![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||
|
The real news here is how common this witless moral equivalence really is. This is why the jihadists could win -- the will to oppose them is not there. From WND, with thanks to all who sent this in:
In his newscast tonight, "NBC Nightly News" anchor Brian Williams compared America's first presidents to the president-elect of Iran, alleged hostage-taker Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, saying they were "certainly revolutionaries and might have been called terrorists by the British crown."At least six of the Americans held at the U.S. embassy in Tehran as hostages for 444 days claim Ahmadinejad was one of the leaders of the captors, having recognized him on television reports.
Williams' comment came in a question to reporter Andrea Mitchell.
At the end of Mitchell's report, Williams asked, "What would it all matter if proven true? Someone brought up today the first several U.S. presidents were certainly revolutionaries and might have been called 'terrorists' by the British crown, after all."
Posted by Robert at July 1, 2005 4:26 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Brian Williams left the blow drier against his head for a few minutes longer than recommended.
Posted by: Beagle
at July 1, 2005 4:49 PM
This isn't outrageous in a post-modern-there-is-no-objective-truth kind of way... Makes perfect sense.
Posted by: jsla
at July 1, 2005 5:14 PM
No establishment of religion, secular governance, legislative and common law
versus
Islamic Republic, rule by mullah, sharia
Yeah, just like our Founding Fathers.
Posted by: Beagle
at July 1, 2005 5:22 PM
Beagle
Don't you know yet that America is also run by a theocracy of evangelical Mullahs? Geez...
-jsla
Posted by: jsla
at July 1, 2005 5:38 PM
Brian Williams is a thoughtless ass.
Washington and the rest of the founding fathers were indeed revolutionaries, each of whom would have most certainly been hanged for treason against the crown had they fallen into the hands of the British.
But Washington followed the usual Western rules of warfare then in effect.
Comparing the founding fathers to the jihadis is a bad comparison, a historically unsupportable comparison. Our revolution and our revolutionaries compares to what the British did to James VI-II in 1688, or earlier, what the Dutch did to the Spanish.
The real comparison to the Iranian revolution is that of the French and Russian revolutions and the reigns of terror and brutal regimes they created.
Posted by: Loxias
at July 1, 2005 5:40 PM
Brian Williams is a leftist do-gooder looking to strengthen the unholy alliance between the Left and Islam. He is nothing different then what we see being taught in public schools and universities, or being promoted by Sean Penn and his Hollywood "progressive" kin.
We must recognize the enemy (islam) and those who aid and abet them (liberals) both must be dealt with.
Before the moslem hating liberals on this website get their panties in a wad, let me say that I obviously don't consider you to be abetting the enemy, so don't take it personal. Just admit your poltical brethrin are a big problem.
-MZ
Posted by: Madzionist
at July 1, 2005 6:07 PM
Where's CAIR? I want them to sue Brian Williams for comparing Muslims to Kafirs!
The outrage! The outrage!
Posted by: nuh
at July 1, 2005 7:46 PM
I caught this as it was happening yesterday and noted it-
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/006885.php#comments
-and thought that a good title for any posted article such as above would be the last highlighted line.
I emailed NBC to say that Brian Williams would be sharing lunch with Dan Rather if this keeps up.
These talking heads are getting emptier daily.
Posted by: BigSleep
at July 1, 2005 8:36 PM
"...certainly revolutionaries and might have been called terrorists by the British crown."
-- from Brian Williams
The British "might have" called them terrorists -- aye, and so can I, and so can any man -- but the point is surely that they were not terrorists. There is no recorded example of Hancock, Adams (not John, nor even the more exuberant Samuel), or anyone else for that matter deliberately attacking civilians for the purpose of sowing "terror." Does the equine Brian Williams have a single example to offer that might conceivably support his notion that the American revolutionaries "might have been called terrorists." If he doesn't, then he must go on the air and apologize to the ghosts of Founding Fathers past.
The odious Peter Jennnings, one hopes, will not be returning. But should the long-suffering viewers have to wait for Nature to step in with a scythe to rid us of the most unpleasant and meretricious of those who practice journalism's lesser calling, the news-reader, or what Italians call the "mezzobusto" (the above-the-waist torso, cut off by the desk at which the teleprompter-reading anchorman or anchorman, looking extremely knowledgeable and extremely busy for the audience, sits).
Posted by: Hugh
at July 2, 2005 12:42 AM
Hugh: they will find someone else just as nasty. Remembeer, these men and women are an expression of a corporate viewpoint. A newsman or even anchorman who disagreed with his/her editor would not last long.
Posted by: Paolo
at July 2, 2005 6:41 AM
Brian Williams of NBC? Who would be dumb enough to waste time on him, a "Network Vacuum-Brained Mouth Piece"? Watch FoxNews, for Heaven's sake! Talking Heads roll: just ask ANY jihadist! Gimme a break!
Posted by: LilOleMissy
at July 2, 2005 10:29 AM


(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)