Skip to comments.Don't Mention the Jihad
Posted on 04/25/2019 12:09:18 PM PDT by Rummyfan
As I wrote yesterday, I think media coverage of the Sri Lankan Easter massacre marked a further descent on a ever slipperier slope. But it's worth noting that we're where we are today because of trends set in motion back when this thing got going. Less than three months after 9/11 - December 1st 2001 - I published the following piece in The Spectator. In the ensuing eighteen years, every fatuous Islamoschmoozing tic of western politicians has expanded beyond parody:
Are you a Western leader of the Judaeo-Christian or Agnostic-Atheist persuasion? Want to issue a public statement on how much you respect and value Islam as a peaceful religion of moderation and tolerance? Take a number, pal. The line's longer than the waiting-list at a Birmingham hospital. The Queen has spoken of her respect for 'the Islamic community', so's the Pope, and Tony Blair. President Bush does it at least a couple of times a day. A week ago, he hosted the White House's first ever Ramadan dinner - not a banquet, that would have been insensitive, and the whole point of the administration's 'Ramadan public relations offensive' is, according to The Washington Post , to 'highlight its sensitivity to Islamic tradition'. At this difficult time, politicians are sensitive about being thought insensitive, so there's no point being too sensitive about how ostentatiously you advertise your sensitivity. In Canada, the Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, hasn't made what one could call a coherent statement on the subject, but he has visited a mosque, as he never ceases to remind people. Ask him about border security or troop deployments or post-9/11 economic issues and he says, 'I was proud to visit da mosques because dat to me is da Canadian value.'
(Excerpt) Read more at steynonline.com ...
On September 21st 2001 Jean Chrétien listens to his seventeenth bigshot imam of the week
Lots more people murdered than in the New Zealand mosque shootings.
Lots less media coverage.
“All the News that Fits, We Print.”
Why do we kowtow to these in-bred seventh-century savages? Why?
It is my personal belief that many leaders are paid to do so.
Probably because most of us have been raised on first century beliefs, which didn't seem to realize six centuries later a belief system like Islam would take advantage of the be nice to others, forgive and forget, . love one another beliefs of the first century- Tom
No I don’t believe that!...these leaders are completely intimidated! They’re terrified some Muslim will take offense and commit a violent act. (Duh they do!) And remember these leaders are politicians first national leaders a distant second! They are worried they will be blamed. Called irresponsible by the opposition & the press. Called racist, etc etc. Its similar to the race card here in the USA.
Also liberals/leftist (but I repeat myself!) are absolutely astounded that anyone is motivated by religion to do anything let alone do violence. They have complete cognitive dissonance on it. It astounds & simultaneously terrifies them in a very deep way. And I am sorry I have to say this but an older generation would understand this statement. Many of these national leaders are women or are men relying on female support so the reaction is to respond with nurturing/understanding - in short a womanish response!
Let the calling of me a misogynist begin!
Prize to the largest use of fonts!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.