Murderous Muslims behind Boston bombing – but the media fights shy of blaming Islam for the atrocity
THIS is what we now know about the Muslim brothers who carried out the April 16 bombings at the Boston marathon and subsequently shot dead MIT police officer Sean Collier, 26: the men, known as “Suspect 1” and “Suspect 2,” were identified as ethnic Chechen brothers. Suspect 1, who was killed in a firefight with law enforcement, is Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26. Suspect 2, was 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. He was arrested shortly after, suffering serious injuries and unable to talk.
But, astonishingly, there has been a noted reluctance in the US media to link their crime with radical Islam, even though it has now emerged that the older brother had been interviewed by US officials in 2011 because the Russian government was concerned over his ties to “radical Islam”.
However, he was released after the FBI assessed he had no connection to terrorist activity.
According to Eric Golub, writing for the Washington Times:
The question that was asked before the bombers’ identities were known was what philosophy, ideology or system of beliefs caused them to act. CNN and MSNBC immediately speculated about “right-wing nutcases” and tea partyers. As of 2013, the number of terrorist attacks involving members of the tea party is precisely zero. The last major terrorist attack that had even the slightest link to anything on the political right was Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh in 1995. Described as a devout Christian and Republican, he was neither.
Conversely, most major terrorist attacks in the United States and Europe in the last 20 years have been motivated by radical Islam. This fact is ideologically uncomfortable for some people, forcing them into imitations of ostriches. Defenders of radical Islam immediately point out that it is unfair to blame one billion Muslims for the actions of terrorists.
Let’s be very clear: Not all Muslims are being blamed. All Muslims are not terrorists. However, most terrorists are Muslims.
And he asked:
How do we defeat an enemy when we refuse to even call it by its name? How does the government protect us from terrorism when it refuses to admit where most terrorism comes from, opting to treat it as a general human malaise that is as likely to be perpetrated by retired Swedish school teachers, Baptist missionaries and tea party Republicans as by young Muslim men?
And he pointed out that the Fort Hood shooting was described as “workplace violence”.
Yet between the 1972 Munich Olympics, the 1985 murder of (wheelchair bound Jew) Leon Klinghoffer, the murder of Daniel Pearl, the blowing up of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the U.S.S. Cole, the bombings in London, Bali and Madrid, 9/11, the Christmas Day Underwear Bomber, Richard Reid the Shoe Bomber, and many more, there is one common thread. They were all committed by radical Islamists.
Call them what you like — jihadists, radical Islamists, Islamofascists — if they aren’t immediately at the top of your list of suspects after a major terrorist act, you aren’t serious about terrorism. You’re like police officers who start their investigation of a school shooting by interviewing the prom queen and the cheerleading squad.
This has to stop. If “an abundance of caution” to avoid a “rush to judgment” exists for radical Islamists after a terrorist act, then at the least we should avoid speculating about the involvement of political conservatives, who are statistically as likely to have done the deed as the prom queen is to have launched a shooting rampage at her school.
The International Business Times, not bound by the politically correct agenda poisoning the New York Times, has zeroed in on radical imam Feiz Mohammad as a source of inspiration for the Tsarnaev brothers.
Sheikh Feiz, as he is known, has created controversy in Australia and England. He thinks Jews are pigs and women deserve to be raped. He supported the fatwa on a Dutch politician and regularly broadcasts sermons from al-Qaeda’s spiritual leader Anwar al-Awlaki. This is the man who influenced Tamerlin Tsarnaev.
Will President Obama and Attorney General Holder acknowledge that radical Islam played a role here? Will the anchors at MSNBC or the writers at the New York Times? The poison spread by radical Islamists is killing and maiming people. Isn’t it time to stop it from being spread?
A murderous, cancerous ideology known as radical Islam has metastasized globally. It needs to be stopped, and admitting the problem exists is the first step to recovery for deniaholics.
As we grieve for those we lost and pray for the families of the victims, we must also honestly confront the fact of who murdered them, and who deliberately tried to assign blame anywhere but where it ultimately belonged. Only that way can we avoid putting political agenda above saving lives.
Also writing in the Washington Post, Wayne Depree said:
If you wish to defeat an enemy, first clearly identify him. Listening to NBC and the rest of the main-stream media blame what happened in Boston this last week on terrorism was akin to hearing Edward R Murrow blame WWII on blitzkrieg. While both activities are best described as a military method or tactic, neither are actual enemies.
Two radical muslim terrorists murdered and maimed Americans, and NBC, along with other media outlets, refused to report all the facts clearly. And you wonder why they have no credibility anymore.
The reality is that in spite of the media’s best efforts, the information does get out. The people aren’t as uninformed as the media would like them to be, and media dominated by the state are deeply mistrusted … It’s up to the public to demand this perverse censorship stop. Letting this type of ‘reporting’ continue is a clear and present danger to freedom.