Friday, November 13, 2009
Why not call it TERROR?
A walloping 85% of network evening news stories on Ft. Hood didn't mention the word ‘terror' in their reports. Only 29% of the evening news reports even mentioned that the suspect, Major Hasan, was a Muslim! Why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
Good Day to You,
I was just passing through and noticed an inconsistency of the context of the comment. You mentioned that very few networks mentioned he was Muslim. I think Terrorist is more of an accurate term. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but I will say that 99% of terrorists are Muslim. Its a fact that the Major was Muslim, but that didnt make him do what he did. He was involved in dealings with radical thinkers who twisted their religion to suit them for their extreme agenda for Jihad. Christians did the same during the crusades. Would you say that Christians are murderers and extremists? No, of course not. I am Christian, but based on your thinking, you should be worried about me committing an act of "Jihad".
If you wish to chat, post it, I will bookmark this. Thanks, and God Bless.
Okay, I'm, gonna say it again.
The news is on the side of the bad guys as is most everyone in Washington. So, the reason terrorizm is not mentioned is because of that nasty little two-word excuse that is widely used in politics.
POLITICALLY INCORRECT
This time, I do wager that I'm right.
-Robin
Hi, it's a very great blog.
I could tell how much efforts you've taken on it.
Keep doing!
Ryan, The crusades are always brought up as an excuse to shut down Christians when they have a problem with Radical Islam. What people fail to realize is that while the crusades were wrong they were a departure from biblical doctrine. They were also acts committed hundreds of years ago by a corrupt Catholic Church. No one talks about the brutal Islamic Crusades that went through the middle east and Europe killing and razing everything un-Muslim. In fact, the Islamic Crusades is what provoked the Christian Crusades. The Christian Crusades were unusually brutal but they stopped the Islamic domination of Europe. The Terrorism today is brought on by a devout adherence to Islamic teaching. You can find dozens of verses proclaiming the necessity of killing infidels as a guarantee of Islamic salvation to Allah. Or dieing while killing infidels (Christians,Jews, and uncommitted Muslims) also is a guarantee of salvation to Allah. You will not find instructions to kill unbelievers for salvation in the Bible. If we are ever going to combat terrorism in this country we have to admit the truth about both Christianity and Islam. And retire the sad excuse of the Crusades as the justification for present day Jihadism. DianefromKY
To Anon-
You completely missed my point. My point is that Muslim's have the largest base of people for a religion on the planet. A very small amount are extremists. What Mike has done is associate every Muslim with an extremist mentality. Its just not the case. My reference to Christians and the crusades was merely to prove "pigeon-holing" amongst religions. Like you said, and actually proving my point, that they distorted the views of the Bible to justify the killings.
<<< Ryan said: "What Mike has done is associate every Muslim with an extremist mentality." >>>
Really, Ryan? Where, exactly, did I do that? I concealed it so well I missed it myself!
I need to write a book about people like you, something like: "Liberals Say The Funniest Things"
What I noted in commentary - and nothing else - is precisely what was noted by number crunchers concerning the fact the mainstream media is being more than reluctant to report the connection between the Fort Hood shootings and the radical Islamic ideologies of the suspect who identified himself as a soldier of Allah!
Ft. Hood killer's title was 'Soldier of Allah'
It was terrorism, Ryan.
Deal with it, will you?
Excellant article Michael and right on! Well put DianefromKY! There are no moderate Muslims only infidel Muslims as they place us all in the same heap. The Koran and Hadith is full of jihad and when peaceful terms are used the next verses somewhere else make them void. In the end every Muslim is for taking the world for Allah, by infiltration, monetary support of others who will by force=(peaceful means),or by violence=Hasan and the cells here who believe as he did!
LH/Fl.
Ryan, You missed my point as well. My point being that the Radical Muslim is actually the Muslim that is most closely following Islamic scriptures. Moderate Islamic people are powerless to combat their more devoted radical followers because they have their own Koran and Hadith to back up their Radical agendas of death and suicide. Moderate Muslims do not have a Koranic defense to be peaceful. That is why Islam as a whole is a very big problem for us infidels. Of course we don't advocate persecuting moderate Muslims with the Radical, but we have to acknowledge and identify the fact that the majority of Muslim teachings are a antithetical to peace and liberty. You need to hear from a woman who was raised as a Christian in a moderate Muslim country of Lebanon. Her name is Brigette Gabrielle. Her life story is compelling. The "Moderate muslims" persecuted her and her family just as much as the Radical ones did. It was Israel that came in and saved her and what was left of her family. DianefromKY
Mike, way to censor. Where is my last reply to not only you, but Anon as well.
Anyways, all I wanted to have as a point was for you to have valid links to back up what your saying. Just because your views may have merit for your agenda doesnt mean you should use them. Many people, Im sure troll your page, spreading mis-information and half truths makes you no better than those pushing their agenda. Even if your right, it doesnt make it right.
God Bless, seriously. Ryan
Ryan,
I see a post placed here from you to Anon dated November 16, 2009 8:56 AM.
As for a post to me you claim I censored, I don't recall seeing one nor rejecting one, although I wholly reserve the right to reject a post from you (or anyone else), depending on its content. Moderation of this blog was instituted to protect its reliability and integrity.
As for your comments about "valid links" to back up my points, I hardly ever write anything on this blog that doesn't have links to information sources so your point is moot.
Anyone who reads this blog or my main site knows there are plenty of links to source information. I dare say I place more links in commentaries than many who have an "agenda".
And good grief, Ryan! Here you go with the "half-truths" and "misinformation" bit again. It's becoming more than a little tired coming from you, Ryan, especially in light of the fact that the only thing you've done since your arrival here as the blog's resident naysayer is make inaccurate accusations and attempt to sow doubt in the credibility of issues debated and incidents documented here.
And what to make of a comment like this from you? "Even if your right, it doesnt make it right."
If I'm RIGHT, saying what is RIGHT does make it RIGHT last time I checked.
Right is right and wrong is wrong, Ryan.
God bless you.
And what is your agenda, Ryan?
What is it that you don't understand?
Post a Comment