Don't talk about it. That seems to be what we hear about this subject. Of course, we talk about it here all the time. Heh. And other than the odd leftist venue, the only others who seem to dare talk about about it are those on the right. Consider Caroline Glick's latest.
The Western media has two basic approaches to their non-reporting of Islamic Jew-hatred and its significance for international security. The first approach is to ignore the issue because it is ideologically inconvenient.
The New York Times, like every other major Western media outlet except The Wall Street Journal, is of the opinion that the Islamic world should be appeased. The Muslim Brotherhood and Iran should be accommodated.
If they gave Islamic Jew-hatred coverage commensurate with its actual significance, they would be undermining their ideological agenda. In light of their ubiquitous and vituperative obsession with Jewish people, it is obvious that it is impossible to appease the Muslim world.
The second approach to contending with Islamic Jew-hatred is to justify it by claiming that Israel has earned all the hate coming its way. It's "political" they say. The Islamic demonization of Jews is understandable given the Palestinians and all that.
Obviously, both of these approaches to the story of Islamic Jew-hatred are appalling. The former approach involves a breach of the very concept of objective journalism. After all, the purpose of journalism is to report on the world as it is, not as we would like it to be.
And the latter approach is no less bigoted than the hatred it serves to whitewash. The European diplomat's gut reaction to Rahimi's speech, "Why are we supporting any cooperation with these people?" was entirely rational.
AND IF Rahimi's hatred had been directed against any other people, race, creed, state or color, no one would support cooperation with "these people."
Wake up left! There's a problem. Be part of the solution for a change.
"Sunday, June 24, 2012
ReplyDeleteEgypt's new president "doubts al-Qaeda role in 9/11"
Add Mohamed Morsi to the lists of heads of state who openly support 9/11 truth. Presidents Ahmadinejad of Iran, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, former PM Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia, and Fidel Castro of Cuba preceded him. -KB
Top Egyptian presidential candidate doubts al Qaeda role in 9/11
by Ben Birnbaum, The Washington Times
**FILE** Egyptian presidential candidate Mohammed Morsi (Associated Press)
Mohamed Morsi
Egypt’s likely next president has long called for the U.S. to hold a “scientific conference” to determine the real culprits of the Sept. 11 attacks, having cast doubt on al Qaeda’s role in 9/11 for years.
“The U.S. administration has never presented any evidences on the identity of those who committed that incident,” longtime Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Morsi is quoted as saying in a 2007 posting on Ikhwanweb, the Islamist group’s official English website.
“The Muslim Brotherhood and others demanded a transparent trial with clear evidence and to have court rulings,” he said after the sixth anniversary of the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people. “We confirm that this isn’t a defense to those who committed these actions, but we only seek the truth.”
Morsi is a 9/11 TROOFER. No wonder so many on the crazy side of the left like him.
http://www.m911t.blogspot.ca/2012/06/egypts-new-president-doubts-al-qaeda.html
Good post, Doodad.
ReplyDeleteThis cuts directly to the chase:
The Western media has two basic approaches to their non-reporting of Islamic Jew-hatred and its significance for international security.
The first approach is to ignore the issue because it is ideologically inconvenient...
The second approach to contending with Islamic Jew-hatred is to justify it by claiming that Israel has earned all the hate coming its way.
The left is lost and the Jewish left is even more so.
Neither of them stand for anything that resembles their reason to be. They do not stand for universal human rights and the Jewish left fails to even stand for the Jewish people.
So we learn to find our allies where they are.
Off-topic in a specific sense but on-topic in a general sense, and crucially essential (and, also, as part of it being crucially essential: Re: "we learn to find our allies where they are"):
ReplyDeleteA Must Watch interview with Iranian ex-Muslim Amil Imani
Ex-Muslim, whistleblower Imani cautions 'infidels': "Stop sharia before it stops you"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXzDAhQPcX0