I intended to make this exact same point about liberal-endorsed murder of military personnel, but Bob beat me to it. And here’s a related one:

Remember that census worker who was found hanged, allegedly with the word “Fed” scrawled on his chest, which was of course instantly the fault of bloodthirsty wingnuts everywhere? The AP reports today that investigators increasingly doubt he was murdered and are looking now at suicide. Just something to bear in mind when the tut-tutting over making assumptions about Hasan begins tomorrow.

Ah, but remember: Left-incited violence is never indicative of anything beyond a reasonable reaction to Wingnut!™ depredation — while citizens expressing dismay, via peaceful protest and petitioning of their elected representatives, over the incremental steps towards totalitarianism they’ve been pushing for years is TERRORISM!!!!eleventy!!

Nice little circular-logic trail they’ve laid out for themselves, innit? Always leads to the same place: blamelessness for the Left, malfeasance that MUST BE STOPPED for the Right. As William Jacobson’s headline asks: “So, Mr. Krugman, Who Incited This Violence?” We already know who did, as opposed to who they’re going to try to frame for it; the only question is how ridiculous — and brazenly dishonest, and desperate — the contortions they use to establish conservative culpability will be.

Plenty more from Bob here, including this:

His family is attempting to establish another narrative about Hasan. A cousin, Nader Hasan, builds a picture of the shooter as a bullied Muslim who was a good person who did not even like weapons, was conflicted about his military service, and was against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The portrayal he paints is that of a bullied man pushed too far who simply snapped under pressure — and perhaps some of that is true.

But postings that are thought to be Major Hasan’s don’t match the portrait of a soldier who was conflicted. They present us with a picture of someone who housed beliefs that established him as a lurking enemy. U.S. Representative Michael McCaul attended a military briefing this morning and found out that Hasan had taken “a lot of extra classes in weapons training, which seems a little odd for a psychiatrist.” In retrospect — and combined with information that Hasan had started yesterday by giving away some of his personal effects, such as furniture — it appears that his assault at Fort Hood wasn’t the result of a man under extreme pressure suddenly snapping. Instead, it looks like a calculating murderer took the time to prepare for his attack well in advance.

In one sense, other American Muslim soldiers are also victims of Hasan’s murderous attack, as suspicions will be raised about their allegiances as well. Hasan’s attack was the third significant “blue on blue” attack by an American soldier on his fellow soldiers in the past 14 years and the second by a Muslim. Sgt. William Kreutzer Jr. fired on a formation of soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, killing one and wounding 17 (formerly the most extensive assault on U.S. forces by a peer) in a 1995 stateside assault. He was recently sentenced to life in prison. Army Sgt. Hasan Akbar, a convert to Islam, was sentenced to death in 2005 for a 2003 attack that left two soldiers dead and 14 wounded in Kuwait prior to the invasion of Iraq. These attacks are remembered, even as Muslim servicemen like Spc. Kareem Khan and Staff Sgt. Ayman Taha are interred in Arlington National Cemetery almost unnoticed.

It ought not be unnoticed, and must not be forgotten, anymore than we ought to refrain from acknowledging that the more violent — and seemingly more prevalent worldwide — strain of Islam is most certainly our enemy, and the enemy of all civilized humanity. And that we have absolutely no chance of winning any war waged against it until we muster the intestinal fortitude to make such an acknowledgment.