![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Freedom to Fold II
Posted by Stephen Green · 9 February 2006
OK, so maybe the MSM isn't really a bunch of cowards. Perhaps they're only cowards selectively: CNN's excuse is -- and excuse the expression -- complete bullshit. Did that consideration -- "not unnecessarily adding fuel to the controversy" -- stop CNN or any of the rest of the Western media from displaying those inflammatory photos from the Abu Graib prison scandal, globally, for weeks, and 24/7? No? We have seen the enemy, and he is us. Except he isn't really us. The MSM have all-but-declared themselves the useful idiots of the other side. If only they were also dumb - as in, "mute." Related stuff here from Pieter Dorsman, who wonders why it's "taking so long to get the west to formulate a proper response."
Splitter! Comments
Useful idiots is a good term, but it almost seems too passive. At some point it is almost too much of a free pass to say that we are talking merely about a mindset. Specific people in charge of these organizations are making affirmative and very peculiar choices about the emphasis they give to such coverage, and I have trouble believing they do not understand the implications of their choices. Posted by: PDS at February 9, 2006 03:19 PMI thought I came up with a good response. I even provided the media with a good excuse for not printing the comics. Posted by: aaron at February 9, 2006 03:22 PMNone of this would have happened if Allah had got his new 10 Commandments here earlier. I guess he didn't use FedEx. Papa Ray This is really no different than when the MSM stopped running video of the Twin Towers coming down because they didn't want to fuel a jingoistic response from America or add to the already self righteous anger that was there. Posted by: Imperator at February 9, 2006 05:09 PMThe Inferno of Dante Alighieri has, since the year 1300, described, and, in illustrated versions, depicted Mohammed in Hell being torn apart by demons as a false prophet. Should all illustrated versions of The Inferno be banned as provocative of Islam? If so, why hasn't this been done in the past seven hundred and six years? Posted by: Robert Speirs at February 9, 2006 06:16 PMOk, here is an iron to throw in the fire about this issue. Strategypage is reporting that it is looking like Iran and Syria were the ones behind the massive protests that ended with burning embassies in Tehran, Damascus, and Beirut. If you are spotting a trend, so am I. If this is indeed the case, the Iranians in particular have demonstrated a schrewd talent to utterly shame us in their grasp of what you nailed a few months ago in the "Arm of Decision." They are using our media to cultivate their radicals, scare the West into believing the rage these "average" Muslims have, while at the same time working our leftist population into a frenzy of self-loathing, causing them to run for cover after committing the gravist of sins: offending a minority. The Mullahs know that they don't have anything that can stand up to the 4th Infantry Division, so they're out there beating us the way they have been for the past 25 years, by proxy through information and the media. I think we've been had. Posted by: TF6S at February 9, 2006 07:15 PM Aaron's been spamming that "Cartoons are crap" post pretty generously... Posted by: richard mcenroe at February 9, 2006 08:43 PMYeah, they were really sensitive about running and re-running the Rodney King videos too. Sorry Rich, is that bad? Posted by: aaron at February 10, 2006 06:10 AMUseful idiots is a good term, but it almost seems too passive. TigerHawk has just come right out and nailed it: "The MSM are dhimmis." Posted by: Joshua at February 10, 2006 09:39 AMAs I understand it, there are three categories of relations between Muslims and infidels. 1. War: dar al-harb: inhabitants of the lands of war (dar al-harb) are infidels to be combated because they oppose the establishment of Islamic law in their countries. As enemies of Allah they have no rights: they themselves and their property become licit (mubah) for all Muslims. As the opportunity arises they can be taken as slaves, kidnapped for ransom, robbed or killed. 2. Truce: A truce is always temporary. It is entered into only when the Muslims aren’t strong enough to overcome the infidel adversary. 3. Peace: dhimmitude: the submission-protection condition of infidels obtained by surrendering their territory to the Islamic authority. Submission because infidels submit in their own country to the Islamic law that expropriates them, and protection because the same law protects them from jihad and guarantees their rights. So there you have it. We can have peace with the Muslims, but only on their terms. Dhimmitude (has a nice ring, don’t you think?). Note to all women: go get measured for your new burka. Or, this alternative: Fight the bastards until there is no fight left in them. And forget everything you ever knew about mercy. (I cribbed most of this from Bat Ye'or.) http://www.dhimmitude.org/ Dear Green. An explanation I can fathom for some (most) of the media's activities is I have seriously considered being taken hostage by these criminals we are at war with and truly if I was having my head cut off in some made for al jazero Even if the screaming goes on for weeks and they have a Dr. to keep me alive. I still say fark 'em. I know about the Bataan Death March. Posted by: Augurwell at February 10, 2006 11:48 PM |
MDS - Give Until It Hurts Terror War Scorecard Watching America 50 Things American Cancer Ablation Center Buy VodkaPundit Stuff
"...Steve Green is to blogging what John Holmes was to enormous penises."
Ann Althouse
Across the Atlantic
American Realpolitik
Albion's Seedlings
Justene Adamec
The Argument Clinic
Todd A
Moe Freedman
Allah Is In the House
Body in Mind
Ben Domenech
Duck Season
Banana Counting Monkey
Ted Barlow
Eric Alterman
American Times
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |