When Terrorism Isn't

I’m with Bill O’Reilly. Why bring up the fact that Anders Behring Breivik – the suspect implicated in two heinous acts, killing 76 Norwegians – is Christian? That’s completely irrelevant. The non-Fox News media played the religious card, calling attention to Breivik’s rambling manifesto advocating a crusade to rid Europe of creeping Islamic influence from immigrants. The shoe-bomber and underwear bomber were committed to jihad, so pointing out – over and over and over – that these two were Muslim is obviously legitimate news. The Fort Hood massacre in 2007 was committed by an American soldier. And last week a plot was foiled to carry out a second attack at the same military base – by another American soldier. Each was Muslim. Their religion is very relevant. And was rightfully trumpeted in the media. What was Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh’s religious persuasion? I don’t recall that was covered in the media, so it must not have been important. Breivik is a nut-job, pure and simple – even his own court-appointed attorney says so. Why bring religion into this sad story? There’s no way a “true” Christian could be capable of such terrorism. That’s reserved for Islamic jihadists.