Brent Bozell III speaks truth to power about Islam and the media's double standard:
There are moments where it becomes painfully apparent that the media elites think that the only thing redeeming about Western culture is its ability to regret its existence. Their dream president is a lip-biting man from Arkansas, traveling the globe apologizing for every historic fault, real or imagined, America has ever committed.This was exactly their mentality with Pope Benedict XVI over his remarks at the University of Regensburg. One wonders if any of his critics had bothered to read his address, the theme of which was the inseparability of faith and reason.
He quoted a Byzantine emperor -- who argued that God could never countenance the coercive violence of radical Islam, and therefore a radical Islam invoking God is irrational. Lost on the outraged was the other argument posed by Benedict: A religion that embraces reason but not faith is also bankrupt. That message was directed at radical Catholics. His call was for a serious and urgent "genuine dialogue of cultures and religions" based on faith and reason.
You would think that this call for a religion based on love and peace, not force, would ring well in peace-loving liberal newsrooms. But this lecture was ignored by the secular press until Muslim riots and threats broke out. Then, predictably and incredibly, the media demanded apologies -- but only from the pope. They treated him like a bumbling candidate for political office, a man too unschooled in the art of public relations, which they know so well. They called him "heavy-handed" and "clumsy." They auditioned on TV and radio shows to explain how the pontiff could be less "tone deaf."
They did not ponder how Muslim violence, from assassinating a nun in Somalia to blowing up Canadian solders in Afghanistan as they hand out candy to children, might be, to say the very least, "tone deaf."
This mind-numbing double standard was set perfectly (and ridiculously) by the New York Times editorial page on a sleepy Saturday, which lamented the pope's desire for a "uniform Catholic identity," which is "not exactly the best jumping-off point for tolerance or interfaith dialogue." These people seem to have no clue that the holy father's first duty is to maintain a Catholic Church that is united and true to its historical roots. His first duty is to defend an ancient deposit of faith and spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. This, to the sages of the New York Times editorial board, is an inherently offensive mission -- exclusive, intolerant, conservative.
Read it all.
Thank you, Robert. This is why I read only the Wall Street Journal.
Bozell has written many columns that have set my teeth on edge, but that one is a prize.
Being politically correct means ALWAYS having to say you're sorry.
Question: Why won't Sudan agree to a United Nations Force for Darfur?
Answer: Because IT'S A ZIONIST PLOT. Doncha know?
At a news conference at the United Nations on Tuesday, Bashir said the Khartoum government would approve an extension of the AU force but adamantly rejected an eventual transition to a U.N. force, saying it was a cover for aiding
Israel.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060920/wl_nm/sudan_darfur_un_dc
Keller, et. al. are motivated first and foremost, by abject cowardice, and then by greed. The mahometans always get a free pass because there is always the underlying threat of violence. The NDT will report that the moon is made of green cheese and that bears never sh*t in the woods, if you threaten them enough. To call them journalists is laughable. Oriana Fallaci was a journalist. Bill Keller was and is a joke.
Just so everyone understands the official Catholic line on Muslims:
http://prodicus.blogspot.com/2006/09/catholic-teaching-on-muslims.html
This was the background to the Pope's allusions to Islam in his lecture. Hardly even unsympathetic, let alone hostile. Just... well, reasonable.
I detest Brent Bozell III, but he's right on here. Very well-written.
I admire Brent Bozell and his work on the Media Research Center (?) Given how lax a good section of the Right wing part of the Talk show circuit (Rush, Hannity, Levin, et al) have been on the subject of Jihad, it's refreshing to see Bozell speak out on this.
Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.
--- Mohammed threatening perpetual violence in Ishaq 587
Bozell should do a piece on how the Moslems are motivated by plunder. I mean, we're giving the our new Moslem citizens free money, but they want it all. They are Mohammedans.
* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *
Islam naturally aligns with Marxism. Both were conceived as world takeover machines, but the Marxists need Islam more than Islam needs the Marxists.
We still don't know just how much filthy lucre the western world's media elites are accepting from the Islamosphere elites. But, one thing is for certain: Islamic blood money is DEFINITELY getting into the hands of the media elites and it's probably more than any of us would care to imagine.
Thank God for the Internet!!!!!
Five years ago it wouldn't have occurred to me to say something like that--amazing.
Jihad Watch is mana from heaven. In these times that is a very appropriate metaphor, we think.
Shouldn't that read "Islam's DOUBLE Standard"? If the Pope or anyone else says Islam is violent, muslims respond with more violence? Doesn't that prove the Pope's argument? "Islam is a religion of peace, and if you don't believe it, we will kill you!"
"Our onslaught will not be a weak, faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutiliated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace."
---Mohammad threatening perpetual violence in Ishaq 587
"To form an administration of this scale and complexity is a serious undertaking in itself. But we are in action at many other points -- in Norway and in Holland -- and we have to be prepared in the Mediterranean. The air battle is continuing, and many preparations have to be made here at home.
In this crisis I think I may be pardoned if I do not address the House at any length today, and I hope that any of my friends and colleagues or former colleagues who are affected by the political reconstruction will make all allowances for any lack of ceremony with which it has been necessary to act.
I say to the House as I said to Ministers who have joined this government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grevious kind. We have before us many, many months of struggle and suffering.
You ask, What is Our Policy?
I say it is to wage war by land, sea and air. War with all our might and with all the strength God has given us, and to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is Our Policy.
You ask, What is Our Aim?
I can answer in one word. It is Victory. Victory at all costs -- Victory in spite of all terrors -- Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without Victory there is no survival.
Let that be realized.
No survival for the British Empire, no survival for all that the British Empire has stood for, no survival for the urge, the impulse of the ages, that Mankind shall move forward toward His goal.
I take up my task in buoyancy and hope. I feel sure that our cause will not be suffered to fail among men.
I feel entitled at this juncture, at this time, to claim the aid of all and to say, "Come then, let us go forward together with our united strength."
----Winston Churchill
Robert,
Thank you for this post, I found deeply disgusting the conceited way in which many journalists tried to ascribe blame right and left, as if the Pope had been ans guilty as the Muslims for "inciting hatred".
Muslims are resorting to methods which amount to blackmail.
Check out the following article (which has made much less noise than the Pope) but which illustrates how Muslims can blackmail and make to grovel an indian politician for suggesting (probably truthfully) that certain Muslim schools in India are promoting terrorism:
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/20/stories/2006092004231400.htm
Re: "They did not ponder how Muslim violence, from assassinating a nun in Somalia to blowing up Canadian solders in Afghanistan as they hand out candy to children, might be, to say the very least, "tone deaf."'
Unfortunately, the western media is tone deaf to the persecution of non-Muslims by violent jihadi Muslims.
This is a glaring double standard occurring here that deserves the strongest condemnation. Yes, objectivity is sorely lacking at the New York Times.
Pope Benedict XVI'S target audience was German intellectuals, not the Muslim world. And yet the Pope attack dogs are attempting to have us convinced that the Pope's remarks about Islam was an effort to shore up support for a new crusade. How far from the truth. The Pope's speech condemned violence done under the pretext of the sword.
The politically correct media has sold out to the idea that western civilization is always the aggressor in the events of the world.
But the facts don't always show this to be true.
Many commentators in the media present the argument that the Pope should have been more self critical of Christianity's violent past.
They use the example of the crusades against Muslims and also cite the Spanish Inquisition. It is quite remarkable how misinfomed these media commentators are about these historical events.
The crusades are always presented as a violent genocide of peaceful Muslims in Muslim lands while the inquisition is described as a war of forced conversions. There is little mention that the target of the inquisition was not Muslims, but herectical Catholics who errored in their understanding of Catholic doctrine.
Today, Christians are a dwindling minority in the Middle East because of Muslim persecution and oppression. Yet there is no coverage of this by the western media. Saudi Arabia bans all other religions in its country and teaches Saudi children that Jews and Christians are misguided and corrupted. But there is no coverage of this occurring in the western media.
It has often been pointed out, quite correctly, that Christians do not riot in the streets or issue death threats when insulted. The recent crude anti-Christian cartoons in the Univerity of Virginia and University of Oregon student papers resulted in a few angry letters to the editor. The display of the works of art "Piss Christ" and the dung Virgin led to a few small peaceful demonstrations and a handful of critical editorials.
Well, another group which could be out burning cars, flags, and effigies of the Pope are the "overly reasonable". While respecting reason when it is linked with faith, the Pontiff actually admonished people from relying too much on reason alone.
I expect angry scientists, atheists, agnostics, readers of Reason Magazine and the Objectivist Newsletter to be out there howling for blood any time now--right?
It is obvious to me from the Muslim reactions that their using violence and the threat of violence against innocent bystanders (what ever Christians happened to be nearby) in order to force the Pope to cringe, beg forgiveness, and surrender (i.e. exclaim how much deep respect he had for Islam and Muslims) is nothing more than just one more example of the long-distance enforcement of Dhimmitude on any Westerner who dares to say, print, or draw, anything Muslims might find offensive. ".....force them to pay the jizya and bring them down low." (sura al-Tawbah, v.29)
Someone mentioned the "Piss Christ" exhibit; but far more offensive to Christian and Jewish icons -- with far more viewers -- have been the late night comedy jokes and skits for years, and such popular shows as The Simpsons and South Park.
Just to pick one example out of thousands one could pick: recently Conan O'Brien on his late night talk show had a bit where the punch line was a photographic promo of a hypothetical cable show, "Sex and the Savior" (a pun, of course, on "Sex and the City"). The photo showed Jesus with a sexy, scantily clad babe on each arm. What did Christians around the world do? They yawned. Some might have even laughed. Nobody was hurt. No one called for violence.
(Conan O'Brien is not some marginal figure: he is slated to take over the most coveted spot of all comedy shows, the Tonight Show, and he recently hosted the Emmy awards for the second time.)
Notice a pattern? When Christians get up in arms they write and talk. They write letters of protest, they post messages on websites, they talk to the media, they debate, they argue.
It's called rationality. The pen is mightier than the sword and we wield that pen all the time.
Muslims don't. They have no rationality. They don't have an intellectual tradition. They are stuck on the sword.
Listen to their rhetoric. It would be laughable if it weren't so lethal. Also notice that they have no sense of humor? I mean, has anyone ever heard a Muslim crack a joke? Are there any Muslim stand up comedians? I mean, practicing Muslim comedians. They are so bloody damned serious. I really think it's a defect in their character. Or even some kind of illness if they cannot be humorous. Hell, isn't that one of the things that separate us from animals?
atheling,
"Notice a pattern? When Christians get up in arms they write and talk. They write letters of protest, they post messages on websites, they talk to the media, they debate, they argue.
It's called rationality. The pen is mightier than the sword and we wield that pen all the time.
Muslims don't. They have no rationality. They don't have an intellectual tradition. They are stuck on the sword.
Listen to their rhetoric. It would be laughable if it weren't so lethal. Also notice that they have no sense of humor? I mean, has anyone ever heard a Muslim crack a joke? Are there any Muslim stand up comedians? I mean, practicing Muslim comedians. They are so bloody damned serious. I really think it's a defect in their character. Or even some kind of illness if they cannot be humorous. Hell, isn't that one of the things that separate us from animals?"
Yes, I have noticed a pattern. The truth is that while the Christian tradition has both its philosphers and as well as its reformations, Islam sadly is still frozen in the 7th century.
atheling.
There are Muslims with sense of humor and rationality, but they usually end in jail.
Some time ago Iranian newspaper cartoonist Nik Ahangh Kosar was jailed because he depicted leading conservative Ayatollah Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi as a crocodile.
The cartoons provoked a mass 3-day protest by religious students in the "holy" city of Qom.
I saw on the Internet that NBC wants to broadcast
Madonna's latest dreck, which features her being "crucified". Funny, would NBC run this type of thing if Mohammed were the one being portrayed by her? Not likely, since NBC's headquarters would be burned to the ground by the outraged ones.
Who needs Al-Jazeera when the Western media is doing such a great job for the "peaceful" ones?
Rocky: or are forced into hiding, or be murdered under the Sharia-sanctioned fatwa.
Q: How many Moslems does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: It cannot be changed. It is eternal and has always been thus.
Many thanks SCV for quoting the great Sir Winston. Where is his counterpart in the current battle?
MP...
Where, indeed?