There’s sensationalism that can go into a story trying to present one point of view that doesn’t really reflect on the tragedy. The past week and a half there has been the tragedy of the attack on Ft Hood where a number of people have been killed and wounded. The alleged shooter in the case has been under guard and a lot of information has surfaced about events leading up to the shooting. It’s natural because we are trying to find out what caused the stress to cause the shooting.

We want to know why.

When tragedies like this happen stories come out that fit the notion of what happen but fit into stereotypes and preconceived notions of what happened. Because the shooter has a Muslim name, first reports had it that the mosque he went to might have been a contributing factor. Some suggested that because he was Muslim he was somehow tied to the 9/11 attackers. There hasn’t been anything concrete causing a link like that.

What got me laughing was a report just given by FoxNews which was a big banner headline on their website. It states that the Fort Hood shooter frequented local strip club.

Now, I’m sorry, when I hear when someone frequents a place I figure they have a ‘healthy’ habit of the place, a place just like the TV show Cheers when Norm walked in everyone knew him and said hello. I have known and have been known to frequent places like that. I could walk in or I could see people walk in who people knew without a second glance. There’s one place I knew of in the past where this guy would show up every Tuesday and Thursday. He might not come in at the same time, but by 5pm he would be there in his ‘special spot.’ Everyone who was a regular at the place knew not to sit in his special spot and if you were a new person to the place you were told about the special spot.

That, my friend, is a person who is a frequenter of an establishment.

According to the FoxNews article, the alleged shooter showed up at the strip club three times in the past month before the shooting. The bouncer remembers checking the ID of the man one time at the door. A person who was a frequent person at the club would have been recognized by sight by the bouncer.

There is a reason for the headline. The portrayal of the alleged shooter by his religious leader and family had been one of a devout Muslim; someone who had trouble finding a traditional wife who would follow the Muslim ways.

The point of the article, it seems from the headline, is again to paint this Muslim man as, to put it bluntly, a hypocrite. They are trying to show him like the bombers from 9/11, whom reportedly frequented (there’s that word again) strip clubs which seemed to be far removed from a strict Muslim lifestyle.

Like most articles, you have to read past the headline and sensational talking points. When you read the full article you get a sense of a man who realized he was being sent to war and was trying to make sense of it. There was a dancer the article talked to who saw him twice and said he was a quiet person. While he stayed at the club a long time, he didn’t drink a lot (reportedly gave a lot of the beer he brought in away to the dancer) and asked dancers questions about their home life, what it was like to dance and the like. Unlike the reports about the 9/11 bombers, he wasn’t throwing money at the women, drinking like there was no tomorrow and trying to sleep with the women. By comparison the portrait was of a man who was looking for someone to talk to, to find some reason for what he was fighting for.

I’m not saying he has an excuse for the shooting, but in trying to make him sound like a stereotype of the wild Muslim man who was looking for easy women to bed before going on a shooting rampage, there is a portrait of a man who for a time was trying to come to grips with having to go to war and fight against people who looked and believed as he did.