any significant abnormal characteristics.”


     Making the ideologically based killers aberrant is simple. The argument goes, The killing was an aberrant act, thence the person doing must have aberrant tendencies. See that circle, it has the characteristic of roundness because of its circularity. Q.E.D.

The present discussion around what is or is not normal behaviour recalls to mind Lenin’s syballine utterance on political bloodletting: “Who? Whom?” which means: interpretation depends on who is doing the killing and who is being killed. If a politically correct group does the killing, the killers’ moral deviancy is dumbed down (they are “militants” or “revolutionaries”) or otherwise exculpated (mentally ill). If politically incorrect, they are simply evil.

It works the other way too. A clearly mentally-ill lone wolf is judged evil, and representative of a greater evil, when his crime suits the purposes of a political movement. Polytechnique massacrist Marc Lepine was the very epitome of the lone wolf beset by personal demons. He had no ideology, belonged to no movement, followed no leader, but was counternarrated by feminists into a poster boy for the politically correct (alleged) evil of inherent male misogyny.

And when the killer is demonstrably a true believer? Again, Who? Whom? To denounce fundamentalist Christianity in the rare event of a Bible-thumper’s killing of an abortion doctor, whether the killer is mentally disturbed or not, is never perceived as racism. But linkage of any terrorist act to Islam is repugnant to liberals, even when the killers themselves declare Islam is their motivation.

We saw intense Islamocringism following the 2009 Fort Hood massacre, in which Maj. Nidal Hasan, an army psychiatrist who had made his Islamist views well-known for years, shot 13 people dead while shouting “Allahu Akbar.” (His business card had the words “Soldier of Allah” on it!)

But liberals refused to recognize ideology as his motivation, several insisting on the desperation counter-narrative of PTSD (he was never in combat, but it was claimed he was driven over the edge by stories he heard from soldiers who had been to Iraq and Afghanistan). “I cringe that he’s a Muslim … I think he’s probably just a nut case,” wrote Evan Thomas of Newsweek. Time’s Joe Klein went farther, denouncing “odious attempts by Jewish extremists … to argue that the massacre perpetrated by Nidal Hasan was somehow a direct consequence of his Islamic beliefs.” (Really, Joe? It’s not the Islamists, it’s those pesky Jooz that are the real problem?)


    PTSD by osmosis. Lot of that going around.

Communism used to get the same kid-glove treatment from liberal media types when it came to terrorism. Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated JFK, was an America-hating, hard-core communist. He killed Kennedy to prevent the U.S. from overthrowing Castro or invading Cuba. The Left owned this crime but, with Cirque de Soleil-worthy intellectual contortionism, liberals produced a counter-narrative cut from whole cloth in order to shift the blame to the Right.

The day after the shooting James Reston, Washington Bureau Chief of The New York Times ascribed Oswald’s lonewolf action to “something in the nation itself, some strain of madness and violence.” Chief Justice Earl Warren immediately declared JFK had suffered martyrdom “as a result of the hatred and bitterness that has been injected into the life of our nation by bigots.” The counter-narrative of right-wing racism took firm hold. California governor Pat Brown organized candlelight vigils nation-wide “to pledge the end of intolerance.” A NYT editorial three days afterward projected “the shame all Americans must bear for the spirit of madness and hate…”

Oswald did not represent a “spirit” of madness and hate any more than Marc Lepine represented a spirit of mass misogyny. The JFK assassination was a significant moment in the Cold War. It was massaged into a civil rights platform in order to denounce the right, as surely as Klein shifted blame to the Jews for calling out Hasan’s Islamism. We can be sure that there would have been no conspiracy theories about JFK’s assassination if the assassin actually was a rightwinger.


    A Communist turned into a right winger. Wanta see it again? The media, apparently, can turn anyone into anything.

We’re in the middle of a Hot War with Islamism. There will be more attempted, or realized, lone-wolf terrorist attacks on our shores. In the event, it would be helpful if the liberal media could ditch its love affair with narratives, and stick with the truth.


   The media rule is–If we like the group, they’re lone wolves–if we hate the group, they’re part of the great right-wing conspiracy.

Government Job or Respect–Which’ll It Be?
Cheerio and ttfn,
Grant Coulson, Ph.D.
Author, “Days of Songs and Mirrors: A Jacobite in the ‘45.”
Cui Bono–Cherchez les Contingencies


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: