Saturday, February 11, 2006

Can We Admit We're At War Now?

With cartoon Jihad still festering after three months, and the press shaking in their boots over a dozen harmless political cartoons, the 3000 dead on 9/11 is still not enough to convince the populous that we are at war. The mainstream news media has shied away from showing the cartoons either from fear or over-sensitivity. First let's look at fear. The anthrax attacks that followed 9/11 targeted not just congressmen, but the media as well. It may be a bit judgmental to accuse the news media of self- censoring cowardice, but they certainly haven't shied away from dreadful characterizations of Christianity or Judaism. Although a few stray Christians have bombed abortion clinics, TV stations and newspapers would have little to fear from Christians and Jews threating to blow up newsrooms. The same cannot be said about Islam. The broadcasting of the Danish cartoons no doubt would bring very real threats of bombings and assassinations of employees and their families.

Our political leaders have begged for understanding of Muslim sensitivities while apparently ignoring the real threat against our freedoms. We are continually reminded that any depiction of Mohammad is considered blasphemous. in Islam. But no less blasphemous than Time magazine announcing “GOD IS DEAD”, or numerous other offenses towards Judeo-Christian sensibilities, some of which have been Federally funded by the NEA. Rest assured this capitulation is due to fear and not civil discourse. Geraldo Rivera even went as far as saying that the Danish cartoons were racist. This is woefully wrong for a few reasons. First of all, Islam is a religion, not a race, and not all Arabs are Muslims and not Muslims are Arabs. Secondly, there is nothing in the cartoons that depicts Arabs in a bad light. Two of the cartoons refer to the violence of Jihad. Criticism of violent jihad may make Muslims uncomfortable, but that hardly constitutes racism.

Islam, however is filled with violence. Muhammad ordered the beheading of every man in the city of Medina, 900 in all. The women and children were enslaved, many of them raped. The Islamic prophet proclaims “I have been made victorious with terror” in the text of this religion. The media never mentions, not even in whisper, that able-bodied Muslims are bound by the Koran to carry out Jihad upon non-believers (infidels). All Infidels are offered a three pronged threat, conversion, dhimmitude or death. The US would never tolerate a Branch-Davidian-like cult to spread across the Nation. Yet the reason of Islam's success is due to the fact it is much more effective at spreading fear of violence than David Koresh's short-lived cult. Until our media is willing to face this truth in public, we face the grave danger of watching our freedoms eroded away. But for now our media that we depend on to protect the first amendment has been cowed by those who would have us understand the true meaning of Islam, submission.

9 Comments:

Blogger WomanHonorThyself said...

Amen Kevin, the media refusing to reproduce the toons was a grave error which I am afraid they may have to pay for in blood..God forbid..however those on the opposing side who rant about "sensitivity" are the worst liars..The Press shows NO sensitivity toward jokes aimed at women, Christians, Jews ..but when it comes to blacks or Muslims, pple lose their jobs over the most innocent remark..People are fed up...ugh.

February 12, 2006  
Blogger scott said...

Bush made a choice on 9/12/2001. He ignored that 15 out of 19 of the killers were Saudis as deliberate provo by Bin Lauden and made the enemy Al Qaeda in Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia and Islam. War of civilizations crashes the world economy as we have no way to take the oil infrastructure intact. Also one of our two parties would not have gone along and because of mistakes made by Bush, Rove and Lott the Dems controlled the Senate in September of 2001. To make this a war of civilizations means a multigenerational war of extermination on a planetary scale and one where we will have essentially no allies. Might be necessary someday. US public is not ready to pay the costs internally or externally.

February 12, 2006  
Blogger American Crusader said...

Not until George Bush stops saying that Islam is a peaceful religion that's being hijacked by a few extremist. When mainstream media finally says that Islam is a religion of hate and conquest, then we will admit that we are at war.
The apologist continue to get their message across louder than those who know the truth.

February 12, 2006  
Blogger WomanHonorThyself said...

Hey Kevin..I linked to this post. good stuff..:)

February 12, 2006  
Blogger kevin said...

Scott,
Attacking Afgahnistan is totaly justified by the fact that al'Quaeda was based there, trained there, and supposedly were sheltering OBL. Remember The Saudi's kicked OBL out of their country. Although I will admit that the House of Saud is more enemy than friend. The "War of Civilizations" as you call it wouldn't have to cause a "multigenerational war of extermination on a planetary scale " I am suggesting we attack Jihad same as we would Fascism.

February 12, 2006  
Blogger kevin said...

AC
I agree, I'm afraid we're going to have to suffer another 9/11 before that happens.

WHT,
Thanks, I'm flattered.

February 12, 2006  
Blogger scott said...

Issue isn't justified / unjustified. It is a matter of choices. OBL was in Afghanistan and we attacked. He is now in Pakistan more likely than not. His son is 100% for sure in Iran and running a base area there. We have attacked neither Paksitan nor Iran. Instead we attacked Iraq. Choices were made. OBL wanted us to attack Saudi. 15 out of 19. That was QUITE deliberate on their part. Bush doesn't want a war of civilizations. He may be right. He may be wrong. It was a clear choice and publically debated then and since.

February 13, 2006  
Blogger kevin said...

Attacking a country that holds OBL and his training camps is always justified Scott. It's no different that chasing down Hitler. I'm no fan of Saddam either, he had to go.
The UN would have let Saddam thumb his nose at them forever, after 19 resolutions he definately had to go.

February 13, 2006  
Blogger scott said...

Not denying the justification of attacking Afghanistan. However note that we attacked the first country that held him but didn't exercise hot pursuit into Pakistan. So choice was involved.

February 14, 2006  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home