Charles at LGF points out that Britain's Sun tabloid has a world map showing "terror attacks by Islamic extremists since 1993": "Evil across our planet."
Here is its lead paragraph:
MORE than 4,000 people have died as Islamic terrorism has spread across the world over the last decade. Here we highlight some of the worst atrocities:
However, none of these "worst atrocities" takes place in Israel. Like the Saudis, the Sun seems to have forgotten that for years now, that tiny nation has borne the brunt of an Islamic terror assault by which attacks against other countries pale in comparison.
The list notably excludes 300+ slaughtered children in Beslan, thousands of Iraqis slaughtered by jihadists (one huge atrocity in Karbala killed more than 180 worshippers at a mosque, women and children included), and innumerable Afghanis murdered by jihadis -- For some reason these didn't make the list, whereas mention was made of dead Saudis-- this distinction seems especially bizarre to me since virtually all Saudis embrace violent jihad as an acceptable means of promulgating Islam... Why would one include Saudi terrorists who accidentally got killed by other Saudi terrorists as being 'victims of acts of evil...?' Seems more like a stroke of good luck than anything else when terrorists blow themselves and each other up 'by accident!' In fact, I don't see anything evil in that at all...
What am i missing here?
On a parallel journalistic note, I did NOT hear Brian ("Iran's newly-elected leader may be a 'terrorist', but so were the founding Fathers to the British") Williams of NBC evening news compare the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks in London to the Founding Fathers. Howcum?
If it's good enough for a terrorist state figure, why isn't the same analogy fitting for smaller-fry homicidal maniacs?
Or did he think it might not play so well with real dead bodies on the streets?
Poor Brian. (Maybe he's the "Catholic with the master's degree" posting on another comment thread -about "The Koran on trial" -who is excusing its 'sura call' to "deceive the infidels" as an outmoded historical curiosity and a no-longer in effect verse.)
How quick these talking heads change their b.s. line!
The relentless Jihad against Israel should be the most obvious -- as in recent memory the longest, most vicious, and in diplomatic terms, the most successful of all Muslim efforts to have their own refusal to accept any Infidel sovereignty, first in the midst of dar al-Islam (that would be little Israel), and second, ultimately, anywhere else in the whole wide wonderful world that Islam will make even more wonderful, as wonderful as all those places, all those lands where Islam conquered, and art and science and humor and wit and kindness and everything that makes life worth living flourished -- didn't it?
Islam = World's largest joke free zone...
The only thing that makes them laugh...
With 3 billion more unearned, undeserved dollars, The PA terrorists can laugh all the way to the bank.
MORE than 4,000 people have died as Islamic terrorism has spread across the world over the last decade. Here we highlight some of the worst atrocities:
Whatabout 70,000 Hindus butchered in last deacde. Hmm it pains me to see the western wrld ignore jihad in India so completely. India has had 295 terrorist attacks last year alone whilst Iraq with 201 comes distant second. May b Indian blood has no value.
BTW Sun is the biggest tabliod out there. Stick to ur cheap gossip Sun...
At least they dared to put 'islamic' and terrorism' together, contrary to the diktat of Islamofuehrer Sacranie.
It would not surprise me if these newspapers were being bribed.
Gentlemen, Gentlemen,
You are obviously unfamiliar with the UK insTITution that is the Currant Bun. I don't mean you Secret and Silvester.
As the State of Israel is not a buxom naked lady with superstructure to rival the Forth Bridge you should not expect anything approximating news about Israel from that paper. Ditto India.
An old joke
The Times is read by the men who run the country.
The Telegraph is read by the wives of the men who run the country.
The Mail and Express are read by the men who think they ought to run the country.
The Daily Mirror is read by the men and women who work for their country
And The Sun is read by the men who don't care who runs the country so long as she is well endowed.
Except that as The Sun now aspires (since the sad decline of The Mirror) to be a serious newspaper with a mass circulation such inaccuracy is not a joke.
lol Granny,
a confession....
i'm that guy who takes Sun for its 3rd Page...
>:)
lol Granny,
a confession....
i'm that guy who takes Sun for its 3rd Page...
>:)
Vikrant,
I'll tell your Mum.
Just mind when you get hairs growing in the palms of your hands.