Lawrence O’Donnell, we fully appreciate your cowardice.

Posted by: alexon at December 11, 2007 6:07 PM

Wow... all I can say is Wow! He's gutless, but at least he's honest about being gutless.

But, now I see how to get more respect from the MSM: threaten to cut their heads off.

Posted by: RalphInfidel at December 11, 2007 6:18 PM

... is he related to Rosie O.D.?

Posted by: RalphInfidel at December 11, 2007 6:24 PM

That's ok the way the laws are going if you upset a Muslim(not hard to do)it is hate and a hate crime.
Great way to control the free speakers.

If that doesn't work they hit you with a law suit and if that don't work they get you like they are trying to get Mike Savage, by getting your accounts dropped.

It is time to fight fire with fire. The Quran should be banned as a hate crime. after all it does call for the murder of Jews and pagans, if that ain't HATE then what is?

Posted by: Joe Schmoe USA at December 11, 2007 6:26 PM

I disagree with you.

Honestly admitting you're scared is a lot less cowardly than wearing a mask of denial. It's the first step in getting assistance.

Here are two more celebrities who have admitted this:

Larry Gelbart, movie & TV producer. Said the reason why Hollywood won't produce a show that has Islamic terrorists as the heavies is because "we don't want to end up like Salman Rushdie."

The Boston Phoenix, an alternative newspaper. Refused to publish those Mohammed cartoons. But unlike other newspapers, they ran an editorial in which they admitted publicly that they feared violence if they published the cartoons, and that's why they didn't do it. Running that editorial was a good way to expose the Islamic radicals anyway.

If you're ever in a situation that scares you, don't deny it, admit it. You'll likely find others around you will admit they're scared too--and in camaraderie there is strength.

Posted by: Steven L. at December 11, 2007 6:39 PM

I have always wondered if more harm is done to the cause of truth by the cowards who won't report certain stories because they are afraid to draw the fire in their direction, or the shills who propagandize for the religion of peace.

Unfortunately, Mr. O'Donnell has a lot of company. If the mainstream media does not exercise its right to freedom of speech on this topic soon, they will have effectively defaulted the power of the press to their intimidators. Many of us have already lost confidence in them and have sought out sites like JihadWatch for our daily dose of world news related to this struggle with Islam.

Posted by: BurkasforHitlery at December 11, 2007 6:59 PM

Greetings:

Censorship is a tactic which has the ultimate goal of
self-censorship.

It would be interesting to know when he first became afraid.

I don't suppose this violates any "journalistic ethics".

Posted by: 11B40 at December 11, 2007 7:04 PM

Reading the above comments and the main text I truly see America's media has a serious cojones deficiency and as for some of the comments - NO DAMMIT, saying 'we're scared...' is NOT enough.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at December 11, 2007 7:27 PM

Wow - This should be widely shared. At least he is honest about being a gutless tool. We might ask the question of LO'D that since he lacks the courage to address one of the major problems of the age, what good is he? Perhaps he should just STFU and let some folks with more intestinal fortitude have a crack at his bully pulpit. I caught the Mclaughlin talking shop on Sunday, and thought, wow I'd really like to hear this guy state his mind on Islam. Guess not.
/Is admitting to gross cowardice in public a form of bravery?

Posted by: MP at December 11, 2007 7:27 PM

I saw O'Donnell's rant on McLaughlin this weekend. It was embarassing, for himself only.

His cowardice, masquerading as "candor", being ready and able to verbally bully those who he does not fear, as opposed to the Islamists, whom he rightly fears, is simply more of the same.

Embarassing.

Posted by: awake at December 11, 2007 7:48 PM

Steven L., I agree with you.

And I think O'Donnell should not be punished or called a coward. Everyone in the media who publicly admits fear of reporting on Islam should be rewarded, because if the thing is admitted it will be easier to do something about it. Someone like Robert Spencer whose life is always on the line obviously has a right to call O'Donnell cowardly, but I question whether that helps Spencer's cause.

Posted by: traeh at December 11, 2007 8:06 PM

When they say they want to criticize Islam, but refrain from doing so out of fear-

They're lying.

Not seeing it as a threat, they simply don't want to criticize Islam. As liberal lefties, they're hard-wired to hate Christianity and Conservatism and Capitalism first and foremost; and they see the threat of Islamic terrorism as pure hype- a Republican-created boogeyman used to foster a state of fear and paranoia in order to shore up the conservative base and scare moderate voters away from voting Democrat.

The following comment was posted on the Spectator website in response to an article about the debate between Ed Hussain and Ayann Hirsi Ali:

"I suspect that any 'Islamist' threat which may or may not exist will dissipate following the removal of the present incumbent of the Oval Office. Consider what really matters - housing, schools, hospitals - not some Muslim bogeyman hiding behind the curtains. The demonisation of Islam by the media (and Phillips, especially) should stop. Get a grip on reality, please."

This is what Liberals really think. And this is why they will never criticize Islam. I have scores of friends up and down the West Coast, from LA to Seattle, and I've heard the same sentiment as expressed above over and over and over again. Muslim is the new Black- the living symbol of the down-trodden and oppressed proletariat everywhere, and as such they are untouchable and beyond criticism.

If a muslim "activist" were to brutally rape and saw the head off of a Liberal's daughter right in front of his face; the Liberal would exclaim:

"Surely this is a response to the horrible state of health care, the lack of public housing and our misguided foreign policy!"

It's time to realize that a good part of the American population has been made insane by prolonged exposure to politically correct cultural Marxism and most of them can't be reasoned with.

Posted by: november1981 at December 11, 2007 8:12 PM

Fear of losing your job (if you are a public servant or in an organisation susceptible to public pressure), of attracting denunciations as a bigot, of being referred to as a loony or an extremist are probably greater deterrents against criticism of Mohammedanism than any physical threat.
One of the most sickening things about the Rushdie affair was the number of westerners who said he was a trouble-maker who had brought it all upon himself.It's almost as if the conventional view is that if you get death threats from Muslims then you probably deserve them - unless its for some offence so idiotic and obscure that you can justifiably plead inadvertence e.g. giving a teddy-bear the wrong name.

Posted by: wallyUK at December 11, 2007 8:26 PM

The "pack journalism" factor should not be overlooked. When I worked for an MSM paper during last year's "cartoon jihad" and besought my editors to run one or more of them with an op-ed piece I had written on the matter, the executive editor sent out an e-mail asking staffers to let him know if they had seen any "legitimate mainstream media outlets" printing them. Few major papers, of course, did so -- in fact, only three: the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Austin American-Statesman, and the Rocky Mountain News of Denver. The rest demurred, often to the tune of weasel-words such as those of a New York Times editorial opining that to forbear showing them was "a reasonable choice ... especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe." The executive editor followed the Times' lead with his own weasel-words about "exercis[ing] all forms of self-restraint" and refused to print any of the Danish cartoons, despite their centrality to what was then a front-page story.

Posted by: Papa Whiskey at December 11, 2007 8:39 PM

november1981, I agree with part of what you said, but not the first line.

When they say they want to criticize Islam, but refrain from doing so out of fear- They're lying.

You are saying that some journalists, who secretly think Islam is not so bad and think therefore it should not be criticized, try to cover up that mild view of Islam by saying, "I don't criticize Islam because I'm afraid a Muslim will murder me."

That's a very funny way to avoid criticizing Islam, wouldn't you say? In fact to me, saying that sounds like a pretty strong criticism of Islam.

So I don't believe you are correct to say that O'Donnell is secretly unafraid of Islam and is only pretending to be afraid as an excuse to not criticize Islam. If O'Donnell secretly thought Islam was not to be feared or criticized, he could hide that much more easily, as many other journalists do, by simply presenting "evidence" and "arguments" from carefully chosen interviewees who serve up the usual PC Islamic apologetics and seek to make Islam look moderate.

Posted by: traeh at December 11, 2007 9:19 PM

Time for O'D to wear a scarlet C.

It can mean so many things.

(Not cojones, though.)

Posted by: profitsbeard at December 11, 2007 10:12 PM

lilly liver

Posted by: Prickzilla at December 11, 2007 11:20 PM

Hey larry,
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to nothing." Edmund Burke

Posted by: Leftho at December 12, 2007 12:49 AM

It may be time for them to use the power of their craft, and find a way to say what is discovered about islam, what it teaches.

May Deepthroat live again, this time in print, with just the facts.

After all, we as posters say what we feel and know, and the truth is what is being looked for.

If he really feels that way, then I would hope his voice can still be heard. Find a way to keep his neck intact, and give another voice to the quest for the truth.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at December 12, 2007 1:32 AM

Wait - is it cowardice, or double standards?

Posted by: mww at December 12, 2007 4:01 AM

Traeh

Click on the following link for an image of O'Donnell in Full Metal Moonbat Mode-

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h219/pjcomix/blog/lodonnell3.jpg

-do you really believe this man fears anything other than the reflection of his raw-boned and puffy-eyed, pasty Irish mug staring back at him from the bathroom mirror on the morning after a long night spent drowning his sorrows in Bushmills and Bush-Hate?

Let me give a concrete example to prove my point.

We've heard various reports of universities who have attempted to cancel certain speaking engagements on the stated reason of not being able to provide security for the speakers or attendees. As a matter of fact, I think this was the case for some events during the recent Islamo-fascism Awareness Week. Now you have to ask yourself: do you think they really seek to cancel the engagement due to security concerns, or because that school is run by liberals who think that the speaker is a racist and a fascist and will use any excuse to keep the event from taking place?

If a university wants an event to happen, no matter how controversial, they will make sure it happens- witness Ahmadinejad at Columbia.

Likewise, O'Donnell, who has described himself as a "practical European socialist", has never backed down from confrontation or controversy- even going so far as to risk the ire of pissed-off Veterans by screaming "liar!" at John O'Neill on national television.

No. Like the person whom I've quoted above, who believes that incidents of Islamic terrorism will subside after Bush leaves office, these lefties are hard-wired to the notion that Christianity, Capitalism and the White Male are the root of all evil- their whole political world-view is based upon this premise. Anything that suggests that there might be something of greater concern than the menace of the White Christian Male would be something that could risk bringing their whole world down around them and they will ignore and explain it away all they can.

Do you really think that the Democratic candidates have avoided discussion of Islam and terrorism because they fear violent retaliation? Edwards himself said: "The War on Terror is a bumper sticker". They all think that- only Edwards was stupid enough to say it.

Despite what they may say, the real reason committed lefties like O'Donnell will never criticize Islam is the same reason they will never criticize Black racism- because Blacks and now muslims are seen as the historically and eternally victimized and downtrodden non-White, non-Christian Other.

And its perfectly understandable that the Liberal Mind can hold the contradictory notions that Islam is Peace and yet muslims are violent because, in the mind of the Liberal, the peaceful muslims are only driven to violence in response to Western intolerance and aggresion- therefore that Rage is entirely justified.

Yet Mitt Romney, Mormons and the Mormon faith are seen as part of the White Construct and therefore- open season as the object of a vicious and bigoted tirade.

The real reason lefties like Lawrence O'Donnell will criticize Mormons and will never offer any lengthy and substantive critical analysis of Islam and the behaviour of muslims is because they are delusional Liberals and hypocrits. And as I live in Los Angeles and am familiar with the neighbourhoods these Fat Capitalist Pigs call home, I can guarantee that rich lefties like O'Donnell and the aforementioned Larry Gelbard are not living in any state of fear-safely tucked away in their high-walled manisions in their privately-patroled, gated community.

I hope I've explained myself. Anyway it was a great excuse to post that fabulous photo of Lawrence O'Donnell in all of his bug-eyed spittle-lipped glory.

I really love that guy

Posted by: november1981 at December 12, 2007 5:41 AM

Joe Schmoe wrote:
"That's ok...it is hate and a hate crime...
If that doesn't work they hit you with a law suit and if that don't work they get you like they are trying to get Mike Savage, by getting your accounts dropped..."

I agree, but would add a last stage, IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, THEY "VAN GOGH YOU!"

Posted by: David England at December 12, 2007 6:51 AM

Those other people,

He can't even name the enemy.

A lot of criticism goes on in here about President Bush not naming the enemy. I agree that it is a big mistake not to do so.

BUT, while this reporter risks his OWN life if he speaks out (and his family) the president risks the lives of a much larger family.
He risks all Americans and it is just POSSIBLE he knows that the risk doesn't all come from outside of the country.
But that there may be risk from pretenders within.

I am only asking for a grain or two of salt.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at December 12, 2007 7:07 AM

We make jokes about it, but how insidious this religion can be requires mature people to contemplate protective strategies. How insidious is this foe is indicated by a recently reported note found on one of a garbage heap of 40 tortured and mutilated murdered people in Basra. The note pinned read: "she was killed for violating Islamic teachings."

The story can entitled "Iraqi Christian woman and brother found dead in city with rise in religious vigilante killings" is found at:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/11/africa/ME-GEN-Iraq-Women-Killed.php

Freedom of speech requires that assassins of our free speech and assassins of our other rights be gathered up by all of us and locked up away from the rest of humanity!

Posted by: David England at December 12, 2007 7:15 AM

The way I see it, O'Donnell's actually improved things here. But admitting the fear publicly and naming the source of the fear he's actually made a courageous statement in the present situation.

In other words by naming his fear and the source of fear he's spoken against it in a real way.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at December 12, 2007 9:58 AM

That's a refreshing burst of honesty from O'Donnell not available from his interviewer, who believes moderate Moslems exist cuz a small number of them serve in the US military.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

One can only speak the factual truth about Islam if he plans to go underground.

This is the 6th Pillar of Islam at work.

Self-censorship is the foundation stone of Fictive Reality.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 12, 2007 10:20 AM

LOL that was totally gutless.....but totally honest !

Someone wake me up when we have some good news...

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader at December 12, 2007 10:23 AM

"That's a refreshing burst of honesty from O'Donnell not available from his interviewer, who believes moderate Moslems exist cuz a small number of them serve in the US military."

Posted above...

The one's in the military are a concern, along with the one's in the police, local, state and federal, government, media, acadamia etc...

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader at December 12, 2007 10:26 AM

Admitting it is a start. If more journalists will follow suit and also admit that they won't be honest about Islam because of fear, then sooner or later, it will hit them that this is wrong, and they will begin to tell the truth.

It's a start.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at December 12, 2007 10:49 AM

I think this candid response is interesting for several reasons.

First, I appreciate that he is honest enough to admit that he's scared of the Muslim response. If more commentators were honest in this manner, it would cause others to connect the dots and obliguely question that peacefulness of Islam if everybody is scared to criticize Islam.

Second, I do find it disgusting that he has no problem criticizing Mormons (or any group composed of straight European white men) and continues to do so despite his fears about Islam, If he doesn't have the guts to criticize Islam, then he has no right to criticize anyone else.

Third, I think this is just another example, like Rick Warren, of what we are going to see in the coming times of western dhimmis make allowances for Islam but attacking everything Western. Might be wise to keep an eye on O'Donnell to see what he publishes and says in the coming months.

Posted by: GuardianofPeaceandJustice at December 12, 2007 10:50 AM

If more commentators were honest in this manner, it would cause others to connect the dots and obliguely question that peacefulness of Islam if everybody is scared to criticize Islam.

This strikes to the heart of the matter. If all non-Moslem talking heads admitted their fear, the success of the 6th Pillar on their behavior, it'd get the truth across but wouild probably not incite yet more religious riots.

Religious riot is a term that I believe was invented by Hindu intellectuals. It's a Moslem behavior seen often in the subcontinent over the centuries.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 12, 2007 11:06 AM

I agree w/ Steven L, Traeh & PersonOfTheBook. Admitting that one avoids lampooning Islam due to fear of reprisals is a very honest - and clever way to highlight this problem, even if unwittingly. This reminds me of an episode last year during the Danish cartoons when a Boston college paper in an editorial admitted that it avoided publishing the cartoons due to fear (any kudos it deserved was wiped out by the fact that they also included as one of the reasons their desire to avoid hurting the sentiments of Muslims).

I don't think that O'Donnell, even if a closet supporter of Islamic advocacy, did the Muslims any favors by admitting his fear. Let's not call it cowardice - how many of us, with our real identities, would put now only our own lives but that of our colleagues (let alone families) on the line? Cowardice would be if one actually changed one's own opinion to conform with the mainstream PC viewpoint on Islam - as may well be the case w/ Rosie ODonnell, Bush, Clinton, et al: a mere desire to avoid a bloodbath, in the absense of the authorities, and other influential positions, to confront this Islamic threat head on.

OTOH, like GuardianofPeaceandJustice, I do consider it despicable that he is willing to criticize Mormons. That reminds one of the school kid who gets bullied by kid A, and instead of hitting back @ kid A or laying low, takes it out on kid B, who is weaker. If O'Donnell or others don't have the balls to criticize Islam, the least they can do is lay off Mormons as well.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 12, 2007 12:05 PM

If we are afraid to speak out agianst evil, we have already lost. I live in the Baltimore metropolitan area, and one commentator who is much braver than LO'D is a gentleman named Tom Marr who has a radio program on 680 A.M. nine til noon. Mr. Marr speaks the truth about islam loudly and often. Mr. Spencer is an occasional guest, and Mr. Marr mentions this site frequently. If you have a chance check him out. I would be remiss in not thanking the ownership of that station for having the guts to take the heat about what Mr. Marr says. Semper Fi to Thomas Aquinas Marr, LCPL, USMC (retired)

Posted by: MP at December 12, 2007 3:08 PM

At least he admits it...

Posted by: US_infidel at December 12, 2007 7:01 PM

Posted by: november1981:
The real reason lefties like Lawrence O'Donnell will criticize Mormons and will never offer any lengthy and substantive critical analysis of Islam and the behaviour of muslims is because they are delusional Liberals and hypocrits. And as I live in Los Angeles and am familiar with the neighbourhoods these Fat Capitalist Pigs call home, I can guarantee that rich lefties like O'Donnell and the aforementioned Larry Gelbard are not living in any state of fear-safely tucked away in their high-walled manisions in their privately-patroled, gated community.

Whatever their motivation, silence from the left will only seal their fate. Once in power, Islamists will confiscate outright, or slowly drain their financial resources for the "good of the Ummah". Adding to their problems, non-Muslim resistance fighters will see them, justifiably, as traitors.

In any case, their walls can never be made high enough to protect them from suicidal Islamic nut jobs, nor well placed rounds from patriotic, but extremely pissed, snipers.

So O’Donnel, choose your poison: take a stand now while the danger is real but relatively low in the US. Or wait until it's too late, and you live in the midst of two warring factions, neither of which considers you a friend.

Posted by: RalphInfidel at December 12, 2007 7:52 PM

I think november1981 is closer to the truth. Anyone who's seen him in action will know that O'Donnell is not really afraid to criticize Islam. He is in fact congenitally outspoken and unafraid. He's just using this "fear factor" as an excuse to be passive because he doesn't see this as his fight. His fight is against the religious bigotry and intolerance 'at home' (read: Christianity).

He is a card-carrying member of the "A Plague on Both Your Houses" school of moral relativism. Like so many leftists, he knows Islam is medieval, reactionary, irrational, and barbaric in many ways. But he also believes "So Is Christianity" and backs this up in his mind with examples of historical Christian intolerance and crimes.

And since all religions do it, the real problem is not Islam, but religious fundamentalism in general. Therefore he refuses to single out Islam for criticism. Christians are much easier and more available for his anti-religious bigotry. I say this as an atheist myself because I know how the willful blind spot for Islam forms and grows within secular humanism. I grew up with it and went to school with it for many, many years. It's not a love for Islam but rather a hatred of Western economics and religion (Capitalism and Christianity) which drives them. Plus other factors november1981 mentions.

The more cynical among them (and I'm not accusing O'Donnell of this) hope to effectively channel Islamic rage against the twin pillers of Capitalism and Christianity, and bring them crashing down like the World Trade Center. With their arch enemies thus defeated they can then tame or "civilize" the noble savages of Islam and create the socialist utopia (heaven) on earth they think is possible. It's a grave miscalculation but it drives many on the left.

Btw, O'Donnel has two daughters also in cable news media; Norah and Kelly.

Posted by: alexon at December 13, 2007 3:39 AM

Lawrence O’Donnell . . has gained attention recently for an emotional attack on Mormonism.
...................

This reminds me of what is going on in Germany. Despite rapidly growing problems there with Islamic terrorism, anti-semitic violence and "honor" killings, Germany is going after--Scientologists.

The German Minister of Labor, Norbert Blum, has refered to Scientology as "Germany's most dangerous sect". The state of Bavaria has banned Scientologists from civil service positions. There is a call for a formal state ban on showing Tom Cruise's films. There is a movement to ban Scientology outright in Germany in the same manner as the Nazi party was banned.

Now, I'll be candid--there are elements of both Mormonism and Scientology that I am not especially fond of. Neither religion, however, represents any kind of violent threat, and people should be allowed to practice freely.

But whatever happens, Tom Cruise is not going to show up in Berlin on a suicide mission. I doubt you can confidently say the same about Muslims following a perceived crackdown on any element of Islam.

Posted by: gravenimage at December 13, 2007 10:33 AM

Tom Cruise already carried out his suicide mission-

it was called Lions For Lambs

Posted by: november1981 at December 14, 2007 6:20 AM