Oh for fuck’s sake. I used that as an example of an atrocity which had been perpetrated by non-Muslims that never reached your insular news media. Clearly I used a bad example, because it happened to involve Muslims, and your opinion on anything to do with Muslim is pre-decided.
Comment on the fact that very few will have seen this reported in the US, not that it relates to a “Muslim problem”.
Then turn off the TV and read the real world news - on the Internet, international newspapers; get a shortwave radio and listen to channels not emanating from the US corporates. It’s a huge world out there, and not all of its problems are exactly as you’re spoonfed them.
Another one: have the protests on behalf of Margaret Hassan been seen in the US media? Hundreds of Iraqis taking to the streets to protest against her kidnappers?
I understand that the Chechnya problem is complicated almost beyond rational understanding. In fact, I believe (or believed) that the Chechens have some legitimate grievances. My point is: When they recruit *foreign Islamic mercenaries * for the express purpose of slaughtering schoolchildren, they lose all legitimacy. They have crossed a line. That is how “freedom fighters” become “terrorists.”
Interestingly, one of the Beslan attackers balked when he realized what the exact nature of the mission was. He was promptly killed by the others. Apparently, even some terrorists have their limits.
To jayjay and owlstretchingtime:
I am painfully aware of the fact that the IRA was well-funded by supporters in the US. In fact, at one time, I was well-acquainted with one of those people. He was a naive, liberal twit who regularly sent money to the IRA or one of its fronts (I am sure he must be on some FBI watch-list). Apparently, when he was in college, he made a trip to Ireland where he was taken in hand by IRA sympathizers who blew smoke up his ass until it was coming out of his ears. They convinced him that the Irish are God’s gift to the human race and that the IRA was just a bunch of good-hearted roques who were literal cousins of Robin Hood. Or something. The punchline is, this person was Polish! I used to tease him about it. “You’re a perfectly good Pollack. Why do you want to be a Mick?” He was not amused. Bwahahahahaha.
You have all made the same valid point: There are plenty of Muslims who condemn the killing. I never really doubted it.
But I ask you this: Why are these anti-terrorist Muslims and their demonstrations NOT getting more attention from the Media? The so-called Liberal Media is supposed to be sympathetic to the plight of the Muslim people, right? Well, where are they? Where is their voice now when it might do some real good?
God knows they are quick enough to jump on a story that George Bush might have broken a window with a baseball when he was five years old…
*I don’t feel like pitting, so, just the latest news: *
Dutch probe Casablanca link to filmmaker death
Thu 4 November, 2004 14:13
By Marcel Michelson
AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Dutch authorities are investigating a possible indirect link between the suspected killer of a filmmaker critical of Islam and last year’s Casablanca bombings, a security source says.
The source confirmed a report in the Algemeen Dagblad daily that the suspect, identified by Dutch media as Mohammed B., had connections with people who were questioned after the May 2003 suicide bombings in the Moroccan city which killed 45.
Filmmaker Theo van Gogh was repeatedly stabbed after he was shot as he cycled to work in Amsterdam. His throat was slit and a five-page letter suggesting a “radical Islamic” motive was pinned to his body with a knife
Yes you did. You started by saying “why aren’t the Muslim leaders speaking out more against the terrorists?” when it was shown that they were, you changed to saying that “ok, the leaders are, but why aren’t the average Joe Muslim doing more to cast these people out of their communities?”, and you even had the cheek to say it was because they secretly applauded them. Then, when that was shown to be aload of crap, you never doubted it?
Bollocks. you realise you’ve been taken apart, now your trying to say you were agreeing with them all along.
Their voice is cowering. Cowering from whom? Cowering from the same people who commit the atrocities. Its hard to say something publically, when you know that if you do, the mosque in which you pray in may be bombed, your family may be targetted, etc etc. That’s why the moderates are silent – fear for their own lives.
Because there is no Liberal media. There are corporations that make money on advertising and they need to sell product. The product that sells the best right now is the “savage” Muslim. Showing Muslims behaving ‘civilized’, will cause a certian segment to change the channel…hell showing ANYone behaving civilized will cause rating to drop…if it bleeds, it leads. Have you heard that before?
Showing vid of a hooded mulisms waving guns and burning flages will get ratings, showing a peaceful rally will not. Which one is the true face of Muslims? Who decided which to show and why aren’t they showing the rallies? What if I tell you they show them on the BBC. Do you now question the moviation of the American News?
That is why you’ve been asked to stop watching TV, if you’re interested the real news; not just what “they” feed you in 45 seconds.
My take: the “liberal media” thing is a myth. I know CBS is reputed to be lefty in the US, but from where I watch it (cable in Ireland), as I’ve said before, I always expect broadcasts to end “Dan Rather, CBS Evening News, on behalf of the Republican Party”.
Corporate-run media will say whatever it needs to to keep itself popular with its advertisers, and to a certain extent in with the government, since if you piss the government off you lose access to the office of the President, and thus become less able to compete with your rival channels.
Muslims condeming Islamist atrocities isn’t good copy. It’s boring. But Muslim terror threats makes for exciting, scary news, and that means station popularity, and that means money from advertisers.
You really need to view events from more than just the corporates.
And we don’t blame homophobic hate crimes on all straights (or, to continue the analogy, just those straights who happen to come into contact with the Queer community). We blame them on homophobes.
QUOTE=yojimbo]If Palestinians were Christians there would still be terrorists among them.
[/QUOTE]
A significant number of Palestinians ARE Christians and yes some of them are/were terrorists or members/affiliates of groups with terrorist ties.
No they didn’t. At best they had the tacit support of some sympathetic officials in the government ( perhaps, easing internal movement within SA ), but they certainly didn’t have the resources of the Saudi state backing them. The bulk of the government and the rulers of SA would like nothing better than to see al-Qaeda expunged, as they pose a direct, explicit threat to them. ObL has made no secret of his desire to overthrow the Saudi monarchy.
Do you really perceive Dan Rather as being sympathetic to the Republican Party??? That would come as a big surprise, I think, both to Rather and the Republicans.
Supporting Tamerlane:
There are about 4000 Saudi princes, with conflicting agendas. Some are friendly to America and some actively support terrorists. It is incredibly complicated and the palace intrigue is impenetrable. And OBL is definitely no friend of the Saudi government.
Not to speak for Jim, but he may have used Dan Rather as an example as he’s more well known than the other news anchors. I know who Dan Rather is, but I couldn’t tell you who fronts NBC news, or ABC, or whatever panel of slack jawed rah-rahs they have on Fox.
Hyperbole. But the lack of holding US policy to account by your news channels seems to me like capitulation. On more independent news media, politicians and their decisions are questioned and raked over mercilessly. On CBS, Rather just prattles on. Download some Jeremy Paxman interviews and you’ll see what a real anchorman should be like.
Hah. My take on Mr. Rather is that he’s coasting towards a long-overdue retirement and would read his grocery list off the autocue without noticing. I’ve seen animatronics that were more engaged. And even if he did care about what he reports, he’s never been much for making waves.
Well that depends on what you mean by significant. Isn’t it somewhere around 3% and their numbers quickly dwindling? Do you have any names on known Christian Palestinian terrorists?