by John Stevenson
My son picked me up from a
too early flight on Sunday, June 12. Had
I heard any news that morning? No, I'd
been in transit. He told me there had
been a terrorist attack in Florida. An
attack on a gay nightclub. It was being
reported that the attacker was an Islamic terrorist. Twenty dead, as far as was then known---but
it would be more. Eventually 49, the
largest mass shooting in American history.
(Lest you think America holds
the world record, it's not even close.
In July 2011, a mass shooting in Norway---strict gun control, even
police are unarmed---left 68 dead, 110 more wounded.)
By the time my son delivered
me home, more was known. The killer had
stopped 20 minutes into his bloodthirsty labors to call 911. In that call (it later turned out there were
three calls) he told the dispatcher that he was killing in support of the
Islamic State (ISIS). He also took the
time to praise the Boston marathon bombers.
Perhaps in an effort to facilitate the investigation sure to follow his
butchery, or more likely to taunt the police, he had publicly announced his
motive. The local 911 answering center,
the local police, and the FBI all knew he was a self-described jihadi
terrorist.
When I got into my house,
California Representative Adam Schiff, top Democrat on the House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence, was on TV describing the killer's 911 pledge
of allegiance to ISIS. Well, that does
it. Everyone watching TV that morning
(there was nothing else on) knew that the killer was an Islamic terrorist. Case closed.
Well, maybe.
President Obama would come on
TV soon to make a statement to the Nation concerning the terrorist
massacre. His message was incrementally
delayed. Viewers were assured that he
was getting up-to-the-minute updates from the FBI director. Finally, the President appeared.
Since the killer had been
thoughtful enough to publicly explain his motivation, imagine my surprise when
the President claimed ignorance: "We've
reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer…we must
spare no effort to determine what, if any, inspiration or association the
killer may have had with terrorist groups." Wow---the killer says he's a jihadi, but the
President is not so sure.
Now correct me if I'm wrong,
but didn't the terrorist just tell us all, publicly, that his motivation was
his allegiance to the Islamic State? Was
the President not paying attention during his up-to-the-minute briefings from
the FBI director? Was he somehow not
watching the news coverage on TV with the rest of America? How is it that he did not know of the killer's
declaration of allegiance?
Fast-forward to July 7. Another savage opened fire on an apparently
peaceful rally in Dallas, where protestors were expressing concern over two
recent killings of black men by white police officers in Louisiana and
Minnesota. The killer did not fire
indiscriminately into the protest. He
killed five white police officers and injured more. He also hit two civilians.
The assassin was soon
cornered by Dallas police and killed.
But not before he explained his motives to negotiators. At a Friday July 8 press conference, Dallas
Police Chief David Brown told the world that the killer had said before his death
that he was motivated by Black Lives Matter.
The Chief said "He wanted to kill officers, and he expressed
killing white people. He expressed
killing white officers."
Aha! Another open-and-shut case. Another killer has been helpful to explain
the motivation for his crime. In his own
words, he has told the world his racist motivation.
Our Commander in Chief was at
a NATO conference in Poland, but took time out on Sunday, July 9 to comment on
this tragedy. His offering was that it
is "very hard to untangle the motives" of the killer.
Now remember that the killer
himself had explained his motive, and that the Dallas police chief had in turn
explained the stated motive to us all in his (by then yesterday) news
conference. And the motive was simple. It did not need untangling. The motive was to kill white
people---especially white policemen.
Even in Poland, the President
must have been receiving news from stateside.
Were his staff shielding him from the facts, keeping him away from CNN
World? Unlikely.
Now I'm taking a leap of
faith, but I do believe that the President of the United States has a staff
that keeps him fully updated on significant events, even (or especially) when
he's traveling. So how to explain that
when all the world knew of the self-confessed motives of the Orlando and the
Dallas murderers, our President was left oblivious of their declarations.
Well, in the first case, the
motive was jihad. In the second, the
motive was racism against whites. Perhaps
jihad in America and black racism do not fit the President's world view. Perhaps the President thought some other more
palatable motives might somehow emerge.
In any event, in his initial
statements he was unable to admit to these publicly-expressed confessions. Or unwilling.
