Last month, when a Colorado Christian entered a Planned Parenthood clinic and fatally shot three people, the mainstream media rushed to make the connection to “right-wing domestic terrorism,” even though police hadn’t made any connection and the evidence was thin.
When two California Muslims shot up a government office several days later, massacring 14, national journalists refused to call it Islamic terrorism even though evidence of the shooters’ motive was overwhelming.
Two mass shootings, two completely different standards of coverage.
“Motive still elusive in deadly Calif. rampage,” was The Washington Post’s top headline Friday morning.
Never mind that it was already evident that Tashfeen Malik and husband Syed Rizwan Farook had been radicalized. That Farook had grown out his Islamic beard and memorized the Koran and had traveled to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Never mind that he was in contact with suspects on the terror watch list, or that investigators found a bomb factory in Mr. and Mrs. Jihad’s home. The Washington Post still found their explosion of violence “puzzling.”
The more evidence of motive, the more stumped the media elite became.
When the New York Post nailed it with the front-page hammer, “MUSLIM KILLERS,” MSNBC pooh-poohed it as “too sensational.” “We need to know more,” a correspondent sniffed.
Even now, after learning that Malik pledged allegiance to ISIS and the FBI officially declared it an “act of terrorism,” they still played dumb, still quoting President Obama and his attorney general suggesting it could be “workplace violence.”