Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
But I'm not sure the story is front-page material. Obviously it's not good, and it reveals that supporters of terrorism are able to work their way well into the government. But at least he wasn't off in Iraq fighting (or not).
I'm guessing there's some reluctance to run with the story because they inherently convey the idea that "you can't trust muslims anywhere," which is probably not a sentiment many people want to have ascribed to them.
|
I disagree. There have been all sorts of stories on the prosecution of American Muslims for supporting terrorism -- and as to a PC motivation for not highlighting this story -- let's just say that I've heard the most thorough coverage on this issue from NPR.
I think that the messages and reactions from this story is not so much "You can't trust Muslims" as (1) "Holy shit! an active duty Army officer is an active supporter of al Qaeda!" and (2) "Holy Shit -- not only didn't the Army know, but they let him into Gitmo to communicate with the prisoners! What kind of security and background checks do they run before they give someone a TS clearance (I'll bet he had one) and a sensitive job like that?"
I thintk reactions (1) and (2) are why the right and the Admin aren't eager to talk about this story. Just like, according to Congressional Republicans the CIA is completely at fault for the intelligence "lapses" on iraq. No one from 1600 Penn.
S_A_M
