Some people — naming no names, of course — are smearing and denigrating anti-jihad activists, and thereby revealing…that they secretly endorse the jihad agenda, are no different from Al-Qaeda itself, and would behead us all if they had half a chance!
The above paragraph is, of course, a parody of Ralph Peters’ vicious, cowardly, and irresponsible New York Post column.
Now, imagine if I wrote that paragraph in all seriousness, filled it out to column length (without ever getting more specific), and sent it to the Post or any other publication. Would they print it? Of course not. What responsible journalistic enterprise would publish a hysterical screed attacking unnamed enemies?
Well, Ralph Peters has shown us that the New York Post will, and James Taranto and Laura Ingraham (see “Friday’s Guests”) have shown us that when you do, others will be ready to lend you a platform and a little respectability.
The fact that Ralph Peters’ fall to the nadir of journalistic integrity was not greeted with opprobrium, but with approval by people who should have realized that Peters’ flailing at unnamed opponents was the epitome of journalistic unfairness, illustrates the anxiety of many to avoid any appearance of bigotry — even if this means they will have to throw standards of truth and evidence out the window in the process. And yes, this does help the jihad advance: Peters means to scare people away from looking at how Islamic teachings are used to recruit and motivate jihad terrorists. The result will be that those texts will continue to be used in this way, without challenge or even scrutiny.