Monday, December 1, 2008

Mumbai Media Machinations

Hypocrisy drips heavy from the broadcast towers of the Western media.

The tragedies in Mumbai set in stark relief the variation in media labels for those that kill Jews in Israel and those that kill innocents of other creeds in other places.

You will note that “militants” hardly exist in this horror, but “terrorists” abound. [1]

Will someone please stand up and explain to me the difference between a “militant” suicide bomber who incinerates a bus full of women and children in Jerusalem, and the Mumbai “terrorists?”

Why it is ‘militants’ who blow up schools and study centers in Israel and execute its students, while ‘terrorists’ are those who attack hotels in India? (Terrorists Paralyze India’s Business Capital)

My powers of discernment are clearly lacking—will the media please clarify for me whether Israeli victims are different, are less innocent, than the victims in India? If “terrorists” are those who intentionally seek out the murder of civilians, is there something less ‘civil’ about Israelis riding a bus to work, or studying at a school, or eating at a street-side restaurant?

Even when some of the victims are Jews, whether in Israel or Mumbai, the distinction emerges. Why are terrorists called terrorists in India, Beslan, Madrid, London and Bali — and not in Israel?

Perhaps the difference has nothing to do with the victims, but concerns the perpetrators instead. Are the ‘terrorists’ less sincere or less passionate than the ‘militants’— or vice versa? And yet, strikingly, all of these perpetrators are extremist Muslim Jihadists.

Interestingly, now that the rampage in Mumbai is receding from the media’s spotlight, attributions of blame are emerging. The “terrorists” are no longer amorphous, anonymous murderers; shocking no-one, they are now being identified as Pakistani and/or Muslim militants.

I have not yet seen a cogent differentiation between what constitutes a “militant” and what constitutes a “terrorist.” Is it only I who remains confused? Or is it possible that this double standard thrives on sympathies, not fact; arises out of prejudice, not truth; that it is the product of agenda driven politics and less than honest journalism?

Hide the Jews

“Americans, Britons and Israelis are being targeted by the terrorists according to a proliferation of news reports (see also The Hunted)

You may (sadly) note that Jews are not anywhere noted as specifically “being targeted” in the news headlines. Yet it was the Jewish Chabad House — a religious center and community group set-up for all varieties of Jewish visitors — that was targeted. There are in fact more than 3300 such Chabad-Lubavitch institutions around the world. The center is apolitical with no formal association with Israel.

Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Sikh, Bahai and Buddhist centers were not targeted.

The victims executed at the Chabad House were Jews, including Rabbi Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka. What did their Jewish-ness have to do with Kashmir, with India-Pakistan relations, or with Muslim separatist ambitions? Or even, for that matter, with the “liberation of Palestine?” Jews were the target, not the Israeli Consulate. [2]





The answer remains chilling: nothing. The fact is that the Jews are the only ethnic or religious group that is consistently targeted by terrorists worldwide, irrespective of where they live, how religious or irreligious they are, or how patriotic or apolitical they may be. Whether they are children or elderly, Jews remain the world’s most sought-after terrorist trophies because they happen to share the same invisible genetic source, the same historical inheritance.

Yet the media chooses to ignore what these brainwashed terrorists are making clear and evident in their every action — that it is the Jews who are the preferred target.[3] The Mumbai terrorists’ separation of Jews (or Americans or Britons, for that matter) from the rest of the hostages for execution is a grim reminder of the Holocaust, of the Entebbe hijacking, and the Munich Olympic massacre. And such reminders are not to be ignored.

The Importance of Getting It Right

The media’s coverage of these horrors need not be suffused with appeasement. Victims should not be confused with perpetrators: all the murders are all needless tragedies. All those who did the killing are equally indefensible. Only when the media (and Western societies in general) see—starkly—that difference, will we be able to successfully protect our freedom and our liberty.[4]

Obfuscating the truth may be politically correct or simply incompetent reporting, but it does little to explain the mindset of these killers or the intentions of their handlers. And until we understand this, the immovable intentions of these Islamic radicals, our answer to their challenge will remain tenuous and out of reach.

Footnotes:

1. A particularly telling example comes from the UK’s Independent, perhaps the most anti-Israel major newspaper in the West.

2. In 2007, the FBI released its annual 2007 hate crime reports. Of the total 1,628 victims of anti-religious hate crimes, 69.2% were Jewish and 8.7% were Muslim. There were at least 40 times more stories last year about Islamophobia than about anti-Semitism. Investigative Project on Terrorism "They're Winning" by Steve Emerson:

3. Indian Doctors Shocked at Hostages' Torture:

4."It's all very well for us to say Islam has nothing to do with extremism and terrorism. We can go on deluding ourselves these psychopaths do not represent us...""The great religion that preaches and celebrates universal brotherhood, equality of men and peace and justice for all has been hijacked by a demented, miniscule minority. And, as my friend says, only Muslims can solve this problem. Only Muslims can confront these anarchists in their midst...""Only they can get their faith freed from the clutches of extremism. This is no time to hide. It's time to stand up and speak out. For the terrorists will continue to speak on our behalf" unless we do speak up. "This is no time for silence. Enough is enough!" "No Time to Hide for Muslims" by Aijaz Zaka Syed:

Links to Related Articles:
"Mumbai and the Chabad Movement" by Lucette Lagnado (WSJ, Dec. 4, 2008)
"If this isn't terrorism, what is?" by Tom Gross (WSJ, Dec. 2, 2008)
"For most of the Mumbai siege, the BBC went out of its way to avoid reporting that the Jewish community center was one of the seven targets. At one point viewers were told that "an office building" had been targeted (referring to the Jewish center as such). Meanwhile - perhaps even more disgracefully - a New York Times report on the last day of the siege stated: "It is not known if the Jewish center was strategically chosen, or if it was an accidental hostage scene."
Background: A Rich history now stained with blood" by Shalva Weil (The Jerusalem Post, Nov. 30, 2008)

Breath of the Beast

Posted on Modern Conservative.com

Posted on FaithFreedom.org

Posted on The Absurd Report

Posted on Weekly Blitz

Posted on Hudson New York

Posted on Bruce's MidEast Soundbites

"The Jihadi as Nazi, from 9/11 to Mumbai" by Bradley Burston (Ha'aretz, Dec. 3, 2008)

Targeting Jews - Again by David A. Harris (Jerusalem Post, Dec. 8, 2008)

1 comment:

BlairSupporter said...

Militant or terrorist? Just another way the liberal intelligentsia use to confuse issues and to establish the "purity" of their political position.

It used to be that a terrorist was someone else's freedom-fighter. And then we started to understand that no determination to "fight for freedom" was an excuse for terror.

Now such as The Independent, The Guardian and other British "views"papers are turning the pages back in their ongoing, disgraceful attempt to lay the blame for all the terror of the world at the feet of the west.

They are deeply wrong and need to be countered. Thus, some of us spend far too long on the internet for our own good(!), setting the record straight.