Piggy back blogging

It will be about a month or so before I can get into the full stride of blogging (I currently don't even own a computer with net access) so its quick hits and what not. But in case any of the readers that stop by here don't already read Orcinus on a regular basis, today Mr. Neiwert has up a post about one of the true heroes of the Virginia Tech shootings. Not surprisingly, you haven't heard much about him from the panic stricken "America has been wussified by liberals" blogosphere.

This man's name is Waleed Shaalan, and he was one of the 32 victims of Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech gunman who seems to have provoked so much "well I woulda given him the ol' kung-foo fighting cuz these hands are fast as lightning" fantasizing on the parts of so many arnchair critics of the victims' response to the rampage. Not to mention, of course, the ongoing speculation that Cho might secretly be a Muslim engaging in that jihad that Michelle Malkin swears is gonna swoop down on us any day now.The case of Waleed Shaalan offers them a little bit of a reality check. There weren't many heroes that day, but he was one of them. And oh yes: He's Muslim.

You might also notice that in the comments I fired off a few comments about this post over at Greenwald's that I linked to in this post the other day. It really is frustrating not having the time to write about such things in the depth I'd like to. But I'd just like to reiterate how mind-boggling that post at Greenwald's is. The source that Melanie Phillips cited to say that WMDs really did exist in Iraq is a flat out white supremacist/rabid anti-semite who intends to map and catalogue the activities of every mosque in the United States. And that individual was promoted by Phillips, Malkin, Horowitz, Glenn Reynolds, and a number of other Bush loyalist blogs.

Now to be fair, they likely were unaware of his background. But then again, it's awfully convenient how Malkin et all manage to overlook extremism that can't be attributed to "the left." Especially in the case of Malkin, since she's famous for her "conservatives zealously police their own ranks for extremism" remark. So when she cites Gaubutz without nary a word about his extremism that counts as an endorsement that he is not an extremist. Granted I haven't had the time to surf around the net and see what she's had to say about him .... if I'm wrong and anyone knows it drop off a comment and I'll make the necessary corrections.