MSM: ‘Bomb blast, shooting in Norway has Islamic feel to it’

From the very surprised and seemingly disappointed Guardian:

“Targeting government offices and the Labour party camp point to political agenda behind attacks rather than Islamist terrorism”.

A gunman dressed as a police officer shot and killed upwards of 80 people at a Labour Party youth camp on the small island of Utøya just hours after a car bomb killed seven individuals in Oslo’s government district. Police arrested a 32-year old Anders Behring Breivik, “who happens to be conservative Christian who enjoys classical music and the video game World of Warcraft“, in connection with the pair of attacks.

The news is still unfolding, and more is being revealed by the minute. But one thing is for certain: your local news program is more concerned with finding a hidden link to an “Islamist” group than with the actual devastation rattling the streets of Norway.

Much is to be said (and questioned) about the mainstream media’s coverage of these terrible and shameful attacks on Norwegian soil and, more specifically, how our news sources, who claim to uphold genuine neutrality and objectivity for the sake of honest reporting, assumed al-Qaeda was at it again.

Have we reached a level in the West, and particularly in the United States, where we immediately feel compelled to attribute violence to Islam, to Arabs, and to anyone with dark skin and hair? Must every bullet and every car bomb be investigated for serial numbers in Arabic print? Is it bad that I, along with the community of conscience, refuse to be trained into instinctively picturing a bearded Muslim man whenever a separatist group in France sets a building on fire, whenever hooligans flip police cars in the streets of Canada or Britain, whenever Colombian drug barons infiltrate the United States with cocaine, money, and a political agenda meant to unseat the authority of American law enforcement?

And am I expected to defend myself, my people, and my religion each time a bomb goes off?

Mainstream media has lost focus of the real issue at hand, which is that hatred, corruption, irresponsibility, and prejudice took the lives of almost a hundred innocent Norwegians today. Learning that today’s attacks have no direct or indirect connection to Islam should not disappoint nor should it make this tragedy any less significant. The perpetrators must be brought to justice before the world’s eyes, and the media must do its part by telling the story as it is without acting under the orders of the memo that has apparently been circulating through news office desks since 2001, the one that claims everything evil has some odd connection to Islam, even if you have to make it up. (Note that the media must also make sure not to paint entire groups of non-Muslims as terrorists as well. This isn’t honest, nor is it an objective representation of the facts on the ground.)

There seems to have developed two kinds of terrorism, based on what is printed in the New York Times and the like. There is “Islamist terrorism”, the worst kind, the category that all violence immediately falls under before it is investigated and proven to be completely unrelated to Islam. The second kind of terrorism is the “Everything else terrorism”, the kind that can’t give the West an excuse to wage another war in the Middle East and North African region, the category that is dealt with, sure, but quietly, diligently, and carefully so as to avoid labeling an entire group of people with unfair stereotypes.

It is this exact dynamic that has not escaped from notice mostly because the mainstream media makes it tremendously obvious. According to the Guardian, “[t]he most tempting and immediate conclusion was that it would be a jihadist group [that committed the attacks], as the style of the Oslo attack bore strong similarities to other earlier attacks in Europe and elsewhere”. However, bomb blasts look and sound the same everywhere. The fact that it’s acceptable to assume a Muslim was behind it simply on the basis that the attacks bore a resemblance to selectively chosen terrorist attacks reveals the true ignorance of conventional mainstream journalism.

Whoever it is behind these skewed comparisons purposefully ignored the stark resemblances today’s shooting in Norway shares with the Columbine High School shooting of 1999, the Virginia Tech massacre of 2007, the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, and the Greensboro Massacre of 1979, none of which were committed by Muslims but all of which featured the same key ingredient of terrorism: hate.

A popular commercial in Egypt reads “We are Muslim, we are against it [terrorism]” and airs very frequently during prime time hours. But you didn’t learn this from the New York Times because it doesn’t fall into its script of finding Islam at fault whenever possible.

Until the media’s unreliable and tainted coverage of all things “terror”-related becomes neutral and ceases its vain attempts to hold Islam responsible for all that is un-Islamic, you will continue to be hidden from the fact that we Muslims condemn terrorism just as much as you do.

There are 3 comments

  1. 48Refugee

    There was also that anti-IRS psycho in Austin last year who crashed an airplane into an IRS building where 200 people were at work… Everyone was quick to assume Muslims were behind that act of terror too.

  2. Julia Hurley

    Brilliant post.Made me think immediately of a quote from Robert Fisk I love to site when people bring up the word “terrorism” which I refuse to use anymore….

    ‘Terrorism’ is a word that has become a plague on our vocabulary,the excuse and reason and moral permit for state-sponsored violence – our violence – which is now used on the innocent of the Middle East ever more outrageously and promiscuously. Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism. It has become a full stop, a punctuation mark, a phrase, a speech, a sermon, the be-all and end-all of everything that we must hate in order to ignore injustice and occupation and murder on a mass scale. Terror, terror, terror, terror. It is a sonata, a symphony, an orchestra tuned to every television and radio station and news agency report, the soap-opera of the Devil, served up on prime-time or distilled in wearyingly dull and mendacious form by the right-wing ‘commentators’ of the America east coast or the Jerusalem Post or the intellectuals of Europe. Strike against Terror. Victory over Terror. War on Terror. Everlasting War on Terror. Rarely in history have soldiers and journalists and presidents and kings aligned themselves in such thoughtless, unquestioning ranks. In August 1914, the soldiers thought they would be home by Christmas. Today, we are fighting for ever. The war is eternal. The enemy is eternal, his face changing on our screens. Once he lived in Cairo and sported a moustache and nationalised the Suez Canal. Then he lived in Tripoli and wore a ridiculous military uniform and helped the IRA and bombed American bars in Berlin. Then he wore a Muslim Imam’s gown and ate yoghurt in Teheran and planned Islamic revolution. Then he wore a white gown and lived in a cave in Afghanistan and then he wore another silly moustache and resided in a series of palaces around Baghdad. Terror, terror, terror. Finally, he wore a kuffiag headdress and outdated Soviet-style military fatigues, his name was Yassir Arafat, and he was the master of world terror and then a super-statesman and then again, a master of terror, linked by Israeli enemies to the terror-Meister of them all, the one who lived in the Afghan cave.

  3. jim

    whatever…..there go the progressives. Are you seriously trying to make people not think of Jihad when a bunch of innocent, in my opinion; people are killed by a single person.

    I have a better idea, why not talk to your Islamic friends, and have them stop blowing up everything. For instance, when I here of a horrific auto accident, that occurred at 3am, I instantly think alcohol was involved. If there were no such thing as alcohol, I would’ve asked “what caused the crash?”…but since humans are innately lazy, we assume the obvious. When I hear the word JIHAD, I don’t think of construction unions, I think of religious fanatics. 20 years ago, on the other hand…..what’s a jihad?

    The guardian must realize that brits are financially cared for by their queen, so in theory, brits never experience suffrage; because they never truly have an adult opinion, because their leader, is an old queen; god bless her.

    Here in America, if I don’t have the cognitive awareness to know what is what, I will starve, because I will never know what the people are wanting to buy. In England, they are like little children, that is why there is so much outcry, it’s actually called; crying.

    Citizens need to band around their rule of law, that;s how things are down, not EVERYBODY gets warm milk from a queen, and their crust cut off….in my opinion.

    Guy in Denver, CO U.S.A.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s